For generations, Americans have struggled with what to do with people of all ages who are convicted of crimes. When crime rises, it is very easy to seek a sense of safety in the building of prisons and filling them to the brim. When young people allegedly offend, there is often a knee-jerk reaction to drop the heavy hammer of penal law upon their heads.
This publication’s November 19, 2020 piece titled ‘New Canaan Police Commissioner Pushes for Hardline Prosecution of Car Thieves’ illustrates the oversimplification of this very complex topic. Quotes attributed to one of New Canaan’s Police Commissioners and the town’s police chief typify the many-decades-old perspective that calls for more immediate, harsher penalties for young offenders. In New Canaan’s most recent experience, young offenders are alleged to be stealing cars with keys kept in the interior of the very same unlocked cars.
The idea that young people should be imprisoned for such offenses and suffer quickly imposed and harsh sentences flies in the face of what well-informed criminal justice experts, sociologists, psychologists and educators understand; incarcerating young people for automobile theft is not effective for the present, nor, very importantly, for future generations. Incarcerating young people for non-violent crimes not only is ineffective in preventing future crime, but may in fact, increase the risk of recidivism.
The incarceration of young people also fails to acknowledge the complex societal and cultural issues that bring car-canvassing youth to New Canaan. The rate at which youths of color are incarcerated compared to their white counterparts is stunning and tragic.
Criminal justice policy cannot be reactionary. It must be a product of information, data and honest societal introspection, with an optimistic eye toward the future. If we are going to measurably diminish crime committed by young people, our efforts must be multidisciplinary, and it must incorporate mental health, educational, sociological and clinical planning that envisions authentic generational change.
The format and space kindly provided by the New Canaanite provide only a glimpse of thought on this topic. Readers are urged to examine research on this topic. Some of that research has been ably performed here in Connecticut, which we should be proud to know, has become a leader in criminal justice reform.
As long as we misguidedly and reflexively call for incarceration of young offenders, without reallocating funds to early intervention and education, the United States will continue to lead the world in putting people in jail. Surely, we can agree that this is not where our great nation, nor New Canaan, should wish to lead.
Matthew Maddox
Mr. Maddox,
You have written a compelling letter for why young people should not be incarcerated. So, what is your recommendation of what to do with these perpetrators once they have been arrested and tried?
Thank you for your comment and question.
Except for serious or persistent offenders, our courts should focus on rehabilitation and education; this is especially so for young and juvenile offenders. That rehabilitation should, on the one hand, sting. It should be memorable. Community service, and a lot of it, should be mandatory. Instruction specifically targeting the alleged offense and its consequences should also be mandatory. Rehabilitation must include education. By that, I mean schooling and demonstrated achievement in school, whether traditionally academic or trade education. Where indicated, rehabilitation should include mental, emotional and other health care. It should include substance abuse evaluation and treatment where indicated. When offenders fail to comply with conditions, there should be graduated, but immediate consequences directed toward privileges and liberty. When offenders compl, and have completed their conditions, our State and federal system of laws should automatically move them to sustained programming that follows education and training, and that mentors young people toward goal planning and achievement. There are, no doubt, readers who may gasp at the apparent expense of this general outline. However, over the long term, comprehensive intervention will save money on traditional probation, parole and judicial branch staffing. It will also realize long term gains in employment, other economic indicators, families remaining intact and the many societal benefits that flow from those intact families.
Thanks to Matthew Maddox for his thoughtful and well researched comments on the subject of youthful offenders. As a retired teacher (and caring citizen) I agree with his point of view and hope that my fellow citizens see the wisdom in his approach to a difficult matter.
1.”urged to examine research…” sounds good. Anyone have a link to sizable and statistically valid data that proves the point beyond a reasonable doubt?
2. In the meantime, let us know how you feel about the perps and punishment if your personal car disappears.
3. This reminds me of a cartoon recently where a dispatcher sent a swat team to a Thanksgiving dinner with 13 people and a social worker to a fast food establishment based on a report of a man with a knife.
4. It is likely most car thieves will pick the easiest targets and the path of least resistance and punishment. “Community service” for a conviction sounds more appealing than prison.
5. What venue in New Canaan wants convicted felons running around to pay their debt to society?