A rational response to mandatory sentencing laws

Suppose people of Italian extraction are disproportionately affected by anti-racketeering statutes.  Would this be a good reason to oppose such laws? Obviously not. Why not? The reason is that the law targets the criminal behavior, not the ethnicity of the criminal. If it just so happens that people of Italian extraction are ‘overrepresented’ in the memberships of organized crime syndicates, then of course they will be ‘disproportionately affected’ by anti-racketeering laws. So what? It is very easy to multiply examples. Who commits more rapes, men or women?  You know the answer. Among men, in which age group will we find more rapists? Will there be more rapists in the 15-45 age group or in the 45-75 age group? You know the answer. Laws against rape will therefore disproportionately affect males aged 15-45. Would this be a good reason to oppose such laws? Obviously not. Why not? The reason is that the law targets the criminal behavior, not the age or sex of the criminal.

My two cents

Al Capone. Mugshot information from Science an...
Al Capone (1899-1947), American gangster, 17 June 1931. ‘Al Capone sent to prison. This picture shows the Bertillon photographs of Capone made by the US Dept of Justice. His rogue’s gallery number is C 28169’. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Why couldn’t someone have explained it to me like that years ago?

In America, it seems this issue crops up when it comes to voting laws. In Australia, I remember it cropping up on the issue of mandatory sentencing. Mandatory sentencing is passed off in certain circles as a type of conspiracy against particular demographic groups. It’s a good example of a red herring that relies on emotional manipulation. It would have sucked me in—when I was 15.

Taking that further, I think that if a law disproportionately affects middle-aged white males (for say white-collar crime), then certain pundits can’t get much mileage out of that, and therefore won’t make a point of it. But if a crime affects any other demographic, then it’s easier to get mileage.

Pushing this to its logical conclusion, I’ll have to admit that certain laws will always discriminate against and oppress people of a certain demographic group—and that group is criminals. If I’m not mistaken, that’s inequality, and an unfair advantage to the law-abiding.

It reminds me of the Wizard of Oz, when Toto pulls away the green curtain, and the exposed man says “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!” (Or his red herrings!)

When the Wizard of Oz was exposed, he admitted he was a humbug. But not so with those who appeal to demographics.

Quote source

Vallicella, B. (2012). Photo ID: The ‘It Would Disproportionately Affect Hispanic Voters’ Argument. Available: http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2012/08/a-throwback-to-poll-taxes.html. Last accessed 13th Apr 2013.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s