Thursday, I had my Law and Society class at the University of Washington Tacoma, and we had to debate about prison: whether it should be abolished, reformed, or whether we should double down on crime. I was part of the reform group. What followed was one of the most emotionally charged and mentally draining debates I’ve ever experienced, and I’m still processing it.
This post unpacks what it felt like, what I said, how anxiety can distort our perception, and why it all matters.
How the Debate Was Structured (and Why It Hit Close to Home)
So my Law class has to do a debate, and the debate was about prison and abolishing it, doubling down on crime, or reforming it. I was in the reform group.
The group arguing for doubling down on crime brought up a case study that, according to them, showed that doubling down works. Our law professor even said he kind of agrees with that. I was like, hold up. From what I understand, doubling down on crime doesn’t actually work. Reforming is what has shown to be more effective, at least from everything I’ve seen and lived.
The group that was for abolishing prisons and the doubling down group kind of got into a back and forth. Our reform group was quieter. When it came to my turn, I spoke up.
What I Said, and Why It Came From the Heart
I said:
“I don’t know if any of you guys have loved ones or family members in prison or jail, but I do. And reform actually shows to work. A lot of people end up in prison, especially for petty low-level crimes, because they come from environments of survival. If you don’t change that environment in prison, then there’s really no difference. So when people get out, they commit the same crimes because surviving is what they know. There’s no deterrent.
But if you give them something to lose, for me, going to university is like going to Harvard because of the background I came from. Nobody went to university. Everyone I knew either went to jail or… worse. So yeah, people need something to fight for.”
Was I Too Emotional? No. I Was Human.
After I spoke, someone asked, “Well, where do you draw the line?”
I answered, “I draw the line at violence. Our house got shot up when my son was a baby. You absolutely need to double down on that. That’s real harm. But if someone breaks into your house and steals something? Yeah, that hurts. I’ve had things stolen. But a lot of those crimes come from survival and hardship, not just some desire to be a criminal.”
And afterward, people said I had a good debate. But I still walked away wondering: Did I make it too personal? I never singled anyone out. I just said, “I don’t know if you have people you love in the system, but I do.” I didn’t mean to make it personal. I just spoke from experience.
Addressing the Real Numbers: Low-Level Offenses and Extreme Cases
Another point I made was that a lot of people in the class were more focused on the extreme cases, but what about the low-level cases? Again, incarceration rates show that most of the prison population is made up of low, petty, or nonviolent crimes rather than violent crimes. Just for example, on Friday, there was a school shooting in Florida on a campus. The person responsible had white supremacist views and was a Trump supporter who was against minorities. For crimes like that, I definitely believe in doubling down on crime, which is why I said in some areas, you double down on crime, but again, those are extreme cases. It’s not like these kinds of crimes are making up the prison population.
So I stand by what I said. The majority of the population is made up of Black and Brown bodies in the prison system rather than non-people of color, and statistically, most non-people of color are the ones who are committing mass murders. I’m not saying no other races can be violent, again, when it comes to violent crime, I’m biased because I grew up in a violent background. I do believe we’ve got to be more harsh with violent crime.
But again, there are a lot of nonviolent offenders locked up in prison because every jurisdiction and every state has its own way of dealing with the legal system. You can have someone serving 20 years for theft or identity theft, not saying that’s right, versus somebody who killed someone but only gets 10 years.
Why Lived Experience Matters More Than Just “Case Studies”
Some of the people in the “double down” group came up to me after and said, “I actually agree with what you said. I wanted to be in your group.” But they had to argue that side because of the straw draw. I felt kind of bad about it, especially since the professor said he agreed with their side.
But again, when someone says, “case studies show X,” I can’t help but push back. Because from what I know, doubling down doesn’t work as well as reform. And I think bringing in personal experience is important.
A lot of the time, people who believe in doubling down on crime are looking at it through a textbook or privileged lens. Sometimes it’s from a place of hurt because they’ve been violated. That’s valid too. But for me, I admit my bias comes from trauma. I have PTSD and anxiety. Maybe that’s why I was still feeling anxious hours after the debate. Class ended at 3:30. I was still feeling it at 6:46.
The Root Cause Isn’t Crime, It’s Trauma, Poverty, and Lack of Opportunity
Also, the abolitionists pointed out in class: the fact that we have so many prisons speaks volumes. That reflects on us as a society. Why do we need so many? What’s really going wrong? I stand in agreement.
We’re addressing symptoms, crime, instead of root causes: trauma, poverty, lack of education, food insecurity. For a lot of people, the first time they get three meals a day is in prison. So yeah, when you finally give people their GED in there, they start believing they can have something more. That they can fight for their future.
But when you’re in survival mode? Nobody’s opening a math book. Reform is about fighting for the soul. Giving people something real to lose. Something worth building. (This also can lead to the argument that it starts at home, but we can’t fully grasp that argument unless we address systematic issues that disproportionally affect certain groups of people. Until we address those truthful matters, this argument remains half-baked.)
The Psychology of Speaking Up When It’s Personal
Even though people said I did a good job, part of me still worries. I expected an email saying I was too emotional or too personal. But that didn’t happen.
Talking it through helped me realize: I wasn’t emotional. I was passionate. I was grounded. I shared what I know to be true from lived experience.
And I want to remind others who feel anxiety like I do: speaking up when it matters is always worth it. Just because you’re nervous doesn’t mean you did anything wrong. Sometimes, it means you did something incredibly brave.
The Broke College Student 
Leave a comment