9 ms·

Except that has never proven to reduce recidivism, and in the US seems to increase it. The Swedes seem to have much better luck with education, training, and re

Except that has never proven to reduce recidivism, and in the US seems to increase it. The Swedes seem to have much better luck with education, training, and rehabilitative options.

RealityVoid 7y ago
Op mentioned nothing about recidivism or it's usefulness to the prisoner. That's just about irrelevant if the intended desired effect is deterrence.
- magashna 7y ago
  Apologies. Punishment is not a deterrent.
  - rbut 7y ago
    And you are wiser than anyone in authority that has walked before you? (eg. parents, law makers, authorities, teachers, etc). Punishment is a deterrent and has been proven so for millennia.
    - magashna 7y ago
      I never claimed to be wiser, though there is evidence that agrees. At least in the US, murder rates are consistently higher in states with the death penalty. https://web.archive.org/web/20140330143555/http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/the-death-penalty-and-deterrence?id=1101085 https://web.archive.org/web/20140330143555/http://www.amnest...
      - joshuamorton 7y ago
        While I generally agree with your broader point, I doubt this relationship is causal.
        sokoloff 7y ago
        Agreed. It's entirely possible that high murder rates drive support for the death penalty, for example.
        schaefer 7y ago
        magashna: Punishment is not a deterrent. rbut: Punishment is a deterrent and has been proven ... magashna:murder rates are consistently higher in states with the death penalty. joshuamorton: I doubt this relationship is causal. Magashna is clearly not arguing causality, but rather that the death penalty has failed to be a deterrent to murder.
        joshuamorton 7y ago
        This doesn't show that though. You have to examine the counterfactual: would the crime rate be even higher without the death penalty? If yes, it is a deterrent.
        stallmanite 7y ago
        How can one examine a couterfactual in cases like this? Barring access to Marty McFly’s time machine unless you have two identical copies of a state to experiment on how would you go about this? Edit: legitimately curious, not trying to be nitpicky
        joshuamorton 7y ago
        You probably can't, which is my point. Generally the best ways to analyze the impact of similar social changes is to compare two similar locations, one that makes a change and one that doesn't, over the same time period, and hope that controls for broader social change. It's not perfect by any means though.
      - abakker 7y ago
        A confounding factor in this statistic is that even if you were a rational actor, weighing the deterrence value of the death penalty, the actual application of the death penalty is far from certain, so you'd appropriately assign it low probability. The distance from the present in time, and absolute probability are likely key contributors to this not being a good stat. A good look at deterrence would be Singapore, where probability of swift punishment seems to materially reduce crime.
    - maxheadroom 7y ago
      >Punishment is a deterrent and has been proven so for millennia. A proven deterrent? Do you have any facts to back-up your posit? The crime and recidivism rates would seem to indicate the contrary; especially, in the states. Essentially, we should - in theory - have no crime by now (given it's been over a millennium) as all rates should've diminished to zero, yeah? At best, punishment as a deterrent is keeping the for-profit prison-industrial complex in business and that's about the extent of any benefit[s] (if it can even be called that) it might be providing to society.
      - really3452 7y ago
        "Deterrence in relation to criminal offending is the idea or theory that the threat of punishment will deter people from committing crime and reduce the probability and/or level of offending in society." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology) So, punishment as a deterrent is currently a theory.
        Cpoll 7y ago
        > Theory I want to reply to wickedsickeune below, "Gravity is also a theory," but I think the thread's hit max-depth. The word "theory" in the context of Deterrence_(penology) is not the same as the word "theory" in "theory of Gravity." The _Theory_ of Gravity refers to a model or explanation that follows from observed facts. Deterrence, according to the Wikipedia page, doesn't fit that definition of the word. > Despite numerous studies using a variety of data sources, sanctions, crime types, statistical methods and theoretical approaches, there remains little agreement in the scientific literature about whether, how, under what circumstances, to what extent, for which crimes, at what cost, for which individuals and, perhaps most importantly, in which direction do various aspects of contemporary criminal sanctions affect subsequent criminal behavior.
