Monday, October 30, 2006
OVERFLOWING PRISONS
The Enid News-Eagle, a good small city daily, has published an appropriate editorial on the issue of overflowing state prisons. This issue should receive widespread discussion in an open forum of ideas, untainted by political posturing and demagoguery. It has not had this. Almost simultaneously with the appearance of the editorial, a candidate for governor started running commericals attacking the incumbent governor for freeing 1500 prisoners under the state's legal process for clemency and parole review.
Oklahoma has had a redneck "hang 'em high," or "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mentality. We have 25,000 state prison inmates as a result. That is the reason that we are first in the percent of women incarcerated, and in the top five for over-all incarceraton rate. That is why we have a prison finance problem. That is why we have 800 prisoners soon to be put out of a private prison with nowhere to go. That is why we have 400 state prisoners in the Oklahoma City jail, and countless others all over the state including Enid. Courts are trying to force transer of these into a prison system with no room.
Various estimates are that half of the prisoners have offenses that relate to alcohol and substance abuse, that 8,500 (a third) of our prisoners have a mental illness, that a fourth may be functionally illiterate, and that as many as two thirds lack employable education and skills. Yet our prison system must concentrate on just finding a cell bed for inmates and little else!
One has cause to wonder about the nature of the offenses and the length of sentences for prisoners. Of Course, there is little question about strict sentencing for murder, rape, child molestation, armed robbery, and the like. But prison sentences for simple possession of marijuana? Invading the privacy of homes to find small personal stashes of drugs or paraphernalia? Convicting a woman with a couple of pots of marijuana in her home? Jailing people for offenses of animal neglect and vehicular accidents? Perhaps some bi-partisan study group needs to take another look at the nature of offenses which merit severe prosecution and prison terms, as well as further study of alternatives to incarceration.
Further, one wonders at the logic of incarceration conditions. Do we really need the usual prison cells for non-violent and white collar offenders? Would less expensive, and more humane, dormitories with just fences do as well for many? Should more use be made of ankle bracelets, home and work confinement, and outside supervision? What about more work supervision with lock-down dormitories in off time? Should access to educational opportunities, drug treatment, and vocational training be essential elements in order to negate recidivism?
The point is that Oklahoma has more of a problem than just cell housing for the prisoners the system has condemned to serve time behind bars. Our excessive rate of incarceration needs examination. Do we really have more degenerates in our population than elsewhere? Do we have a penal code that is stricter? Is our standard for arrest and prosecution of offenders more strict? Are our judges too severe in sentences, and what about effects of mandatory sentencing? Do we not have good alternatives to prison? Have we too little concern with treating, as well as housing, prisoners? Do we really look for less expensive "minimal security" conditions for minor offenders?
Oklahoma must look closely at the financial costs of its prison system, because there are too many other state needs and priorities to let in continue its rise. There is also the need to examine its function as a significant rehabilitative service, as well as its punitive one.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Oklahoma has had a redneck "hang 'em high," or "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mentality. We have 25,000 state prison inmates as a result. That is the reason that we are first in the percent of women incarcerated, and in the top five for over-all incarceraton rate. That is why we have a prison finance problem. That is why we have 800 prisoners soon to be put out of a private prison with nowhere to go. That is why we have 400 state prisoners in the Oklahoma City jail, and countless others all over the state including Enid. Courts are trying to force transer of these into a prison system with no room.
Various estimates are that half of the prisoners have offenses that relate to alcohol and substance abuse, that 8,500 (a third) of our prisoners have a mental illness, that a fourth may be functionally illiterate, and that as many as two thirds lack employable education and skills. Yet our prison system must concentrate on just finding a cell bed for inmates and little else!
One has cause to wonder about the nature of the offenses and the length of sentences for prisoners. Of Course, there is little question about strict sentencing for murder, rape, child molestation, armed robbery, and the like. But prison sentences for simple possession of marijuana? Invading the privacy of homes to find small personal stashes of drugs or paraphernalia? Convicting a woman with a couple of pots of marijuana in her home? Jailing people for offenses of animal neglect and vehicular accidents? Perhaps some bi-partisan study group needs to take another look at the nature of offenses which merit severe prosecution and prison terms, as well as further study of alternatives to incarceration.
Further, one wonders at the logic of incarceration conditions. Do we really need the usual prison cells for non-violent and white collar offenders? Would less expensive, and more humane, dormitories with just fences do as well for many? Should more use be made of ankle bracelets, home and work confinement, and outside supervision? What about more work supervision with lock-down dormitories in off time? Should access to educational opportunities, drug treatment, and vocational training be essential elements in order to negate recidivism?
