I don’t think all crimes are to be treated equally, infact that’s the point of my post, that crimes are definately not to be treated equally. And yes, i know different amalgum of states have different laws for different criminals and felonies. In California i can be sent for 25 years to life for stealing 10 packs of Cig on 3 occassions, or i can murder someone. The punishment itself isn’t bad +3 crimes means habitual-, just the relating to other crimes is slightly (ok obviously jacked). Because of Mandataory sentencing laws, a judge has to give me (in the cig example 25 years when really , 5 or 10 is more apporitate). In that case, i might as well shoot someone, i’m getting the time anyway.
[used self as an example only in the stealing and killing people thing. don't know one panic.]
I’ll try to be clearer in the future.

As for it being a band-aid. Yes. It is…, education is the way to go but i’m specifically speaking about what happens to educated people who enter the crimial justice system. For example. Say a red light is run and you get pulled over. You can be arrested. The ticket says so. We, as a people, are aghast at the stupid waste of time to arrest someone under those circumstances, yet if you are, you now face 12 hours of processing, and multiple days of court fees and appearances. And that’s if you plead guilty! It’s not really hard for people to fall into the cracks.

But on Criminals. “i stole from a store.” I believe, you stole, and you go to jail. Why can’t you vote when you get out? Why are you automatically disqualifed from a job? Sure you could do it again, but what if the circumstances mattered? I think they should matter. After all, you were not Ted Bundy.

First of all, you talk about how things “used to be” when men were treated fairly by the judicial system, and I think that is a false image ingrained in many minds by the perpetuations of our media. We’re led to believe that an ideal scenario actually happened at some point (call it the “leave it to beaver” syndrome if you will). Husbands weren’t all sober and kind to their wives, neighbors weren’t always friendly and helpful, government wasn’t always led by honorable men, and criminals weren’t always treated fairly.

Throughout history “criminals” have been fed to lions, imprisoned for stealing bread, killed because of their brother’s involvement in organized crime (or opposing it), women have been (and are) stoned for adultery while their male counterparts roam free, people were hung for being different, burned for speaking out, shackled for having ideas, exiled for writing, the list goes on and on.

Anyhow, that’s not my real point. Rehabilitative measures are a band-aid (at best) for the problem of “increasing” criminal offenses. The real solutions need to be addressed much earlier; why do people commit crimes? Some because they’re psychotic/sociopathic (in which case rehabilitation is useless), but not most offenses happen because of poverty, the only way out of this is education. People need to be taught how to act, how to take care of themselves, how to respect themselves and others, to have pride in doing well, etc.

This is increasingly difficult in ever-expanding subcultures that don’t place an inherent value on education or intellect. This is never a popular solution because it takes time, time, money, and time. Everyone wants a solution now, but we need to look to the situation in 20 years when the criminals’ children have followed their fathers’ examples. We need to teach these children to fish while they still want to learn.