        dkersten 7y ago
        > Deterrence, according to the Wikipedia page, doesn't fit that definition of the word. Yes, because the word "theory" was used erroneously. Saying that its currently a hypothesis would have been better.
    - joshypants 7y ago
      Someone needs to read some Foucalt lol. Dreadfully uninformed comment, rbut.
    - vernie 7y ago
      Thanks dad.
  - umvi 7y ago
    So what is an effective deterrent if not punishment?
    - magashna 7y ago
      Better education and healthcare I'd assume.
      - jcutrell 7y ago
        Deterrent is, I think traditionally at least, considered “negative reinforcement.” So, “I don’t want to end up like that person, so I won’t do what they did to end up in their situation.”
        magashna 7y ago
        Just because it's the traditional view doesn't mean it's correct, or that it works. Crimes like drug use have shown great benefit from using rehabilitation over punishment, as proven in Portugal's long test of decriminalization and rehab. Rates of drug use and diseases like HIV have dropped significantly.
        umvi 7y ago
        I agree drug use is better treated with addiction therapy than prison. But the article in question is about a human trafficker. How does giving a human trafficker "education" (free college?) deter them from doing more trafficking?
        magashna 7y ago
        I wouldn't assume that human traffickers are proud of what they do, or that they enjoy it. I guess the question is why does someone get into a hard criminal lifestyle like that in the first place. Maybe education and opportunity are the answers to that.
        DataWorker 7y ago
  - leetcrew 7y ago
    seriously? you can notice people being deterred by the threat of punishment every day if you pay attention. just Saturday night I tried to walk outside of a bar holding my drink. the owner asked me not to do it because he might get in trouble.
    - magashna 7y ago
      So if there was no threat of punishment you would become a murderous, thieving, drug user?
      - jl6 7y ago
        If you need an engineering analogy, think of it as defence in depth. Punishment is part of a package of measures that seek to reduce criminality. Doesn’t stop everybody, and it’s not the only thing that stops anybody.
      - goto_self 7y ago
        The main flaw in your argument is that not all repercussions are legal. Would I try heroin if there were no negative consequences? I'd certainly be less averse.
      - leetcrew 7y ago
        black and white is not usually an effective model for the world. I don't think I would become a "murderous, thieving, drug user", but I would probably take parking rules a lot less seriously. I might fly my drone places where it's not allowed. I'd probably get a really loud exhaust for my car too.
        josinalvo 7y ago
        > I'd probably get a really loud exhaust for my car too. Why?
        leetcrew 7y ago
        why not? it's fun. I'm not sure I would actually want to live with it on a daily driver, but it'd be great on a weekend car. I'm mainly using it as an example of a behavior that's mildly antisocial but not bad enough to trigger serious enough guilt/embarrassment to stop people from doing it if they couldn't be punished.
  - metalliqaz 7y ago
    ... said the guy who obviously doesn't have kids.
    - magashna 7y ago
      But I have parents. Do you think I was raised in a vacuum?
      - lazide 7y ago
        There is a huge difference between having something applied to you, and having to determine the correct course of action (independently) to apply with someone else and then deal with the consequences/fallout. In my experience, you have to pick something - and nothing is perfect or works all the time. It is usually worse not picking something (inaction) or being inconsistent in what you pick (wildly varying expectations/results). How this applies to the current thread is up to the reader.
  - harimau777 7y ago
    Even if it's not as effective as other alternatives, I think it is most likely at least something of a deterrent. For example, I hear of criminals purposely avoiding crimes with more serious punishments (e.g. mugging someone but avoiding hurting or killing them). In addition, there's a saying that "locks don't keep criminals out, they just keep honest people honest". I think it's likely that punishment at least serves a similar role. Granted, I think we would probably both agree that the US justice system (for example) is too focused on punishment and not enough on rehabilitation.