The point is that Oklahoma has more of a problem than just cell housing for the prisoners the system has condemned to serve time behind bars. Our excessive rate of incarceration needs examination. Do we really have more degenerates in our population than elsewhere? Do we have a penal code that is stricter? Is our standard for arrest and prosecution of offenders more strict? Are our judges too severe in sentences, and what about effects of mandatory sentencing? Do we not have good alternatives to prison? Have we too little concern with treating, as well as housing, prisoners? Do we really look for less expensive "minimal security" conditions for minor offenders?
Oklahoma must look closely at the financial costs of its prison system, because there are too many other state needs and priorities to let in continue its rise. There is also the need to examine its function as a significant rehabilitative service, as well as its punitive one.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Friday, October 20, 2006
THE SHADOW IS LARGER THAN THE MAN
The e-mail the other day contained a beautiful picture taken from a helicopter flying low across the rolling sands of the desert. Below were the dark forms of a number of camels, traversing those dunes and valleys. That was at first glance. A closer look revealed the very small, light brown camels which were casting the extended dark shadow replicas of their forms. It seemed an eerie sight, somewhat surrealistic.
Men (and women) cast shadows. A shadow may be miniscule or it may be long and magnified many times, as in the case of the desert camels and the leaders of prominent nations. Further, those shadows may be dark and ominous, or they may be the welcome shade of rest and respite.
Many years ago, it was spoken that an institution is but the lengthened shadow of a man, implying that past leadership of that college or university had cast a larger, longer shadow that became the institution. It would probably be more accurate to speak of the institution as the shadow silhouette of many men and women, leaders and builders, who have contributed their life essence to its development.
It may also be true that internationally, a country's image and reputation may be symbolized as the lengthened shadow of one man and his administration, representing it on the world's stage.
As I looked at the picture of the broad and lengthy shadows cast by the the small and insignificant camels, I could not help but see an analogy of this picture in the world view of today.
We have a president, a small and insignificant man in terms of personal qualities and intellectual stature, who has cast a dark shadow over the entire world. Althugh that shadow may be shared by the vice president, secretary of defense, and others around him, there is little doubt that he has cast an ominous pall over all of us. He has chosen a doomsday course. This man's world policies and actions, based upon falsehoods and misconceptions and then fanning the fears and flames of hatred, have made America and the world less safe.
What America needs now, and what the world needs, is for a leader to emerge from the political morass that passes for democracy in this country. This leader needs to be one who will cast a different kind of shadow over the world -- the cool shade of peace and respite.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Men (and women) cast shadows. A shadow may be miniscule or it may be long and magnified many times, as in the case of the desert camels and the leaders of prominent nations. Further, those shadows may be dark and ominous, or they may be the welcome shade of rest and respite.
Many years ago, it was spoken that an institution is but the lengthened shadow of a man, implying that past leadership of that college or university had cast a larger, longer shadow that became the institution. It would probably be more accurate to speak of the institution as the shadow silhouette of many men and women, leaders and builders, who have contributed their life essence to its development.
It may also be true that internationally, a country's image and reputation may be symbolized as the lengthened shadow of one man and his administration, representing it on the world's stage.
As I looked at the picture of the broad and lengthy shadows cast by the the small and insignificant camels, I could not help but see an analogy of this picture in the world view of today.
We have a president, a small and insignificant man in terms of personal qualities and intellectual stature, who has cast a dark shadow over the entire world. Althugh that shadow may be shared by the vice president, secretary of defense, and others around him, there is little doubt that he has cast an ominous pall over all of us. He has chosen a doomsday course. This man's world policies and actions, based upon falsehoods and misconceptions and then fanning the fears and flames of hatred, have made America and the world less safe.
What America needs now, and what the world needs, is for a leader to emerge from the political morass that passes for democracy in this country. This leader needs to be one who will cast a different kind of shadow over the world -- the cool shade of peace and respite.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Thursday, October 05, 2006
STOP THE OCCUPATION!
The Militant Moderate came of age during World War II, and entered military service voluntarily while still 17 years of age. During his youth, the military occupation of which he knew most was the German occupation of France, Poland, and parts of Europe. There was also the Japanese occupation of Korea, regions of China, and the Philippines.
These occupations were basically "successful," although not without resistance from freedom fighters. The reason they were successful was the cruelty of the occupiers. If a German soldier were killed, then ten or twenty villagers were lined up and shot. Still there was token resistance. In the Orient, the brutality and inhumanity were amplified further. Rape, murder, and pillage were common. Torture and other repressive methods were used to control and rule the populati9on.
Americans have not normally been good occupiers. We have been good warriors, but we have not been good rulers of occupied territory. We had trouble in the Philippines after acquiring them from Spain. The Yankees were poor occupiers of the South after our Civil War. Our colonial experience has been limited, and self-governance alleviated problems. Viet Nam was certainly not a good occupying experience in support of an unpopular government.
