A lot of people reading this article likely grew up in a \u201clock \u2018em up and throw away the key\u201d mentality with regard to criminal justice. The mass incarceration sentencing theory became the primary way our leaders thought we could eliminate crime in society in the 1970s and 1980s. In the aggregate, the mindset of America was that we were fed up with crime and criminals and that society\u2019s main goal was to exact retribution.<\/p>\n
Sentencing Theories<\/p><\/div>\n
It is no coincidence that our pop culture references changed to be consistent with that retribution theme. In the 1950s and 1960s, as characterized by the television drama \u201cPerry Mason\u201d or the book \u201cTo Kill a Mockingbird\u201d (published in 1960), we told ourselves stories about how we need to value individual rights against a government that may abuse its power. Both Perry Mason and Atticus Finch, in \u201cTo Kill a Mockingbird,\u201d were lawyers who stood up for the \u201clittle guy\u201d who was unfairly accused by an authoritarian government.<\/p>\n
In the 1970s and 1980s, however, we began to tell ourselves stories about stopping those people who were getting away with anti-social and criminal behavior. What legal drama dominated the late 1980s into the 90s? \u201cLaw and Order,\u201d of course. In a small way, pop culture reflected the changing social mores. Whereas Perry Mason stood up against a sometimes oppressive government, \u201cLaw and Order\u201d told stories where we cheered on the government to get retribution on those who tried to, quite literally, get away with murder.<\/p>\n
Well, we are now well into the 21st<\/sup> century, and the facts listed above paint a very grim picture of the fallout from decades of incredibly harsh sentences for crimes, sentences that demonstrated the \u201clock \u2018em up and throw away the key\u201d mentality. While the mass incarceration sentencing theory may have dissuaded a small percentage of would-be criminals, the downside to the policy is far too severe as the facts above demonstrate. And let us not forget that a person\u2019s sentence does not end when they step out of prison.<\/p>\nReal World Case in Point<\/h2>\n
Take, for example, the true story of a young man who was a first-time non-violent drug offender in 1996. That person pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 10 years in prison, 40 months of which was mandatory. In prison, he was not permitted to advance his education, or engage in other chances for human development. He was left in a cage for over three years. Upon release from prison, he faced automatic suspension of his driver\u2019s license, permanent loss of voting rights, and numerous insurmountable barriers to education and employment, not to mention the permanent stigma of having a criminal record.<\/p>\n
Indeed, we often forget that part of a criminal conviction is not just the prison sentence but the collateral consequences of:<\/p>\n