> The theft laws were changed to help reduce incarceration rates across the country, and some studies have found that the lower penalties have not led to more c

> The theft laws were changed to help reduce incarceration rates across the country, and some studies have found that the lower penalties have not led to more crime. And then they link to a nearly 4-year-old study that would have been using at least 5-year-old data for outcomes immediately on the heels of the reforms. I was onboard with the data when it came out, because hard data is hard data and should be given considerable weight in the absence of substantive issues with the data. But to cling, years later, to those early studies as proof that reforms couldn't have contributed (even partially) to a rise in property crime despite incontrovertible increase in property crime today, seemingly conspicuously in reform-friendly areas, is simply indefensible. The honest thing to do is recognize that perhaps the reforms have had negative consequences, and reassess the situation--e.g. with new studies.