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    I don't know what the aggregate statistics are, so I don't know the data says about this at the societal level. But at the individual level, I think it is more accurate to say this varies and it may work with some people but not others. There is a thing that officially gets called Oppositional Defiant Disorder where you have a kid whose wiring boils down to You can't make me! Neither of my sons has been given such a diagnosis, but that's perhaps in part because I recognized that trying to force issues as a routine thing or be dictatorial with them would be counterproductive. As a parent, I didn't use a punishment model because I believed that would backfire with my kids. Maybe it kind of works with some kids, but I was sure that would be a case of "There will be hell to pay" in my home. Studies typically show that every dollar invested in the health, welfare and education of preschoolers saves multiple dollars down the line on things like prison. Of course, we still need some means to address the issue when things go sideways, but it's problematic to focus overly much on addressing problems at that late stage. We have jokes about "the third world country of America" because America does a relatively poor job of designing a society that generally works for most people and prevents issues as much as possible. Instead, we deal with problems after they develop at a point when they are much harder to address and when any optimal outcomes are no longer possible.
- _jal 7y ago
  If you look at legal theory, the actual reasons for punishment are a mixture of deterrence, prevention, rehabilitation and retribution. It is certainly possible to question how well any of these goals are met, or even the overall framework. But it is useful to start with the reality of how folks talk about punishment in a criminal justice context. Ref: search "purpose of criminal punishment" and pick one.
  - will4274 7y ago
    Your whole comment comes off as exceedingly arrogant. OP is pretty clearly talking about retribution, so calling this out as one of the "actual" reasons is condescending and a non-sequitur. Moreover, assuming that somebody will agree with you after Googling something implies the only source of the disagreement is another person's lack of knowledge - this is again exceedingly condescending.
- LaGrange 7y ago
  It doesn't work for deterrence either, but it's pretty clear by now that the function of most penal systems is vengeance.
leetcrew 7y ago
recidivism and deterrence in general are not the same thing. high recidivism does not mean that people who haven't been imprisoned yet aren't deterred from committing crimes.
- DataWorker 7y ago
  What about an ever increasing rate of criminality? If more and more people are competing crimes then doesn’t that suggest the deterrent effect is minimal, more importantly insufficient. And if the deterrent effect is insufficient then shouldn’t we try to find a better way by making use of modern science and data driven decision making?
  - leetcrew 7y ago
    > If more and more people are competing crimes then doesn’t that suggest the deterrent effect is minimal, more importantly insufficient. is this actually true? as I understand it, we are well past the peak of criminal activity ( at least in the US).
    - DataWorker 7y ago
      The incarceration rate has declined in the past decade but I would guess that’s due to already having locked up a large proportion of the population as well as changes enforcement and prosecution. Weed is legal now, to take an obvious example of prosecutorial waste that’s been ameliorated.
  - mieseratte 7y ago
    > If more and more people are competing crimes then doesn’t that suggest the deterrent effect is minimal It's a multi-variable system. It could be that other conditions and effects override what is, in other circumstances, a solid deterrent. Threat of long imprisonment works great on the guy who doesn't want to lose his cushy job and easy life. It doesn't work as well on someone with nothing and no hope of gaining anything. Saying it doesn't serve as a deterrent for a certain class of individual is a fair statement, saying it doesn't work, full-stop is most certainly wrong.
zamalek 7y ago
You are arguing reformation vs. restitution. Most countries (and their electorate) would rather have restitution, not because restitution is a better solution, but because vengeance has been the gold standard of justice for millennia. It's a self-perpetuating zeitgeist. The irony is that these systems do not achieve restitution. The victims may experience righteous indignation, but that will soon fade away. Meanwhile the perpetrators gets to spend a few years among their peers in crime university. > The Swedes That is a reformative incarceration system.
austincheney 7y ago
In the US there should be separate prisons for first-time offenders versus offenders who have previous convictions.
viklove 7y ago
This article is about China...
siruncledrew 7y ago
This is in China, not the US. Different system.

Except that has never proven to reduce recidivism, and in the US seems to increase it. The Swedes seem to have much better luck with education, training, and rehabilitative options.

RealityVoid 7y ago

Op mentioned nothing about recidivism or it's usefulness to the prisoner. That's just about irrelevant if the intended desired effect is deterrence.

magashna 7y ago
Apologies. Punishment is not a deterrent.
- rbut 7y ago
  And you are wiser than anyone in authority that has walked before you? (eg. parents, law makers, authorities, teachers, etc). Punishment is a deterrent and has been proven so for millennia.
  - magashna 7y ago
    I never claimed to be wiser, though there is evidence that agrees. At least in the US, murder rates are consistently higher in states with the death penalty. https://web.archive.org/web/20140330143555/http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/the-death-penalty-and-deterrence?id=1101085 https://web.archive.org/web/20140330143555/http://www.amnest...
    - joshuamorton 7y ago
      While I generally agree with your broader point, I doubt this relationship is causal.
      - sokoloff 7y ago
        Agreed. It's entirely possible that high murder rates drive support for the death penalty, for example.
      - schaefer 7y ago
        magashna: Punishment is not a deterrent. rbut: Punishment is a deterrent and has been proven ... magashna:murder rates are consistently higher in states with the death penalty. joshuamorton: I doubt this relationship is causal. Magashna is clearly not arguing causality, but rather that the death penalty has failed to be a deterrent to murder.
        joshuamorton 7y ago
        This doesn't show that though. You have to examine the counterfactual: would the crime rate be even higher without the death penalty? If yes, it is a deterrent.
        stallmanite 7y ago
        How can one examine a couterfactual in cases like this? Barring access to Marty McFly’s time machine unless you have two identical copies of a state to experiment on how would you go about this? Edit: legitimately curious, not trying to be nitpicky
        joshuamorton 7y ago
        You probably can't, which is my point. Generally the best ways to analyze the impact of similar social changes is to compare two similar locations, one that makes a change and one that doesn't, over the same time period, and hope that controls for broader social change. It's not perfect by any means though.
    - abakker 7y ago
      A confounding factor in this statistic is that even if you were a rational actor, weighing the deterrence value of the death penalty, the actual application of the death penalty is far from certain, so you'd appropriately assign it low probability. The distance from the present in time, and absolute probability are likely key contributors to this not being a good stat. A good look at deterrence would be Singapore, where probability of swift punishment seems to materially reduce crime.
  - maxheadroom 7y ago
    >Punishment is a deterrent and has been proven so for millennia. A proven deterrent? Do you have any facts to back-up your posit? The crime and recidivism rates would seem to indicate the contrary; especially, in the states. Essentially, we should - in theory - have no crime by now (given it's been over a millennium) as all rates should've diminished to zero, yeah? At best, punishment as a deterrent is keeping the for-profit prison-industrial complex in business and that's about the extent of any benefit[s] (if it can even be called that) it might be providing to society.
    - really3452 7y ago
      "Deterrence in relation to criminal offending is the idea or theory that the threat of punishment will deter people from committing crime and reduce the probability and/or level of offending in society." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology) So, punishment as a deterrent is currently a theory.
      - Cpoll 7y ago
        > Theory I want to reply to wickedsickeune below, "Gravity is also a theory," but I think the thread's hit max-depth. The word "theory" in the context of Deterrence_(penology) is not the same as the word "theory" in "theory of Gravity." The _Theory_ of Gravity refers to a model or explanation that follows from observed facts. Deterrence, according to the Wikipedia page, doesn't fit that definition of the word. > Despite numerous studies using a variety of data sources, sanctions, crime types, statistical methods and theoretical approaches, there remains little agreement in the scientific literature about whether, how, under what circumstances, to what extent, for which crimes, at what cost, for which individuals and, perhaps most importantly, in which direction do various aspects of contemporary criminal sanctions affect subsequent criminal behavior.
        dkersten 7y ago
        > Deterrence, according to the Wikipedia page, doesn't fit that definition of the word. Yes, because the word "theory" was used erroneously. Saying that its currently a hypothesis would have been better.
  - joshypants 7y ago
    Someone needs to read some Foucalt lol. Dreadfully uninformed comment, rbut.
  - vernie 7y ago
    Thanks dad.
- umvi 7y ago
  So what is an effective deterrent if not punishment?
  - magashna 7y ago
    Better education and healthcare I'd assume.
    - jcutrell 7y ago
      Deterrent is, I think traditionally at least, considered “negative reinforcement.” So, “I don’t want to end up like that person, so I won’t do what they did to end up in their situation.”
      - magashna 7y ago
        Just because it's the traditional view doesn't mean it's correct, or that it works. Crimes like drug use have shown great benefit from using rehabilitation over punishment, as proven in Portugal's long test of decriminalization and rehab. Rates of drug use and diseases like HIV have dropped significantly.
        umvi 7y ago
