Do the present policies on those who commit crimes reflect a class war? For long, people have alleged that certain laws discriminate against some members of the society while such laws favour others. Besides, some sociologists also claim that some members of the society are more prone to some specific crimes than others. So, our opening question is pertinent.
When we realize that armed robbery and similar offences require the use of brute force, it immediately becomes clear that these are offences almost exclusive to the masculine world. The offences are thus: sex-bound. Besides, the need to be physically strong and agile tends to the working class, who at least has some financial return to rely on; hardly ever have the urge to resort to violence. This tends to limit violent crimes to the unemployed, poor and desperate males in their late teens, twenties or early thirties. Indeed, if early citizens are involved, they function as the barons, the financiers, who sit back at home while they let loose the dogs of vandalism and death. They provide the money and tools for the frontline criminals.
Similarly, drug smuggling tends to be more prevalent among the weaker sex, especially ladies in their twenties. They are biologically more attractive and hence more likely to wade through the airport and border posts while hiding deadly grams of hard drugs within one or other of their bodily crevices. Again if older citizens are involved, it is more as the barons, shielding the carriers from prosecution if they are caught. So, this is another crime that is largely sex-bound.
Punishment for offences limited to the citizens on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder appears to be harsher. So, robbery with violence attracts death, and smuggling hard drugs attracts long jail terms. Meanwhile, pen robbery and large scale fraud, offences which are invariably specific to the high class officials, do not attract severe penalties, indeed most culprits at this level manage to wriggle out of the net of the law.
Unedited
When we realize that armed robbery and similar offences require the use of brute force, it immediately becomes clear that these are offences almost exclusive to the masculine world. The offences are thus: sex-bound. Besides, the need to be physically strong and agile tends to the working class, who at least has some financial return to rely on; hardly ever have the urge to resort to violence. This tends to limit violent crimes to the unemployed, poor and desperate males in their late teens, twenties or early thirties. Indeed, if early citizens are involved, they function as the barons, the financiers, who sit back at home while they let loose the dogs of vandalism and death. They provide the money and tools for the frontline criminals.
Punishment for offences limited to the citizens on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder appears to be harsher. So, robbery with violence attracts death, and smuggling hard drugs attracts long jail terms. Meanwhile, pen robbery and large scale fraud, offences which are invariably specific to the high class officials, do not attract severe penalties, indeed most culprits at this level manage to wriggle out of the net of the law.
Unedited
Comments
Post a Comment