Almost every American is aware that our prison system needs to be reformed, but it seems that nobody has a viable solution.  To understand the immensity of the problem we’re facing, consider these four major issues:

#1: Prisons are too expensive

In 2009, [1] Reuters reported that imprisonment costs Americans $29,000 per prisoner (more than my wages last year), and 51.7 billion total on corrections (including local jails, probation, parole).

#2: High rates of recidivism

A 2002 [2] Bureau of Justice Statistics study showed that after three years, 67.5% of prisoners were arrested after release, and 51.8% were back in prison.  So our prison system isn’t reforming the overwhelming majority of criminals.

#3: A criminal’s ability to blend in allows them to strike again, or to breed

Without a way to recognize criminals, they can strike again after leaving prison.  And they leave unfathered children all over our states, [3] contributing to neighborhood poverty and crime.

#4: One out of every hundred Americans is incarcerated

[4] CBS now reports that America incarcerates more people than China, which is amazing, considering that the Chinese have fewer liberties and far more people. Per capita, we are also surpass the rest of the world’s incarceration rates.

Fortunately for the American people, a solution has arrived, and it doesn’t involve expensive psychotherapy or nicer jail cells.  Conversely, the solution involves getting rid of the prison system almost entirely through what we will refer to as a responsibility-based system of law.

Imagine, if you would, a society in which a convicted thief, or someone who cheats on his wife, or someone who sells pot (especially to people under the age of 18), or deadbeat dads who don’t pay child-support, or the fraudulent, or wife-beaters would not go to jail, with one major difference from freedom: they would be forced for an entire year to wear a sign which describes their crime, and gives details about how they did it.  In addition to this, an offender would be required under every circumstance involving a loss in time or property to compensate their victim, by providing the victim with either lost wages or double the amount taken through fraud, thievery, vandalism, or other offenses.

When a person is convicted of a crime, a state official will personally visit their home and post a sign on their door/building/mailbox, which will notify the neighbors of that person’s criminal behavior.  That way, if the criminal refuses to wear the sign and chooses to leave the privacy of their home without it, any two people can report them, and the offender will end up eating gruel and breaking rocks in an Arizona desert tent-city chain-gang for five years.  No fancy vegetables, no television, no basketball.  All offenders will have a tracking device on the sign, or some other method of proving their adherence to the new law (1).

In an even more interesting twist, drunk drivers would get a nice reflective sign on the backs of their cars AND on themselves for two years, so that our police officers would be able to keep tabs on them. And to keep violent offenders from wearing their signs as badges of pride, we would scrap the plan for people who assault others: they will instead be publicly humiliated by caning with their pants down in the public center, and then sent off to a minimalist encampment somewhere in the desert (wife-beaters will be excluded from this, since there’s no value in claiming to beat your wife: both women and men will boo you everywhere you go).  Or the violent offender can be forced to wear a sign touting a far less (potentially) impressive offense.

As a major bonus to society, criminals will no longer be able to freely pursue women and impregnate them out of wedlock, since women will have an incredibly easy time recognizing their potential partners as criminals.  It would be difficult to enjoy the company of a man who had a sign reading “THIEF”–or better yet, “DEADBEAT DAD”–on his chest.  This will largely serve the ideas proposed by eugenicists, but without intrusive and civil-rights-violating castration.  To supplement this program, a public-awareness campaign will be promoted, so that women can learn to search for their potential mate in our criminal database.

Now, many sign-wearers will choose to leave their communities, seeking residence where they can either avoid wearing the sign, or wear the sign around strangers. Of course, all states will have the option to vary enforcement of this plan: more liberal states would probably opt to abandon sign requirements, which would lead to a subsequent flood of criminals into their towns. But states with intelligent voters will quickly adapt, requiring offenders to not only register, but continue to wear their signs until their sentences are over.  This should be left to each state’s consideration, but either way will rid any responsibility-based legal systems of criminals.  If responsibility-based law becomes active in your town, expect a criminal exodus VERY quickly, and expect the other states to follow out of self-protection.