        I agree drug use is better treated with addiction therapy than prison. But the article in question is about a human trafficker. How does giving a human trafficker "education" (free college?) deter them from doing more trafficking?
        magashna 7y ago
        I wouldn't assume that human traffickers are proud of what they do, or that they enjoy it. I guess the question is why does someone get into a hard criminal lifestyle like that in the first place. Maybe education and opportunity are the answers to that.
      - DataWorker 7y ago
- leetcrew 7y ago
  seriously? you can notice people being deterred by the threat of punishment every day if you pay attention. just Saturday night I tried to walk outside of a bar holding my drink. the owner asked me not to do it because he might get in trouble.
  - magashna 7y ago
    So if there was no threat of punishment you would become a murderous, thieving, drug user?
    - jl6 7y ago
      If you need an engineering analogy, think of it as defence in depth. Punishment is part of a package of measures that seek to reduce criminality. Doesn’t stop everybody, and it’s not the only thing that stops anybody.
    - goto_self 7y ago
      The main flaw in your argument is that not all repercussions are legal. Would I try heroin if there were no negative consequences? I'd certainly be less averse.
    - leetcrew 7y ago
      black and white is not usually an effective model for the world. I don't think I would become a "murderous, thieving, drug user", but I would probably take parking rules a lot less seriously. I might fly my drone places where it's not allowed. I'd probably get a really loud exhaust for my car too.
      - josinalvo 7y ago
        > I'd probably get a really loud exhaust for my car too. Why?
        leetcrew 7y ago
        why not? it's fun. I'm not sure I would actually want to live with it on a daily driver, but it'd be great on a weekend car. I'm mainly using it as an example of a behavior that's mildly antisocial but not bad enough to trigger serious enough guilt/embarrassment to stop people from doing it if they couldn't be punished.
- metalliqaz 7y ago
  ... said the guy who obviously doesn't have kids.
  - magashna 7y ago
    But I have parents. Do you think I was raised in a vacuum?
    - lazide 7y ago
      There is a huge difference between having something applied to you, and having to determine the correct course of action (independently) to apply with someone else and then deal with the consequences/fallout. In my experience, you have to pick something - and nothing is perfect or works all the time. It is usually worse not picking something (inaction) or being inconsistent in what you pick (wildly varying expectations/results). How this applies to the current thread is up to the reader.
- harimau777 7y ago
  Even if it's not as effective as other alternatives, I think it is most likely at least something of a deterrent. For example, I hear of criminals purposely avoiding crimes with more serious punishments (e.g. mugging someone but avoiding hurting or killing them). In addition, there's a saying that "locks don't keep criminals out, they just keep honest people honest". I think it's likely that punishment at least serves a similar role. Granted, I think we would probably both agree that the US justice system (for example) is too focused on punishment and not enough on rehabilitation.
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  I don't know what the aggregate statistics are, so I don't know the data says about this at the societal level. But at the individual level, I think it is more accurate to say this varies and it may work with some people but not others. There is a thing that officially gets called Oppositional Defiant Disorder where you have a kid whose wiring boils down to You can't make me! Neither of my sons has been given such a diagnosis, but that's perhaps in part because I recognized that trying to force issues as a routine thing or be dictatorial with them would be counterproductive. As a parent, I didn't use a punishment model because I believed that would backfire with my kids. Maybe it kind of works with some kids, but I was sure that would be a case of "There will be hell to pay" in my home. Studies typically show that every dollar invested in the health, welfare and education of preschoolers saves multiple dollars down the line on things like prison. Of course, we still need some means to address the issue when things go sideways, but it's problematic to focus overly much on addressing problems at that late stage. We have jokes about "the third world country of America" because America does a relatively poor job of designing a society that generally works for most people and prevents issues as much as possible. Instead, we deal with problems after they develop at a point when they are much harder to address and when any optimal outcomes are no longer possible.
_jal 7y ago
If you look at legal theory, the actual reasons for punishment are a mixture of deterrence, prevention, rehabilitation and retribution. It is certainly possible to question how well any of these goals are met, or even the overall framework. But it is useful to start with the reality of how folks talk about punishment in a criminal justice context. Ref: search "purpose of criminal punishment" and pick one.
- will4274 7y ago
  Your whole comment comes off as exceedingly arrogant. OP is pretty clearly talking about retribution, so calling this out as one of the "actual" reasons is condescending and a non-sequitur. Moreover, assuming that somebody will agree with you after Googling something implies the only source of the disagreement is another person's lack of knowledge - this is again exceedingly condescending.
LaGrange 7y ago
It doesn't work for deterrence either, but it's pretty clear by now that the function of most penal systems is vengeance.

