OUT OF OPTIONS :

More on crime, juries and culture (Iain Murray, 7/14/02, Edge of England's Sword)

A general breakdown of cultural norms has removed inhibitors against violent behavior. Rational cost/benefit analysis is secondary to the presence or absence of cultural norms that regulate behavior on a primary level. These norms seem to be much more important in the case of violent crime, dealing as it does with people rather than property. It is therefore my contention that British crime reduction efforts need to move away from the economic one size fits all approach and look at how cultural change has affected violent crime rates. Can government do anything about this? Yes, but it needs significant community and personal involvement too. Fiats from central government won't do anything. It is therefore unlikely to be an attractive option for the current government. [...]

[W]e are left with three possible solutions to the criminal justice problem in the UK:

1. Restoration. Ensure a "reformation of manners," as Wilberforce termed it. Use the tools of education and genuine debate to restore a level of trust and sense of shared endeavor in British society that has been lost. This should reduce crime and put public opinion back in step with the justice system.

2. Revolution. Throw off the old system that has grown irrelevant to the wants of the people. Install a new system that reflects current norms. "Grassing" becomes the ultimate crime and theft, violence and depravity are accepted up to certain limits (eg "messing wif de kids").

3. Paternalism. Recognize the disconnect between the people and the system, but try to uphold the system in an effort to avoid chaos. Abolish any institution that relies on popular involvement and replace with experts appointed by and from the elite. Increase the number of tools law enforcement has to enable them to do their job effectively by use of laws, regulations, permits etc.

(There is also a fourth: Replacement. Completely replace the British justice system with one that works in Continental Europe. Ignore the fact that the disconnect between British norms and that system is even greater than the one that currently exists).

Option 2 is clearly ludicrous, and was abandoned as an option in 1983 (I originally said 1979, then I remembered The Longest Suicide Note in History). Option 3 is the one that has been pursued by governments since then. It has not worked. The disconnect has grown wider and the option has been teetering on the edge of tyranny for some time. If it falls off, as I am sure it will, option 2 will probably result, although some will call for option 4.

No-one has really tried Option 1. John Major, of all people, toyed with the idea but screwed it up so badly with his sex-based "Victorian values" and "back to basics" campaigns that it was discredited before being given a chance to work. Nevertheless, I think it remains the only hope for a democratic, liberty-loving Britain.

This is just part of an interesting discussion of British crime problems, and what appears to be a kind of jury nullification there, that's going on now between Iain Murray and Chris Bertram. I wonder though if Option 1, which I too think is the only possibility that is compatible with democracy, is any longer possible as outlined by Mr. Murray. Stated in its baldest terms, the problem with Option 1 as applied to England (or to Western Europe generally) is that there may no longer be much of a foundation upon which a "reformation of manners" can be built. It may be that Options 2 and 3 are already so far along that Option 1 is a dead letter.
Posted by Orrin Judd at July 18, 2002 3:42 PM