CRIME POWER AND MORALITY
...f Criminal Justice System. Then Criminal Justice is the formal social institution designed to respond to a narrowly defined set of social control needs. As a social institution, and particularly as an institution of social control, perhaps the most important aspect of the environment in which the criminal justice system operates is ideological rather than material. The criminal justice system is rife with value conflicts, political and social controversy, and inefficient organization. Perhaps the most fundamental value conflict that is characteristic of American criminal justice is that between individual freedom and social regularity. Crime control is the primary purpose of the criminal justice system. As we shall see, the criminal justice system is designed for crime control, but the control of crime must be consistent with our social and political heritage. The justice system must achieve a balance or equilibrium (as do all system) between competing values of federalism and uniformity, vengeance and assistance, and differing political persuasions, as well as between individual actors and social regularity. It is the balance of these opposing forces that renders the justice system so complex. (Introduction to Criminal Justice by Lawrence F. Travis III p.3, 21-22) Police Action and the Law Power against the crime is police. Law enforcement is the legal job of the police. Theoretically, this, with the protection of community and the host of other services, constitutes the function of police. Yet there are strong ground for believing that the police themselves law enforcement is only incidental function and frequently utilized not for the community but no further the ends of the police. The contracts that the police have with the courts soon teach them that the law is not inviolable. They see it used to further political ends; they see it available for purchase; they frequently find themselves punished for its enforcement by undue time spent in attempts at prosecution. They tend to lose respect for the law. In his contracts with public, the policeman finds that law enforcement is not popular. He sees great number of people operating their businesses and conducting their lives in disregard of the law. He finds reflected in the eyes of the community a lack of respect for the law. When he does enforce the law, he receives only insults from the public that takes the trouble to let him know what they think – the offenders. It is not surprising, therefore, that the police, who are referred to as pillars of the law, should see its enforcement as an end of dubious value. They recognize that it sets limits to their actions; they recognize that a too-obvious flaunting of negligence would result in the loss of their job; they recognize that it is fundamentally what gives meaning to their job; they recognize these things, and the recognition exerts sufficient pressure on their behavior so that their function is far from mockery. Law is thus, in a very real sense, an end; it plays a subordinate role. When the enforcement of the law conflicts with the ends of the police, the law is not enforced; when it supports the ends of the police, they are fully behind it; and when it bears no relationship to the ends of the police, they enforce it as a matter of routine. (Violence and Police by William A Westley p.140-141). Morality is social values of who is wrong and who is right. However, the conception of morality is variable in different societies and based on many factors including ethic and religion. The well-known fact that some people have their own “moral values”, which could be opposite from social morality. And such kinds of disagreement could be lead to crime. The morality of any social group consist of those judgement of ‘good’, ‘right’, ‘ought’ and their opposites, which the group accepts, teaches to its youth, and endeavors to enforce among its members by political, religion, social, and other sanctions. (Essays in Philosophy by Smith and Wright p. 64). Society cannot live without morals. Its morals are those standards of conduct which reasonable person approves. I think it is clear that criminal law, as we know it is based upon moral principle. In the number of crimes its function is simply to enforce a moral principle and nothing else. The law, both criminal and civil, claims to be able to speak about morality and immorality generally. I do think that one can talk sensible of a public and private morality any more than one can of a public or private highway. Morality is a sphere in which there is a public interest and a private interest, often in conflict, and the problem is to reconcile the two. This does not me...