But while that portion of the plan would apply to less dangerous offenses, it would be imprudent to do the same with rapists, murderers, child-molesters and peddlers of child-pornography, and dealers of heroin and methamphetamine (2).   So if a conviction is made without a shadow of a doubt, the more dangerous offender should expect public hanging within a year of sentence.  If juries feel that new evidence could possibly appear within the next two years, a two-year death-row extension can be filed by the offender’s lawyer (Also worth noting is that currently, the [5] states pay about a million-dollars more for a death-penalty trial than a non-death-penalty trial.  I’m no legal expert, but killing rapists and murderers should be cheaper.  If someone would like to propose a solution to this problem, please contact me.).

This would also completely fix the problem of prison rape, since most truly violent offenders are incapable of raping others when they’re dead. In addition to this, the desert tent-cities for less-dangerous offenders would be equipped with recording cameras for every possible section of the encampment.  Although this might be somewhat expensive at first, every officer would be allowed to use video evidence to convict prisoners of rape or assault, which would result in a very inexpensive and quick execution of the rapist.  To encourage guards to provide video evidence, they will be given a $5,000 bonus upon production. If we end up reducing our prison population by killing all the prison-rapists, we’ll be living in a much cheaper and more humane society.  I, for one, am not interested in paying for or living near anyone who engages in homosexual rape.

Another benefit of abandoning prisons will be the effect it has upon race relations. Within the first year, many thieves and other offenders will be quickly labeled and publicly humiliated, which will lead people to watch for physical signs of past behavior, and not simply rely on profiling.  If massive differences between races become evident, the resulting prejudice will have been due to individual behaviors, which is completely consistent with the ideals of Martin Luther King Jr.: both the racist and the anti-racist will be able to engage in healthy and righteous discrimination, enabled by objective evidence.

Aside from these obvious perks, this plan is also consistent with Biblical law.  For instance, when God instituted His own personal government–which means that it is completely righteous–He never mandated the construction of prisons.  In fact, neither the word “prison” nor “jail” is mentioned anywhere in His laws.  Rather, [6] swift execution was brought upon those who committed the most serious offenses, and those who committed less-dangerous offenses were [7] ordered to repay the victims, oftentimes more than was taken.  Conviction of sign-avoidance can only be provided with the [8] word of two witnesses.  And since Israel was divided into small communities, everyone knew exactly who the criminals were: the degree of anonymity was low enough to keep people from swindling the innocent.

Now, there will be many who oppose this plan, citing the [9] Eighth Amendment which bans cruel and unusual punishment.  But those people need to take a serious look in the mirror and decide exactly what they stand for.  This isn’t thumb-screws or boiling in oil, this is allowing a human being with free-will to be treated according to their own behavior.  In reality, abandoning your children is cruel.  Stealing is cruel.  Beating your wife is cruel.  Cheating the elderly out of their savings is cruel.  The right thing to do would be to save good citizens their money, repay victims, and let potential victims know who they’re dealing with.  In short, this law system only mandates responsibility for the maintenance of a person’s own public standing.  If a person is uncomfortable with describing themselves as a thief, maybe they shouldn’t steal.

Seems like common sense, doesn’t it?  What do you think?

—————————————————————————————————————————————-

Notes:

(1) Since a sign-wearer might be able to take their sign off in certain areas, I would prefer an electronic monitoring system.  If the sensory equipment notices a lack of movement or heat, either an alarm will sound or the person will be contacted by a monitoring agency.  The specifics of this can be tweaked, but either way the new system provides less intrusion than what would be done at a correctional facility, and in the long-term costs far less.  And of course, two witnesses can always testify against a person who neglects to wear their sign.

(2) My position on the death penalty for meth/heroin dealers comes from my own personal experience as a drug-addict in college.  While I was able to live poorly under the influence of many other drugs, methamphetamine quickly reduced me to an emaciated, hallucinating mess.  If I hadn’t been discovered by family friends, I could very well have died or been seriously deranged.  One of my high-school buddies wasn’t so lucky, and spends his days talking to invisible people: last I heard, he was still in bad shape.  You decide for yourself whether or not selling meth to people’s children is worthy of death.