Public opinion strongly supports the increased use of prisons to give criminals their just desserts. The endorsement of punishment is relatively uniform across all groups. ⁶⁰ More than three-quarters of the public see punishment as the primary justification for sentencing. More than 70 percent believe that incapacitation is the only sure way to prevent future crimes, and more than three-quarters believe that the courts are too easy on criminals. ⁶¹ Three-quarters favor the death penalty for murder. ⁶²

Still, the public holds out some hope for rehabilitation, too. About 60 percent express hope that rehabilitative services like psychological counseling, training and education inside prison will correct personal shortcomings. Such sentiments are more likely to be expressed on behalf of young offenders than adults, and by nonwhite respondents. In a national poll, the Los Angeles Times asked, "Where does government need to make a greater effort these days: in trying to rehabilitate criminals who commit violent crimes or in trying to punish and put away criminals who commit violent crimes?" ⁶³ The largest group, 49 percent, answered punish, 32 percent said rehabilitate, 8 percent said "both, equally," and the remaining 11 percent said they didn't know or offered another solution.

The public's soft spot for rehabilitation cannot be dismissed out of hand. Each of us is a member of society, and we obviously owe much of what we are to others who have influenced, helped, guided and civilized us. But there is reason to be skeptical of any proposals for defeating crime and criminals that do not take into account individual will and the motivations of a criminal or potential criminal. ⁶⁴ A criminal must become dissatisfied with his or her life and desire change. A criminal must in the end accept full responsibility for his or her actions.

Despite continuing calls for a "better way," ⁶⁵ what criminals need most is evidence that their crimes do not pay. As Robert Bidinotto says, neither criminals nor the rest of us "drive a car 100 miles an hour toward a brick wall, because we know what the consequences will be." ⁶⁶ Punishment works. Among other virtues, it gives the convicted a major incentive to reform. Even career criminals often give up crime because they don't want to go back to prison. The most successful remedy, if it were economical, would impose unpleasantness on offenders every time they harmed others; predatory action invariably would produce bad consequences.

How can criminals respect others' rights if those rights go unprotected? Criminals are rational, broadly speaking, though more impulsive, myopic and perverted in their goals than the general population. It is rare that the courts find a perpetrator "criminally insane." Strong evidence suggests that criminals respond predictably to incentives, whether it be coddling or harshness. The old prescription that punishment be swift, certain and severe is affirmed by modern social science.

When expected punishment plunged during the 1960s and 1970s, crime rose astronomically. When expected punishment began rising in the 1980s and 1990s, crime leveled off and began falling. With the well-publicized success of no-nonsense police tactics in New York City, fewer observers today doubt that the criminal justice system can have a major impact on crime. ⁶⁷

Commonsense citizens, if not academics, will continue to support punishment as deterrence. And they will oppose the criminal justice experts who deny the individual criminal's responsibility for his actions and maintain that the criminal justice "system itself has a limited role in crime control and crime prevention." ⁶⁸

Economist Gordon Tullock's stark conclusion in his 1974 survey remains valid today: "We have an unpleasant method - deterrence - that works, and a pleasant method - rehabilitation - that (at least so far) never has worked. Under the circumstances, we have to opt either for the deterrence method or for a higher crime rate." ⁶⁹