Today, we endure the latest school shooting (CNN) in Apalachee, Georgia, while five people have just been shot in Kentucky (CNN) near I-75. These incidents are a particular class of violent crime, mass shooting. We start with the premise that deterrence of violent crime would carry over to mass shooting. Let’s see how it goes.
Why America, which has long been a violent society, has become hyper-violent, is not the subject of rational debate. The cure is as vague as the cause. Liberals want gun control and mental health initiatives. Conservatives want to hang the Ten Commandments in front of classrooms; many of the alt-right want to abolish the separation of church and state.
These are not talking points; the two sides are deaf to each other. Though I count myself a liberal, the liberal program may combine unachievable with ineffectual. The alt-right, in the guise of divine intervention, want to take us back centuries, to the evil intolerance of village culture. See Trump Assassination Attempt Notes.
Classic liberalism enshrines the right of the individual to freedom of thought, expression, privacy, and association, subject to the catchphrase, “Your freedom ends where my nose begins.” As this does not safeguard much space, the core has been surrounded by the framework known as law. Most of us liberals live happily within the law. Since the law is a complex abstraction, it takes some intellectual effort to pick it up. This kind of discussion does not happen in a roadside bar. In fact, it is the least popular subject, second to, “Who was your bail bondsman for your last DUI/drug bust?”
Benjamin Franklin was among the most refined class of believers, the deist. In a letter, he referred to the necessity of organized religion, noting that otherwise, “they might never learn.” Those who seek his endorsement for a conservative program won’t get it. Franklin was a liberal. In his America, you could walk a day and see a handful of people. Firearms were clumsy and slow to use. And demands of exploiting the resources of a virgin world left little time for violence, except when those resources were in dispute.
The emptiness of the conservative program, and the unjustified optimism for liberal initiatives, leave us with nothing to return to or advance forward to. The Supreme Court has taken gun control off the table. We are trapped in an eternal present, a Ground Hog Day of slaughter. The political mantra, “This has to stop” thinly disguises our paralysis. It behooves us to innovate, which begins with questions. About a proposed measure , experience or sanction intended to deter violent crime, we ask:
- Does the experience work by influence, or deprivation of a liberty?
- Does it sacrifice innocent lives?
- Does it save more lives than it sacrifices? What is the ratio?
- Does it risk irreversible harm?
- Is it aesthetically repugnant?
- Does aesthetic repugnance damage the mental health of innocents?
- Is there any aspect that is in conflict with bedrock beliefs and attitudes?
- Does the experience work on an intellectual or visceral level?
- Is it universal in application, or does it require prequalification?
Let’s now consider some past methods of violent crime deterrence.
Police brutality. The history of the criminal justice system entwines this with a mix of judicial tolerance and pushback.
Brutality was actually institutionalized in Philadelphia by Frank L. Rizzo, who bragged that Philly was the safest of the ten largest cities in the U.S. In typical application, an individual detained by the police was beaten, driven around in the back of a police van for 12 hours, then dumped on the street in a neighborhood with an attitude hostile to his ethnic group.
It didn’t take much to set off a Philly cop; black, long hair or LGBT could do it. The ratio of innocent victims of police brutality to victims saved from crime has never been tallied. What ever it was, voters couldn’t stomach it. The pattern preceded Philly and has continued in other cities, in the form of sporadic brutality and civil rights abuse.
Defund the police, the polar opposite. Though there hasn’t been a comparison of the Minneapolis experience with Philly, the districts with the highest crime rates voted with the largest margins against defunding. Despite the tragedy of George Floyd, the police are indispensable to their civil community.
Reform prosecution standards. Reform-minded prosecutors prioritize violent crime. This is frequently accompanied by bail reform. Proponents claim that by unburdening the criminal justice system, violent crime can be more effectively curtailed, while bail discriminates against the poor. Whether this is actually an effective strategy is disputed. Michael Nutter, former Philly mayor, is critical of Philly’s reform prosecutor, Larry Kramer, for a variety of related reasons. (WaPo) The White DA, the Black ex-mayor and a harsh debate on crime.
To be continued shortly, with further analysis and actual constructive proposals.