We had a good experience in Germany after WWII, principally because Germans were sick of war, and we closed our eyes while Patton and others recruited former Nazis to help run the country for us. We had a good experience in Japan following their defeat, because we backed away from "unconditional surrender," and we allowed their deistic imperial head to remain in a respected but non-authoritarian role. This understanding and respect for their traditions and religious customs brought a compliant spirit to the occupation of a people haunted by the atom bomb devastation.
In Iraq our troops and their commanders proved once again to be an unbeatable foe in war. Defeating a weakened Iraq army was no challenge for our trained and technologically superior force. However, once again we proved ourselves to be poor at occupation. First, we stood aside and allowed a period of anarchy. There was no governing authority. We disdained use of Saddam's former army or commanders to keep order or to perform governance functions to keep the electricity on and the garbage collected.
With the proliferation of weapons available in the region, things spun out of control. We never gained the support and respect of Islamic leaders. The culture of the Middle East is antithetical to that of westerners, and neither understands the other. The hazards of cocupation are many.
We have again shown ourselves to be poor occupiers. We tried to form a democracy in a sectarian and cultural milieu where democracy is an anathema. We failed to respect regional ethnic and sectarian differences. Force, power, and cruelty are feared, and thus respected. But Americans are notoriously not brutal or cruel. When our troops begin to act in such ways, we condemn them publicly and put them on trial.
Since we are neither brutual nor cruel in our nature, manner, or style, and we do not want to become so, we should get out of the military occupation business. We need to say to Iraq and to the world:
"We have removed a brutal dictator, a threat to the peace of the region, and we have set the people free. We have no desire to occupy this land or to rule it. It has been our desire to see an orderly democratic government established, but it has become clear that our presence in Iraq is a hindrance to the process. Polls show that our presence is not wanted. So now the people of Iraq must assume responsibility for their own future as a free and sovereign nation. We are redeploying our forces within the next 90 days. However, we caution the Iraqi people never to allow the formation of any government which allows forces within to threaten the peace of the region or the world."
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
These occupations were basically "successful," although not without resistance from freedom fighters. The reason they were successful was the cruelty of the occupiers. If a German soldier were killed, then ten or twenty villagers were lined up and shot. Still there was token resistance. In the Orient, the brutality and inhumanity were amplified further. Rape, murder, and pillage were common. Torture and other repressive methods were used to control and rule the populati9on.
Americans have not normally been good occupiers. We have been good warriors, but we have not been good rulers of occupied territory. We had trouble in the Philippines after acquiring them from Spain. The Yankees were poor occupiers of the South after our Civil War. Our colonial experience has been limited, and self-governance alleviated problems. Viet Nam was certainly not a good occupying experience in support of an unpopular government.
We had a good experience in Germany after WWII, principally because Germans were sick of war, and we closed our eyes while Patton and others recruited former Nazis to help run the country for us. We had a good experience in Japan following their defeat, because we backed away from "unconditional surrender," and we allowed their deistic imperial head to remain in a respected but non-authoritarian role. This understanding and respect for their traditions and religious customs brought a compliant spirit to the occupation of a people haunted by the atom bomb devastation.
In Iraq our troops and their commanders proved once again to be an unbeatable foe in war. Defeating a weakened Iraq army was no challenge for our trained and technologically superior force. However, once again we proved ourselves to be poor at occupation. First, we stood aside and allowed a period of anarchy. There was no governing authority. We disdained use of Saddam's former army or commanders to keep order or to perform governance functions to keep the electricity on and the garbage collected.
With the proliferation of weapons available in the region, things spun out of control. We never gained the support and respect of Islamic leaders. The culture of the Middle East is antithetical to that of westerners, and neither understands the other. The hazards of cocupation are many.
We have again shown ourselves to be poor occupiers. We tried to form a democracy in a sectarian and cultural milieu where democracy is an anathema. We failed to respect regional ethnic and sectarian differences. Force, power, and cruelty are feared, and thus respected. But Americans are notoriously not brutal or cruel. When our troops begin to act in such ways, we condemn them publicly and put them on trial.
Since we are neither brutual nor cruel in our nature, manner, or style, and we do not want to become so, we should get out of the military occupation business. We need to say to Iraq and to the world:
"We have removed a brutal dictator, a threat to the peace of the region, and we have set the people free. We have no desire to occupy this land or to rule it. It has been our desire to see an orderly democratic government established, but it has become clear that our presence in Iraq is a hindrance to the process. Polls show that our presence is not wanted. So now the people of Iraq must assume responsibility for their own future as a free and sovereign nation. We are redeploying our forces within the next 90 days. However, we caution the Iraqi people never to allow the formation of any government which allows forces within to threaten the peace of the region or the world."
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
