3 ms·

What laws do you believe would be more effective a catching and punishing criminals? AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low i

What laws do you believe would be more effective a catching and punishing criminals? AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime, so laws based on deterring through fear-of-sentence would not seem to be likely to have much effect. What is it that you're proposing/desiring?

samatman 2y ago
Theft is an organized crime. That tweaker/junkie who steals your bike, breaks into your storage unit, whatever? He's not an organization man. The dude with a standing offer to pay twenty bucks for the bike, or ten if it's shitty? He's with an organization. What I propose is that we start enforcing the law and treat theft as a crime, not a nuisance or fact of life. Roll up the organizations, toss them in prison, and repeat over and over until the message gets out. This isn't a problem which can be solved at the tweaker level. What we can do, and simply choose not to, is get every single dude with twenty bucks or a baggie to trade for your bike. All that's lacking is the political will.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  What's also lacking is any evidence of any kind that this would have the effect you desire.
- immibis 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - samatman 2y ago
    This comment is manifestly made in bad faith. I want the police to arrest, and DAs to prosecute, organized theft rings. Someone with several stolen bicycles is not a small businessman, he's a fence, and should do several years of time. It is in fact quite easy to tell that person apart from the guy who bought a bike on Craigslist and oops, turned out it was stolen. You're pretending this distinction is unclear to you, and insinuating that I'm proposing Soviet price controls. In reality, you are perfectly aware of the distinction and know that I'm not. That is arguing in bad faith.
    - immibis 2y ago
      How do you prove he's knowingly part of an organised theft ring? Simply not checking the provenance of the goods you buy doesn't prove that.
smeeger 2y ago
[flagged]
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  I see. So a few anecdotes, handwaving dismissals of a century or more or crime and sociological research, and a suggestion to move to Twitter.
peppermint_gum 2y ago
> AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime, Could you share some of this evidence?
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  first result from google come for "effect of deterrence on property crime" https://www.house.mn.gov/hrd/pubs/deterrence.pdf https://www.house.mn.gov/hrd/pubs/deterrence.pdf second result, summarizes and links to several review papers: https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/five-things-about-deterrence https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/five-things-about-deterr...
  - peppermint_gum 2y ago
    Then I'm not sure what you mean by "deterrence". Both of the linked articles argue against increasing the severity of punishment, but they also say that the certainty of getting caught is a strong deterrent. This doesn't seem to be in conflict with what the GP said ("supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively"). It seems to me that many people have a problem with thieves not being punished at all.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
      Most of the people I have read or heard advocate for "more effective handling of crime" are much bigger on the severity of the sentence, though I don't deny that many will mention both. The "N strikes and you're out" angle, for example, is all about the severity of the sentence once you reach N. New HN commenter "smeeger" whose subthread we are in seems close to favoring violence as punishment for relatively minor crimes, for example. Still, yes, things that significantly increased the likelihood of being caught and punished do seem like a good idea, and do not require sentencing being changed.
      - smeeger 2y ago
        ive been commenting here since 2014 but have to constantly make new accounts because HN bans me for expressing problematic beliefs. the fact that this thread got through the filter feels like a miracle or a dream… you need to read more carefully. i used the word effectively for a very specific reason. even the insanely sympathetic and humane punishments on the books in western countries now would basically stop crime if they were applied and implemented properly. if punishment were actually likely. if prisons werent just boot camp for criminals. social clubs. prisoners emerge from prison emboldened, not humbled. our system is broken and it stays broken because people are crappy. recently i actually decided to stop caring because its so pointless. oh and your hands are waving a lot more than mine… you clearly dont want to think too hard about this
dimensi0nal 2y ago
Incapacitation, not deterrence? If someone is in prison, they can't reoffend.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  We already have the highest incarceration rates in the developed world - I'm not sure that more people in prison is the right solution.
  - hansvm 2y ago
    I think there's precedent for shipping them to Australia. It probably costs less to taxpayers, and it doesn't even harm Australians since our thieves are less dangerous than their spiders.
    - underlipton 2y ago
      Because outsourcing parts of our economy to Pacific countries has worked out so well in the past.
    - FireBeyond 2y ago
      As someone born in the UK, who grew up in Australia, and who now lives in the US, this trope always makes me laugh... England sent prisoners to America for nearly 70 years before sending any to Australia, mostly Virginia, Maryland and the Carolinas.
      - hansvm 2y ago
        *checks map* That looks like the greater D.C. area. Coincidence?
  - linksnapzz 2y ago
    No, and prison is expensive. 1.) Corporal punishment or 2. ) Exile to Amchitka, with some camping gear, a knife, and fishing line/hooks.

samatman 2y ago

Theft is an organized crime. That tweaker/junkie who steals your bike, breaks into your storage unit, whatever? He's not an organization man. The dude with a standing offer to pay twenty bucks for the bike, or ten if it's shitty? He's with an organization. What I propose is that we start enforcing the law and treat theft as a crime, not a nuisance or fact of life. Roll up the organizations, toss them in prison, and repeat over and over until the message gets out. This isn't a problem which can be solved at the tweaker level. What we can do, and simply choose not to, is get every single dude with twenty bucks or a baggie to trade for your bike. All that's lacking is the political will.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
What's also lacking is any evidence of any kind that this would have the effect you desire.
immibis 2y ago
[flagged]
- samatman 2y ago
  This comment is manifestly made in bad faith. I want the police to arrest, and DAs to prosecute, organized theft rings. Someone with several stolen bicycles is not a small businessman, he's a fence, and should do several years of time. It is in fact quite easy to tell that person apart from the guy who bought a bike on Craigslist and oops, turned out it was stolen. You're pretending this distinction is unclear to you, and insinuating that I'm proposing Soviet price controls. In reality, you are perfectly aware of the distinction and know that I'm not. That is arguing in bad faith.
  - immibis 2y ago
    How do you prove he's knowingly part of an organised theft ring? Simply not checking the provenance of the goods you buy doesn't prove that.

smeeger 2y ago

[flagged]

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
I see. So a few anecdotes, handwaving dismissals of a century or more or crime and sociological research, and a suggestion to move to Twitter.

peppermint_gum 2y ago

> AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime, Could you share some of this evidence?

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
first result from google come for "effect of deterrence on property crime" https://www.house.mn.gov/hrd/pubs/deterrence.pdf https://www.house.mn.gov/hrd/pubs/deterrence.pdf second result, summarizes and links to several review papers: https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/five-things-about-deterrence https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/five-things-about-deterr...
- peppermint_gum 2y ago
  Then I'm not sure what you mean by "deterrence". Both of the linked articles argue against increasing the severity of punishment, but they also say that the certainty of getting caught is a strong deterrent. This doesn't seem to be in conflict with what the GP said ("supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively"). It seems to me that many people have a problem with thieves not being punished at all.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
    Most of the people I have read or heard advocate for "more effective handling of crime" are much bigger on the severity of the sentence, though I don't deny that many will mention both. The "N strikes and you're out" angle, for example, is all about the severity of the sentence once you reach N. New HN commenter "smeeger" whose subthread we are in seems close to favoring violence as punishment for relatively minor crimes, for example. Still, yes, things that significantly increased the likelihood of being caught and punished do seem like a good idea, and do not require sentencing being changed.
    - smeeger 2y ago
      ive been commenting here since 2014 but have to constantly make new accounts because HN bans me for expressing problematic beliefs. the fact that this thread got through the filter feels like a miracle or a dream… you need to read more carefully. i used the word effectively for a very specific reason. even the insanely sympathetic and humane punishments on the books in western countries now would basically stop crime if they were applied and implemented properly. if punishment were actually likely. if prisons werent just boot camp for criminals. social clubs. prisoners emerge from prison emboldened, not humbled. our system is broken and it stays broken because people are crappy. recently i actually decided to stop caring because its so pointless. oh and your hands are waving a lot more than mine… you clearly dont want to think too hard about this

dimensi0nal 2y ago

Incapacitation, not deterrence? If someone is in prison, they can't reoffend.

FireBeyond 2y ago
We already have the highest incarceration rates in the developed world - I'm not sure that more people in prison is the right solution.
- hansvm 2y ago
  I think there's precedent for shipping them to Australia. It probably costs less to taxpayers, and it doesn't even harm Australians since our thieves are less dangerous than their spiders.
  - underlipton 2y ago
    Because outsourcing parts of our economy to Pacific countries has worked out so well in the past.
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    As someone born in the UK, who grew up in Australia, and who now lives in the US, this trope always makes me laugh... England sent prisoners to America for nearly 70 years before sending any to Australia, mostly Virginia, Maryland and the Carolinas.
    - hansvm 2y ago
      *checks map* That looks like the greater D.C. area. Coincidence?
- linksnapzz 2y ago
  No, and prison is expensive. 1.) Corporal punishment or 2. ) Exile to Amchitka, with some camping gear, a knife, and fishing line/hooks.