Actually the system is quite beneficial- to the “prison-industrial complex”.
IMHO, this is an area where privatization can line up the wrong incentives.
Well, if the minimum sentence for any crime is 5 years, no one has to look that up. Not saying I agree with that as a policy, just refuting your thought.
What the hell crime is there in Belgium anyway? Insulting goats? Peeing on public market stalls?
Speaking Dutch in public.
IIRC there are twice as many Dutch speakers than French in Belgium.
Belgium remains relatively free of violent crime, but low-level street crime is common. Muggings, purse snatchings, and pocket picking occur frequently, particularly in major cities. Thieves often loiter in transportation hubs like the Metro (subway) and train stations to take advantage of disoriented or distracted travellers.
You recall incorrectly. Besides, it’s a meta thing. Don’t think about how many speak the 2 languages as their first language. Think about how many speak the languages as their second language.
“Straddling the cultural boundary between Germanic and Latin Europe, Belgium is home to two main linguistic groups: the Dutch-speaking, mostly Flemish community, which constitutes about 59% of the population, and the French-speaking, mostly Walloon population and Brussels inhabitants, which comprises 41% of all Belgians. Additionally, there is a small group of German-speakers who are officially recognized.”
"Belgium has three official languages, which are (in order of size of the native speaking population of Belgium) Dutch, French and German. A number of non-official minority languages are spoken as well.[123] As no census exists, there are no official statistical data regarding the distribution or usage of Belgium’s three official languages or their dialects.[124] However, various criteria, including the language(s) of parents, of education, or the second-language status of foreign born, may provide suggested figures. An estimated 60% of the Belgian population speaks Dutch (often referred to as Flemish), and 40% of the population speaks French. (French-speaking Belgians are often referred to as Walloons, although the French speakers in Brussels are not Walloons.)[nb 4]
“Total Dutch speakers are 6.23 million, concentrated in the northern Flanders region, while French speakers number 3.32 million in Wallonia and an estimated 870,000 (or 85%) in the officially bilingual Brussels-Capital Region.[nb 5][125] The German-speaking Community is made up of 73,000 people in the east of the Walloon Region; around 10,000 German and 60,000 Belgian nationals are speakers of German. Roughly 23,000 more German speakers live in municipalities near the official Community.[8][126][127][128]”
That would be 6.23 million Dutch speakers and 4.19 million French speakers.
If you have only visited Brussels it might seem different as French is the de facto language there.
Dutch (official) 60%, French (official) 40%, German (official) less than 1%, legally bilingual (Dutch and French)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/be.html
(Emphasis added) IMO that’s part of the point: it involves concluding that there may exist some lesser offenses for which incarceration is just not the appropriate penalty at all.
And BTW I believe this can be applied without necessarily giving up on public-nuisance policing on the other hand if the latter’s properly applied ( I may have an issue with doing a stop-n-frisk on someone who merely “looks out of place in this neighborhood”, but none at all about doing so to someone who did jump the turnstile or who is hustling pirated DVDs at passerby). It is often mentioned in discussions of crime and deterrence that what’s on the common street-level offender’s mind, when pondering if it’s worth it, is not primarily how harsh is the sentence at the end of the process, but whether he will be caught and charged to begin with.
If muggings are common, then how is the country “relatively free of violent crime”?
Or is it “low-level street crime” until it happens to you?
Violent Crime here obviously means Murder, Manslaughter, Rape, Knifing, Gunshot wounds, and other serious Physical harm of lasting effect. At least that is how I read that in plain English.
Mugging is not a crime and is undefined. Some ‘muggings’ involving major force are obviously violent. Some ‘muggings’ involving threats or common assault are not obviously violent.
Ah, you see, in US parlance, “violent crime” includes that committed through any use or threat of force against a person whether or not it is consummated; “mugging” is the colloquial term used commonly to refer to the crime that is legally defined as “robbery” where force or violence was either used* or* threatened against your person, to steal from your person. If you are grabbed from behind, pinned against a wall and your pockets riffled, it’s considered a violent robbery, a mugging, even if the worst injury is that you got your clothes dirty. If you are confronted by three big mean guys with knives and demanded to hand over your money if you don’t want to get hurt, that is considered a violent robbery, a mugging, even if they never lay a hand on you.
That’s a very simplistic way to look at a complex subject, particularly since crime rates aren’t even directly correlated with incarceration rates. Crime rates have fallen in some states that have cut their incarceration rates and in countries that already had much lower incarceration rates. Crime rates have also risen along with some states increasing incarceration rates. Incarceration rates’ effect on crime is not nearly as clearcut as you state and may even have little to no impact on crime.
UK statistics divide crimes of violence into two categories, "Violence"resulting in injury, physical or psychological, and “Violence” resulting in no injury.
Technically under common law, shouting at someone or merely touching their clothing is Assault and therefore some sort of “violent” crime.
This broadens violence to the point of being meaningless and when discussing the level of violence in society, that resulting in at least a minimum physical or psychological harm is caused.
I don’t care if it set them back from school but I do care if it costs them a job. That’s more likely to drive them further into petty crimes. I think judges have had and used that option all along in the US.
I would be interested in data on how a short stint in prison affects a kid in school. The option of getting that record expunged might be an incentive to behave. Or it might have the opposite effect by grouping trouble makers together in a Lord of the Flies marathon of juvenile stupidity.
Around here, first time misdemeanor offenders almost universally get some form of alternative punishment tailored to help them, e.g. if the offense was drug or alcohol related, then treatment is a condition of the release, if it was battery, then anger management, etc.
But there has to me some teeth behind it. What if the guy screws up his alternate release? What if he commits 18 misdemeanor crimes? Do we go the alternate sentence route every single time?
So, if some confinement is needed at some point, do we make it a minimum of one year? As has been said, a year in jail (or even two months) would make a person lose his job, his car, and probably his house. The problem, though, with the system is not the kid who makes one mistake and gets a DUI. He will likely never be in the system again. He will do his alternative punishment, learn his lesson, and be gone
What do we do with serial misdemeanants who fail drug tests and continue to shoplift, possess drugs, drive on a suspended license and the like? Is the OP’s proposal no jail time at all until we unleash the year long prison terms?
I am no expert, but IMHO I suspect that multi-day detentions are very likely to have longstanding negative effects on “good” kids, and especially on kids on the “cusp”. Especially imagine a kid who has been trying to stay out of a gang, or minimize his involvement; I’m guessing a stint in detention would sour that outlook, except for the most determined.
Probably less effect (good or bad) on those already spiraling into a life of crime, except to keep 'em off the streets for a while, further confirm their career status, and improve their “street cred”.
Well, doesn’t all mugging involve robbery/theft? How is that not a crime?
Prison that teaches job skills that help them including social training. Psychological help, etc…
I have no delusions of fixing all of them but I suspect there is a viable cost savings in putting people back on the right track even if the upfront cost is higher.