I think a large part of it is the stigma we place on ex-prisoners. When you get out of jail and can’t get a job and are basically treated like scum by most of society, going back to prison seems like a pretty good option. At least you don’t have to worry about getting three meals a day and staying out of the elements. Hence, a high recidivism rate.
Also, there’s the fact that guns are legal, but we don’t require (or even really encourage) people to learn how to use them. So you have lots of untrained people using deadly weapons. I think people should be allowed to own guns, but I also think we should place more emphasis on gun education, which would lessen not only the rate of accidental gun deaths but also homicides (with the knowledge of what guns can do, fewer people would be tempted to use them to solve their problems). This is only conjecture however.
I’d like to see some cites for that assertion. It may be true that released prisoners have such a tough time that going back to prison seems a good option, but I am not inclined to accept that notion without support. It seems to me that it is at least as likely that released prisoners might be less inclined to commit crime than they were when they were initially convicted, because they know how bad prison life is.
No cites, but I will give you anecdotal evidence. While living in Korea and Taiwan for 3 years, I was routinely told that police were largely indifferent to most crime. When I myself was robbed of $700, I called the cops and told them I was 90% sure it was the kid next door. They basically asked if I’d seen him, and when I said no, threw up their hands and didn’t so much as ask around.
I later was told this was pretty much universally the case, even with some violent crimes (mugging, assault etc) that would rate jail time in the US. The consensus was that Police had some deterrent effect by driving around with their party lights on 24/7, but unless there was a dead body (or a percentage to be skimmed), cops rarely made even cursory investigations. FWIW.
I’m assuming that you mean that the recidivism rate of those who completed their degrees was 50% of the overall rate. But then there is then a certain amount of self-selection involved- perhaps those who completed degrees would have had a lower rate even if college education hadn’t been available. When I started working in the criminal justice system, it was possible to earn a college degree while in a NYS prison ( don’t know if it still is). Sure, some of them took advantage of that opportunity. But most were released from prison pretty much exactly as they went in- if they had dropped out of HS, they didn’t get a GED while incarcerated. If they went in illiterate, they came out illiterate. Those who were able to get a degree while incarcerated naturally tended to be those who had the most education going in. I don’t think simply allowing education is going to affect the recidivism rate very much- but providing a more immediate incentive (such as requiring some educational progress for parole) for the prisoner to get an education might.
No cites, just anecdotal. Few released prisoners actually think going back to prison is a good option ( although I met one or two). Plenty, however, seem to think that committing new crimes for financial gain is a good option, either without thinking about or not caring about the possibility of being returned to prison.
Those are documented prisoners, other countries do not document their prisoners as well as western countries do. North Korea has either 200,000 or 1,000,000 people in prison out of a population of 22 million.
What’s “those”? Didn’t the main quote in the OP mentioned Canada, England & Wales and Norway? Hasn’t most of the thread has focused on the US? Wasn’t the only mention of China was to discredit their official figures?
In my criminal justice class there was a section in the book talking about how crime rates in the US went down by about 30% in the 1990s. People in the US said it was due to longer sentences and being tough on crime, but Canada’s crime rates declined by 30% at the same time while their methods of fighting crime were nothing like ours or nearly as harsh. Supposedly the drop in crime was due to a growing economy that took place all over north america and has/had nothing to do with crime fighting itself.
Documented prisoners and undocumented prisoners are not the same thing. If you look at undocumented prisoners like those in political prisons, concentration camps or in places with a crappy infrastructure the US is probably nowhere near the top of the list of highest incarceration rate. Compared to the developed world we are but places like north korea are suspected of having as much as 5% of their population in prison but they do not document them the way the US does.
The thread topic is meant to encompass all countries – but of course, we cannot have any meaningful discussion of incarceration rates in countries for which there are no reliable documented figures. You said the prison population of North Korea could be anywhere from 200,000 to 1 million. We do have reliable figures for Russia, and its prison population is (since 2003) less than ours in both absolute and proportional terms.
I have a strong suspicion that the politicization of the legal system is a big factor. We don’t vote directly for any legal figure either here in Oz or the UK (the two countries whose voting system I know anything about) … in fact, I get the impression, though I don’t have direct knowledge, that such a thing is very uncommon on a world stage … maybe even unique to America?
So, politicians certainly do still play the “tough on crime” card at election time. But because they’re running for parliament, not a legal system position of some sort, they have lots of other cards they can play, and “tough on crime” never becomes the be-all and end-all. And the judges etc are all appointed, so basically they get to do what they think works best, without worrying what the public thinks about it at all.
What it all boils down too … you guys have got too much democracy for your own good
Another part of it is that law enforcement is a massive lobby, one just as concerned with political power as with keeping the peace. There really isn’t much incentive for humanitarians or social welfare types to go into police or corrections work in this country. Mostly, it appeals to people who respect force and authority and believe that crime comes from a lack of respect for those things.
Prisons are also a boon for economically depressed areas. In fact, we even have privately run correctional facilities in some places, where states have contracted them out to make the budgets and taxes look better.
I basically believe that when you are a disadvantaged person and you get a criminal record, you cross a cultural line and become dispensable. You lose your right to a lot of things, and not just during your sentence. The rest of us would really rather just kick your ass good and hard and then forget about you, because it makes us feel good.
The idea of penal reform is mostly dead, because doing anything that might really lead criminals to reform is seen as coddling and an insult to their victims.
In the whole EU there isn’t a single country where judges are elected.
In Spain, most judges have to earn their posts passing what’s called a “oposicion”. Every so often, the government will count how many openings are for judges and call for an “oposicion”: for judge, notary public or DA you must have a law degree. People who pass the test get to pick the openings (best grade picks first). If more people pass than openings there are, the extras are marked as “reserves” and can be called upon when new openings happen. If less people pass than openings there are, those spots are left open (has never happened, afaik). The only judges that get finger-posted, excuse me appointed, are those in the Supreme Court.
One of the biggest issues in our political landscape is the interaction between the executive, judicial and legal branches of government (president and ministers; parliament and senate; judges). One of the worst accusations that can be made against a judge are “he’s letting his politics cloud his judgment”.
… …
The stress here is on “reform”. This leads to looking for alternatives (rehab, schooling); some crimes are punished by “inhabilitación”, where you can’t work in that kind of job for a period of time (if you’re a CPA and get inhabilitated, that means you’ll only be able to work in jobs you never wanted to touch with a ten foot pole).
And the cops don’t really search unless they think there’s something to be done. Often you can get better results by talking with a couple bar owners in the bad parts of town than by going to the cops (you still go to the cops, specially if whatever got stolen or damaged was insured, since insurance demands it): you may not be able to get all your jewels back, but those two or three special pieces, yes. Or even the whole pack, with the apologies of someone who did not realize he was stealing from you :rolleyes:
