I tend to believe that incarceration is generally a bad policy of fighting crime not because of its effects on crime rates but because its effects on individuals. This effect is socialization into the prison culture and prison social networks which makes it more difficult for inmates to live a crime free life after the release. This may or may not show in crime statistics, which as I said are affected by multiple factors, but it certainly makes a huge difference for the individuals involved. I generally do not believe in "standing one's ground" which is the mentality behind liberal use of incarceration - I find to be a part of macho posturing on the micro level and imperial arrogance on the macro level. I am disgusted by both.
Having said that, I think that dangerous criminals should be incarcerated. It is better than executing them.
Wojtek
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Dennis Claxton <ddclaxton at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Michael Smith wrote:
>
>> Any one loon like George Zimmerman is a lot more dangerous than any number
>> of potheads or turnstile- jumpers or deadbeat dads or graffiti-painters.
>
>
>
> Much talk against prison policy is unconvincing because people don't know
> what they're talking about. Or, to be kind, they don't have the latest
> info. You're in New York right? I ask because what you say here gives a
> false impression of what's going on there:
>
> http://www.aclu.org/infographic-safety-numbers-prison-population-statistics-new-york-vs-indiana
>
> August 15, 2011
>
> In the last decade, New York drastically reduced its prison population and
> at the same time experienced a huge drop in crime. Indiana, on the other
> hand, drastically increased its prison population — and consequently the
> burden to taxpayers — while seeing a much smaller drop in crime than the
> national average.
>
> graphic here:
>
> https://www.aclu.org/files/drugpolicy/safetyinnumbers.pdf
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- Wojtek http://wsokol.blogspot.com/