Crisis in America: Over-Criminalization
Throughout the ages people have been under scrutiny from their government as well as society as a whole. The problem is that it seems no one is governing the government, or policing the police. What is the deciding factor for one sector to have the power to criticize without penalty? Over-Criminalization stems from more than just curiosity. It is even being allowed into the privacy of our own homes and into our bedrooms. We are no longer living in the dark ages and must realize that there are far more important issues that need to be dealt with.
Crisis in America: Over-Criminalization
For the average person, it would seem that we are able to make our own decisions without the interference of the government or local police agency. However if you believe this, you are sadly mistaken. There is more against the people of modern society than we would like to actually believe.
Over-Criminalization is not just a fancy text book term used to sell books. It is a serious crisis that we are facing within the United States as we speak. As Sanford H. Kadish wrote, “the crisis of overcriminalization,” has “been attended by grave consequences.”(Criminal Law Today, 2002). While this may seem speculative to some, it is merely the truth of what we are facing as a society if we continue to allow interference from outside sources into our personal lives.
The interference that I am talking about is consensual acts among adults. It is confusing to me why it is called consensual if it is outlawed or regulated. The first consensual act that I will be discussing is the act of sodomy, also known as buggery. (Criminal Law Today, 2002)
Sodomy has been known with written law since approximately the early 1500’s. (About.com, Sodomy Laws) The term sodomy is said to have originated from the biblical city of Sodom. Sodom was known as a city of “impiety and wickedness.” (Gen.18: 20;Rom.9: 29). It is believed that throughout history, homosexuality has been thought of as “sinful and ungodly” therefore earning its name of sodomy.”(About .Com, Sodomy laws.)
Due to the teachings of the Catholic Church sodomy was a crime that was punishable by death during the 1500’s. As time passed into the 1900’s the laws were not as based on religion, and therefore the punishment for sodomy lessened. (About.Com, sodomy laws) Religion, in many cases teaches us to tolerate others for their differences, while Catholicism seems to be teaching persecution for those that choose the homosexual lifestyle, or even those who would engage in sodomy.
As time has progressed sodomy has still been the focal point of people who believe that sodomy is an act against a higher power. Texas is a state that holds homosexuality sodomy laws in a different light than with heterosexuals. Texas is one of four states that have sodomy laws, which only apply to homosexuals. (Slate.MSN.Com, 2002). In the case of Lawrence v. Texas, he was charged with having homosexual relations but the case was later reversed and remanded. (Legal Information Institute)
This has posed the question as to why some individuals are subject to prosecution for the same act that others are free to do. Why are heterosexuals allowed to commit sodomy in Texas, but homosexuals are not? I am of course speaking on a consensual level. I have an answer that I believe speaks for itself. Kadish also said, “because local officials may use moral crusades as a means of deflecting criticism of their own inept administrations, “these laws invite discriminatory enforcement against persons selected for prosecution on grounds unrelated to the evil against which these laws are purportedly addressed.” (Criminal Law Today)
Although why single out homosexuals as a target for prosecution? Is it because they are considered to be an easy target? Or is it because the majority of the population is not homosexual. Only 15% of the population in the United States are believed to be homosexual according to STATS.com
As discussed previously, some states have different laws that apply only to those who are of a different sexual orientation, and in some cases of age. While in some cases age is understandable, sexual orientation is not, provided it is with two consenting adults. While all this makes enough sense to the common person, why would you want the government in your business, regardless of your sexual orientation? Or even worse should the government be able to treat you differently based on your sexual preference?
As laws are passed and views are imposed on us, by those laws that are presented we presume that we are supposed to go with the flow or the majority so to speak. People do not want to seem as though they are different. It is far easier to follow the majority without flack, than it is to be in the minority, and receive the repercussions of being different.
Now that we have deemed what is inappropriate for the government sanction morally incorrect, we will discuss what is appropriate for the government to have say in. There are of course laws and rules for a reason, to maintain order among the masses. Without laws and rules, people would not have order, and things would be in chaos. Although it may seem that I feel law is oblivious to people’s feelings, this is not the case. People need protection from some of the things that are commonly found within society, and therefore we must oblige and give up part of our privacy.
When we log onto the Internet, we are not alone. We might like to think that we are but we aren’t. This is for our protection and or the safety of our children in many cases. Child Porn has caused serious concern, especially over the past few years. The Internet has almost anything that a person could want, especially a pedophile.
Children are the victims more often than not, by coercion to a sexual offender who has more than likely perpetrated before. Parents can try to use parental control software, but this is not a replacement for adequate parental supervision. (Criminal Law Today, 2002) Many of these pedophiles use chat rooms to find their next victim. The worst part is that this is not the only thing that these predators are trying to accomplish.
From an article in the text, a man was charged with running a prostitution ring as he was using the Internet to deliver teenage girls to hotels and homes in Florida. He had accomplices in the teen sex ring, but from the comfort of his home he managed to make 53,000 dollars in profits. (Criminal Law Today, 2002)
Where is the line drawn between persons private sexual desires, as long as they coincide with what is legal and what is not acceptable by society? Prurient interest is that which is considered to be a morbid interest in sex; an obsession with lascivious and immoral matters.” (Criminal Law Today, 2002) Lascivious is known as something that is lewd and obscene and causes lust. If a person is very interested in sex, but keeps it to a consensual relationship with an adult partner does this make them immoral?
Times must change to suit the needs of the people, and I don’t feel that what goes on in a person’s bedroom or home within legal standards should be used to judge them even if the majority does not necessarily agree with their choices. We must focus on what is truly important, not over-criminalizing a person based upon their sexuality because we don’t agree with their lifestyle choice.
References:
Schmallger, F. (2003) Criminal Law Today: An Introduction with Capstone Cases (2nd ed.) (UOP Special Edition Series) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Legal Information Institute Web Site: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html Retrieved June 20, 2004
Stats Website: http://www.stats.org/record.jsp?type=oped&ID=61 Retrieved June 20, 2004
MSN Slate Web Site: http://slate.msn.com/?id=2075271 Retrieved December 13, 2002
About.Com Web Site: Http://gaylife.com/cs/gay101/a/sodomylaws_p.htm Retrieved June 19, 2004