leetcrew 7y ago

recidivism and deterrence in general are not the same thing. high recidivism does not mean that people who haven't been imprisoned yet aren't deterred from committing crimes.

DataWorker 7y ago
What about an ever increasing rate of criminality? If more and more people are competing crimes then doesn’t that suggest the deterrent effect is minimal, more importantly insufficient. And if the deterrent effect is insufficient then shouldn’t we try to find a better way by making use of modern science and data driven decision making?
- leetcrew 7y ago
  > If more and more people are competing crimes then doesn’t that suggest the deterrent effect is minimal, more importantly insufficient. is this actually true? as I understand it, we are well past the peak of criminal activity ( at least in the US).
  - DataWorker 7y ago
    The incarceration rate has declined in the past decade but I would guess that’s due to already having locked up a large proportion of the population as well as changes enforcement and prosecution. Weed is legal now, to take an obvious example of prosecutorial waste that’s been ameliorated.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  > If more and more people are competing crimes then doesn’t that suggest the deterrent effect is minimal It's a multi-variable system. It could be that other conditions and effects override what is, in other circumstances, a solid deterrent. Threat of long imprisonment works great on the guy who doesn't want to lose his cushy job and easy life. It doesn't work as well on someone with nothing and no hope of gaining anything. Saying it doesn't serve as a deterrent for a certain class of individual is a fair statement, saying it doesn't work, full-stop is most certainly wrong.

zamalek 7y ago

You are arguing reformation vs. restitution. Most countries (and their electorate) would rather have restitution, not because restitution is a better solution, but because vengeance has been the gold standard of justice for millennia. It's a self-perpetuating zeitgeist. The irony is that these systems do not achieve restitution. The victims may experience righteous indignation, but that will soon fade away. Meanwhile the perpetrators gets to spend a few years among their peers in crime university. > The Swedes That is a reformative incarceration system.

austincheney 7y ago

In the US there should be separate prisons for first-time offenders versus offenders who have previous convictions.

viklove 7y ago

This article is about China...

siruncledrew 7y ago

This is in China, not the US. Different system.