4 ms·
Isn't that the % of people breaking parole, not the total recidivism rate? Elsewhere: > recidivism rates between 1994 and 2007 have consistently remained arou
by nerfhammer 13y ago
Isn't that the % of people breaking parole, not the total recidivism rate?
Elsewhere:
> recidivism rates between 1994 and 2007 have consistently remained around 40 percent.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/sentencing_and_corrections/State_Recidivism_Revolving_Door_America_Prisons%20.pdf http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Repor...
- JackFr 13y agoThat article is one of the most thoughtful I've read -- at its heart it is not a simple or obvious problem. "For example, why do Wyoming and Oregon have the lowest overall recidivism rates for offenders released in 2004, and why do Minnesota and California have the highest? Why does North Carolina return relatively few ex-offenders to prison for technical violations of their parole, but reincarcerate a comparatively large proportion for new crimes? What drove the recidivism rate down by 22.1 percent in Kansas between 1999 and 2004, and what drove it up 34.9 percent in South Dakota during the same time period?" "Florida and New York began the twenty-first century with nearly the same size prison population (about 70,000 inmates). During the ensuing decade, Florida added 30,000 inmates and now has more than 100,000 persons behind bars. Meanwhile, New York’s prison population fell below 60,000. Yet the crime rate dropped in both states by about the same rate. In fact, New York’s crime drop was slightly larger (29.2 percent) compared with Florida’s (28.2 percent)."