|
smfchicago
|
 |
« on: November 12, 2006, 12:33:12 AM » |
|
THOUGHTS ON HJR80 - Entitlement and Empowerment
(ed. note: This is a post that appeared in the topic "Thoughts on HJR80", during a particularily lively discussion about this resolution and it's implications for both inmate families and victim family members. I think it's such an exceptional read for those interested in this issue that I've chosen it for This Week's Editorial. It was submitted by our attorney member smfchicago.)
Contrary to what many of you have said – on both sides – there is a spirited debate going on here. I’d like to share a story with all of you, not because I have righteousness on my side, I don’t. But because I believe that we all have been hurt, and we all have some healing to do. None of us will win in the game of comparing whose hurt is worse. To the loved ones of people who have been murdered: I am sorry for your loss. I call you “loved ones of people who have been murdered” to avoid labeling you “victims,” an unempowered place to be. You are not powerless. Your voice is not irrelevant. Obviously, your loss matters.
To those who are loved ones of incarcerated persons: I am sorry for your loss. I call you “loved ones of people who are incarcerated” so that you too will be empowered, and not sheltered under the unempowered role of victim. You are not powerless. Your voice is not irrelevant. Your loss matters too.
While both your voices and your pain matters, this is not about you. It’s not about either of you. This – HJR80 - is about a just society living up to its expectations. It’s about making policy decisions that are made by courageous legislators who can make sensible decisions without using emotion to guide their decisions. It is about leadership, which sometimes, often even, requires leaders to make difficult choices for the greater good.
We all need to abandon this sense of entitlement. We are entitled to safe neighborhoods and to be protected from crime; that requires sensible crime-prevention policies that work, including a correctional system that focuses on preventing further crime, rehabilitating offenders and creating an incentive-based system where people who have done bad things need to learn their behavior was wrong, and earn the trust of the public that they will not repeat their behavior to the detriment of others. We are entitled to quality public education for our children; that means not draining the resources for them while satisfying the desire to “lock ‘em up and throw away the key” when the prisoner is no longer a threat to public safety and is remorseful. This is what we are entitled to. This is what HJR80 is about.
We are not entitled to Illinois’ taxpayers financing our grief or releasing our loved ones if they are still dangerous and unrehablitated. We are not, as individuals, entitled to say who must stay in prison and for how long. We are not entitled, as individuals to say who should get out of prison and when. We are in a republic (representative government) which operates as a democracy (majority rules). This is how our country governs. This is how the HJR80 Committee will carry out its work and determine its recommendations.
In 2003, Justice Kennedy gave a speech to the ABA. In it, he noted that “a society confident in its laws and institutions should not be ashamed of mercy.” He is no bleeding heart liberal. And he has the protection of lifetime tenure to say these things without fear of retribution from any constituency. We might do well to listen to him.
Anecdotally, and this is not representative of anything but the diversity in prisoners, their sentences, their crimes and their hope. A 15 year old boy grows up on the south side of Chicago. His mother buys drugs from him, and works part-time in a bar. His father and older brother, whom he idolizes, sells drugs too. One day, three “buyers” steal some drugs and some money from the 15-year old’s brother. In a quest to get the drugs and money back, the brother sends the 15 year old and two older men to go and retrieve the stolen items. The two older men end up shooting and killing them men they were supposed to retrieve the guns and money from. The 15 year old boy, who was never armed, is charged and convicted of first degree murder. He is sentenced to mandatory natural life in prison, despite the judge's desire. Today he is 30. In the last 15 years in prison, his mother has come to see him 15 times; his father has never come. He has not talked to his father in 10 years. Despite this, he is a model prisoner. He has no record, no prior convictions. He has not received a single disciplinary ticket while in prison for the last 11 years. The two things he regrets most in his life are going to the victims’ house and selling drugs to his mother. He will never get out of prison short of a new law or successful appeal. Is this fair?
There are people, whom I know personally, who are spending their lives in prison for far more awful crimes, who also have stellar prison records. There are just as many who I’d be afraid of if they were released tomorrow, reagrdless of their offense. But it’s not my decision. It’s not your decision. To the loved ones of crime victims and or incarcerated people: your voice is important in this debate but you have to be willing to listen. If your grief, understandable as it is, prevents you from being able to hear other viewpoints, if you’ve already made up your mind, then there’s nothing to discuss. Please be honest with yourselves. We all have more in common that we have differences.
|
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM