Disparities between races in the legal system - Term Paper Example

Disparities between races in the legal system In the United States, being poor and/or outside of the physical identification of Caucasian can cause problems to arise that are based on social grouping that has nothing to do with actual criminal activity. When criminal behavior is considered, the laws can sometimes be seen to distinctly separate those of one group from those of another through the way in which they more harshly punish crimes that are associated with one group in comparison to similar crimes that are punished in regard to another group. While racial and socio-economic separation of social groups is strictly a construct of society and has no real meaning in regard to culture and ethnicity, the United States is still mired in racial profiling and prejudices that create social problems and leave the world in an unfair state. One of the primary issues in the United States is that their has developed an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ idea in regard to Caucasian America versus all other ‘racially’ described social groups. It is not merely skin color that has created this separation between people, but socio-economic disparities that has created a sense that there are those who have rights and everyone else is in conflict with those chosen few who are of a social class to provide them with rights. Laws have been developed that specify certain groups through their behaviors and bring about punishments that are racially defined by concepts of identity that are beyond a person’s control. As well, the state of being poor has created problems for citizens who haven’t the means to support themselves, but are treated as if the lack of those means puts them in conflict with the greater good of society. Targeting populations has gone so far as to include pregnant women who are drug addicted, effectively giving them no other recourse than to abort their children rather than risk jail time as services and efforts made post conception are not always considered when incarceration is considered by the legal system. The primary problem with this concept is that it appears to attack African American women over any other race, thus suggesting that the legal system is trying to encourage African American women to abort their children, rather than carrying them to term. The way in which the justice system has developed has encouraged and promoted a continuation of social problems rather than providing relief for those issues through racial profiling that diminishes the credibility of the system. Traffic Stops Racial profiling is defined by Glover (2009) as “the use of racial and/or ethnic status as the determinant factor in decisions to stop motorists either in the absence of indications of criminality or in determining who to enforce law against” (p. 11). There is a pervasive habit among law enforcement to stop drivers who appear to fall within the social groups of African American or of Hispanic descent for traffic violations, real or exaggerated, in order to investigate the nature of their business within a specified geographic location. A study done under the supervision of Dr. John Lamberth through Temple University in 1994 showed that the New Jersey police provided for an unfair percentage of traffic stops for people of non-Caucasian groupings. The study showed that “while African American drivers and Caucasian drivers committed roughly the same percentage of traffic violations, a startling statistic of 73.23% of the drivers stopped were African American drivers, while only 13.5% were of a different race” (Harris, 1999, 265) A Maryland lawsuit involved a defendant by the name of Robert Wilkins, a Harvard Law student, against the police department because he felt that when he was stopped by the police he and his family were unfairly processed and made to wait while drug sniffing drugs were brought to the scene to investigate their car. There was no reason for police to create this investigation other than suspicions brought on by their race. Proof of this was brought to light when a memo surfaced that “instructed troopers to look for drug couriers who were described as ‘predominantly black males and black females’” (Harris, 1999, p. 266). Because of these types of erroneous traffic stops that are taken to their extremes and create embarrassment and inconveniences for people based upon their skin color, an attitude of hostility emerges between law enforcement and the African American communities, with some aspects of this outrage spilling over into Hispanic communities. Because of this type of hassle created simply through the color of skin, the police lose their credibility with people who are targeted, thus leaving them vulnerable and without the feeling of public protection should the time come when they need the services of the police. The security of all of the public becomes less stable if the simple act of presenting oneself in public provides recourse for the police to act against an individual. Inequality in the Legal System The concept of law within the United States is that it should be met out through equal means, letting no man stand above another in the blind eye of justice. Unfortunately, this has not turned out to be the case. According to Lippman “defendants charged with killing Caucasian victims were four times as likely to receive the death penalty as defendants charged with killing African Americans and that African American defendants were one and one -tenth times as likely to receive the death sentence as other defendant (p. 79). An African American defendant has a higher chance of being locked up than does a Caucasian defendant for the same crime. Not only is sentencing shown to be unfairly balanced, but the way in which the laws are framed creates problems in the system. One of the drugs that are unlawful to use in the United States is cocaine, however, cocaine comes in different forms. Crack cocaine, a substance that is used more frequently in African American communities by 90%, will create a 5 year minimum sentence for 5 grams in possession. In order for the same sentence to be received by a user of powder cocaine, a drug that is more often associated with affluent Caucasian users, 100 grams must be in possession (Spohn, 2009, p. 243). The laws are designed to punish one user over the other, the racial identity of the type of communities in which the drugs are found relevant to the level of punishment that is exacted. This type of disparity creates a break in trust, thus creating a system which appears to favor a skin color of one social group over the skin color of another. The social contract within society which dictates and structures acceptable behaviors is thus broken, creating communities that feel that they are designated outside of the law, thus they must protect themselves. This is relevant to the increased gang activities that are often seen in lower socio-economic areas and more specifically communities where non-Caucasian people have discovered that they are not protected by the law, but are a victim of its injustice. Humans are creatures of the earth and when cornered, they will react and lash out against an oppressive force that threatens their safety within a community. With the police threatening the safety of African American social groups through undo traffic stops, searches, and eventually through laws that unequally punish them as they are defined by systems of criminal identifying factors that are associated statistically with one social group over another, there are consequences to the greater society where safety becomes a matter of dependency upon unsanctioned groups over the corrupt official groups of the police. The laws that make an attempt to define individuals through social grouping based on skin color does not end at traffic stops and cocaine use. Laws in different communities have targeted African American women where motherhood is concerned when the mother has a difficulty with drug addiction. Drug addiction in mothers is a difficult problem as an innocent life is being affected by the use of drugs while it is within the womb. Therefore, law has made attempts to rectify the situation through laws that are designed to make it illegal for drug addiction behaviors to occur during pregnancy. The problem with this type of a law is that it targets both the poor and African American women in particular as the use of crack cocaine is a primary targeted substance for the arrest of women who use during pregnancy. In a cooperative effort between a hospital and law enforcement in South Carolina, a system of arresting mothers for crack cocaine use during pregnancy was installed. When a woman tested positive for crack cocaine as they were about to give birth, they were immediately arrested. An amnesty program was designed to accompany the program so that women who agreed to go immediately into treatment after giving birth would be given the amnesty. Failures to submit to the treatment would result in arrest. However, the test program brought to light a serious problem with the idea of creating such a cooperative effort (Ehrenreich, 2008). The first problem was clearly shown through the racial diversity of the women involved. Of the 44 arrested during the operation only one was not an African American woman. Thus, the design of the program was geared towards social constructs within which targeted the communities of African American women. Secondly, the women were treated barbarically, taken to jail cells almost immediately after giving birth and not being given aspects of their dignity from the denial of proper post birth medical care. In addition, some women were taken to jail while they were in labor, but not near the end of their labors, thus creating a hostile environment in which to approach the birth of their child (Ehrenreich 2008). The care of these women and their children was usurped for the desire to incarcerate them for their addictive behaviors. While the use of drugs while pregnant is a tragedy and the problems that can occur within the infant after living in a womb that has been affective by drug use can create a large series of problems within society, the criminalization of drug use during pregnancy creates a great number of problems. To begin with, the concept tends to be geared towards targeting women in the African American communities, the laws written in such a way as to suggest that to abort a child is better than to give birth if a woman is addicted to drugs. Secondly, the idea of getting treatment is often too late to prevent criminal charges, and if the woman tries to get treatment there are few facilities in the country who will accommodate a pregnant woman. Gray (2001) states that 67% of all rehabilitation centers will not take women who are pregnant and that 84% of all drug rehab centers will refuse to take women addicted to crack cocaine (p. 129). Thus, this social remedy creates a promotion for abortion which suggests an effort to diminish the number of African American children who are born into the world. The problem with the statistics that are available is that while 90% of all crack cocaine users are African American; this does not mean that 90% of all African Americans use crack cocaine. When these statistics come to light, it is easy for law enforcement officials to get the idea that to combat a problem such as this means to engage the community that is targeted by the statistic as candidates for the behaviors that can be averted by arrest for those behaviors. This creates the disharmony within the greater society that makes the discord of the balance of legal system to her citizens out of sync so that communities begin to defend themselves. In this example of the criminalization of drug use in pregnant mothers, not only is a single gender singled out, but the socio-economic status of a woman defines her ability to get any help for the problem, thus creating an additional disparity that increases the potential for profiling to exist. Profiling does not only occur for racial groups, but for socio-economic groups as well. Socio-Economic Factors in Profiling. Socio-economic factors affect the way in which drug use has been criminalized. Marijuana, a mostly harmless drug carries criminal penalties, while alcohol does not carry penalties for use. Driving while intoxicated does provide for criminal penalties. However, in the criminalization of drug behaviors, marijuana has contributed to the incarceration of 829,600 people, while heroin and cocaine combines only provide for 582,100 (U. S. Department of Justice). It might be considered that the use of alcohol is designed for social events that include those who are of the upper class, thus the drug is a legal substance. However, marijuana is a drug of the lower classes, often associated with a lack of ambition and contributing to a lack of activity towards goals and achievements. Therefore, high penalties are assessed for this drug that has led it to be the number one cause of arrest in drug related criminal activities. According to Marxist theories, when a society becomes based upon mutual goals and ideals, a society will find harmony, but when based upon winning and succeeding against fellow community members through capitalistic goals, a society will find that their law will break down. Marx believed that the “whole capitalist system was crimininogenic for valuing completion over cooperation and polarizing the rich and the poor (Lanier & Henry, 2004, p. 12). When the rich are so very far in social class from the poor, as it exists in the United States, envy and jealousy create rich environments in which criminal behaviors can occur. Therefore, the police often look at those who appear to have little to no means and assume that they have committed a criminal act. However, beyond this assumption is the criminalization of being poor that has begun to be a trend within the United States. In 2007, the city of Orlando, Florida began to take their homeless problem to a place of criminality. While the act of being poor and trying to manage basic daily functions has been made more and more difficult through ordinances that make it illegal to lay on a bench or to do laundry in the sink of a public restroom, the people who were attacked during the subsequent laws for Lake Eola Park were defined by their desire to help others by feeding them. According to the laws that have been put into place, it is illegal to feed more than 25 people at any one time in the park without a permit. In addition, there are only two permits allowed each year (Associated Press, 2007). The problem at the lake where this law has been placed is that it attracts high numbers of people who have no place to go for basic human needs. Food, shelter, and basic hygiene are difficult to discover when one has little in the way of resources. One might suggest that the more appropriate place to seek help is at the shelters and charitable organizations that are available. Aside from some of the obvious problems of finding these places, there are not near enough places to house all of those without homes. In 2007 when this law went into place there were roughly 2000 beds for homeless people in Orlando, with an estimated population of 8500 homeless (Associated Press, 2007). Where charities used to go to the park and feed hundreds at a time, they are now not permitted to help those in need. Two meals a year will unlikely create a great many problems within the population of homeless within the area. The Aim at Solutions While it appears that the aim of such a law prohibiting helping the homeless is intent on trying to encourage them to go elsewhere, there is no real place that is ‘elsewhere’. Every community creates issues for those without means, thus creating a deeper social issue rather than creation solutions. This also creates a social divide between classes that suggests that being homeless is shameful or represents a moral flaw within the individual who is suffering from a lack of resources. The United States views poverty as a state that threatens the illusion that has been created by the ideals of the nation that ‘the American dream’ is accessible and available to all, and if one is not accomplishing this goal, then one isn’t trying hard enough. Through this socially constructed ideal, the idea of poverty is a direct threat to the belief of the founding principles of the country. Racial Profiling Racial profiling is a term that refers to the assumption of the possibility of guilt due to factors that are related to physical characteristics that identify someone as possibly being with a group that has been stereotyped for certain criminal behaviors. One of the most terrifying events in the history of the United States was the destruction of the World Trade Center towers in New York City, accompanied with several other efforts towards destruction on American soil. However, one of the results of these events has been to increase the acceptance of racial profiling towards people who appear to be of Middle Eastern ancestry. The associations made to terrorist acts to those who have the appearance of being from the same background as the terrorists have put a large group of people from a wide variety of cultures into a target zone of many other Americans. The problem with defining what is wrong with racial profiling is in disputing the association that a culture makes with physical appearance to criminal behaviors. Stereotyping emerges because at some level, the stereotype represents a pattern that has been observed. Colonel Carl A. Williams, the superintendent of the New Jersey Police department defended his department for stopping more African American and Hispanic drivers than Caucasian drivers through the theory of ’rational discrimination’. He said that “Two weeks ago, the President of the United States went to Mexico to talk…about drugs. He didn’t go to Ireland. He didn’t go to England” (Gaines & Miller, 2007, p. 233). However, this argument does not support the facts of life in America. A study in Texas showed that there is an equal chance of African American drivers and Caucasian drivers to be in possession of drugs, but nationwide statistics show that an African American driver has a 5.8% chance of being arrested, a Hispanic driver having a 5.2% chance, where a Caucasian driver has only a 2% chance of being arrested. The associations that have been made by law enforcement and by a great portion of culture is that the stereotypes that have been made concerning race are accurate. However, the idea that skin color or heritage has an association with criminal behavior is a dangerous basis on which to make assumptions about people. The problem with making those assumptions is that it asserts the idea that one ’race’ is superior to another and has higher moral standards. Race is a social construct that defines people into groups based on physical appearance without any regard to heritage. Therefore, race does not have any true existence. The second best boxer in history, Henry Armstrong, had a father who was part African American, part Irish, and part Native American. His mother was an Iroquois Native American (Armstrong, 1982, p. 19). However, he was identified as an African American boxer. His identification with the social group African American was based solely on physical characteristics that only represented a small part of his ethnic make-up. This is the fallacy of race, that it doesn’t identify anything rational. Using race as an excuse to target someone for crime creates a society that builds its assumption on ignorance of the truth. It is just as barbaric to define people by their socio-economic status, taking their rights merely because they have misfortune in their lives. Crime does exist, and sometimes social groups can be identified as having associations with crime, but not because they have either similar skin color or socio-economic hardships. They are involved in crime because they made a conscious choice to behave against the laws of a state through the individuated choice of belonging to that group. References Armstrong, Henry. (1982). Gloves, Glory, and God: An Autobiography. Westwood, N.J: Revell. Associated Press. 3 February 2007. Debate Rages in Florida over Law Against Feeding the Homeless. Fox News. Accessed at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250141,00.html Ehrenreich, N. (2008). The reproductive rights reader. New York: New York University Press. Gaines, L. K., & Miller, R. L. R. (2007). Criminal justice in action. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth. Glover, K. S. (2009). Racial profiling: Research, racism, and resistance. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield. Harris, David A. (1999). “The Statistical Analysis: The Stories, The Statistic, and The Law: Why "Driving While Black" Matters”. Found in Race, Racism and the Law Speaking Truth to Power!!. Minnesota Law Review 84, pp. 265-326. Lanier, Mark, and Stuart Henry. (2004). Essential Criminology. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press. Lippman, Matthew Ross. (2007). Contemporary Criminal Law: Concepts, Cases, and Controversies. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications. Spohn, Cassia. (2009). How Do Judges Decide?: The Search for Fairness and Justice in Punishment. Los Angeles: SAGE. #U.S Department of Justice. 14 August 2008 Number of Arrests by Drug Type 1982-2006. Office of Justice Programs . Accessed at Read More