A Humanistic Approach to Crime

I recommend Mark Kleiman’s book, When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment.

Kleiman is a liberal, but it would be best to characterize this book as centrist, or perhaps radical centrist, as it departs from liberal orthodoxies even as it challenges conservative orthodoxies.

The United States imprisons people at a greater rate than any other country, which is kind of amazing in the “land of the free.” Yet there really is a lot of crime in this country–even if you exclude victimless drug offenses–so something has to be done.

Kleiman’s main point is to propose changes to the system of probation, to make it more effective and thereby a legitimate alternative to incarceration. In most states, the probation system is poorly thought out, and doesn’t effectively deter people from further offenses that get them thrown into prison. Kleiman talks about a program in Hawaii that makes probationers know more clearly when their next offense will lead to prison, and this certainty has a deterrent effect–leading to less imprisonment.

Kleiman also proposes an interesting technological solution–have probationers wear a GPS bracelet so that their movements can be tracked. Whenever there was a crime, it would be simple to determine if any probationers were present at the time. Letting the probationers know this would deter them, preventing crime and keeping them out of prison. This solution does sound a bit 1984ish. However, one a person is convicted of a crime, they lose some of their rights, and tightly supervised probation is more compassionate than incarceration.

Kleiman takes aims at some liberal orthodoxies, like dealing with “root causes” of crime. For instance, he puts the kabosh on the frequently heard argument that if we invested more in education, it would prevent kids from getting into trouble. He says, in fact, that most kids don’t get into trouble as it is, so that investing in education for everyone would be an extremely expensive way to reduce crime by a small amount. Kleiman believes that crime can be repressed without solving social inequalities.

He’s also skeptical of some gun control measures, like prohibiting legal gun owners from carrying concealed weapons. On the other hand, he favors closing the loophole that allows private gun sales without a background check (which could be a service provided by gun merchants). That loophole effectively undermines the whole system and allows anyone to easily purchase a gun, even felons and mentally ill people who would fail a background check.

He criticizes policies like “three strikes, your out” not only from the compassionate point of view that it sometimes punishes people disproportionately, but the hard-boiled point of view that it focuses resources on criminals who tend to be older and are at the tail end of their criminal career. Instead, he recommends focusing on young adult criminals with a long career ahead of them. He suggests that once an adult has been convicted of a crime, their criminal record as a youth (if any) should be unsealed. He says that sealing criminal records is meant to give youths a fresh start, but if they have spoiled that fresh start, their is no logic in keeping those records sealed. On the other hand, unsealing them would allow judges to determine whether the convicted person really was a first offender and should perhaps get probation, or fit the pattern of a career criminal and should be incarcerated.

I see Kleiman’s book as humanistic. In a perfect world, no one would commit crimes and no one would have to be incarcerated. The United States is far from perfect. Some deterrence is necessary, but their is something off-kilter in our system. Both the left and the right have tired and deeply imperfect solutions, and it appears that Kleiman has some clever ideas that deserve serious consideration.


6 Responses to “A Humanistic Approach to Crime”

  1. May 9, 2010 at 6:31 pm

    No mention at all of restorative justice? It seems to me that restorative justice is a deeply humanistic response to crime, attempting to have those who commit crimes recognize the harm they have caused while allowing the victims to come to terms with, and eventually overcome, the fear that is engendered by victimhood.

    I also don’t really like what I’m hearing regarding the inefficiency of investing in education and other social programs to tackle the root causes of crime. Seems to me that there really are situations which lead to people committing crime more readily, and that any just society would seek to avoid anyone living in those situations for its own sake, as well as for the benefits in terms of crime rates it would offer…

  2. 2 Rick Heller
    May 9, 2010 at 7:25 pm

    I think the author is in favor of education and social programs for their own sake. However, he says that broad investments in education across all of society won’t do much about the crime rate–although specific interventions targeted at “at risk” may have some benefit. Overall, though, his findings are that intelligent policing is the most cost effective way to prevent crime, and prevent people from doing things that get them incarcerated.

  3. 3 Jim Farmelant
    May 15, 2010 at 2:33 pm

    iven that there is a fairly extensive literature on the relationships between crime rates and economic inequality, I am wondering if this issue is addressed in Kleiman’s book. If it is, does he think that the relationship is a causal one? And if his answer is yes, then why not make that the focus of his anti-crime policies? And if he doesn’t then what’s so humanistic about his approach to crime?

  4. May 15, 2010 at 4:46 pm

    I think Kleiman is trying to present policies that could

    1. reduce incarceration
    2. reduce crime
    3. get passed in our current political environment

    He doesn’t deny that inequality may increase crime rates, but as a practical matter, the political winds make large-scale redistribution unlikely. He’s trying to get beyond the traditional left-right cleavages by coming up with innovative policies have a chance of being adopted. His focus is on reforming probation, which I have read (unable to location reference) is in Massachusetts a dumping ground for political hacks and does not serve the public or prisoners well.

  5. March 6, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    Simply desire to say your article is as astounding.

    The clarity for your put up is simply spectacular and i can assume you’re knowledgeable on this subject. Well with your permission let me to grasp your RSS feed to stay updated with imminent post. Thanks a million and please continue the enjoyable work.

  6. May 22, 2013 at 8:12 pm

    Thank you for the good writeup. It in reality was once a
    enjoyment account it. Glance advanced to more introduced agreeable from you!
    By the way, how could we keep up a correspondence?

Comments are currently closed.

%d bloggers like this: