71–80 of 91 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In loads of cases questionable deaths haven't been investigated on how they died. Meaning: lots of murders aren't being reported/seen as murder. Unfortunately do not have an article/reference for this, despite trying to find it.
Murder is usually the one crime stat that can't be fudged - the saying in public policy circles is "you can't hide a body". You can downgrade an assault to a public order disturbance, you can just fail to log thefts, but when someone dies it gets into too many databases to remove from the stats. Most murders are not of the sort where it's unclear if it was murder at all. Someone's stabbed, beaten, shot, etc.
Homicides generally, maybe, are harder to fudge (especially homicides + suicides as a single group) but breaking down into specific crimes (and non-crimes; not all homicide is criminal) certainly can be fudged.
There are a couple reasons why there are so little people in jail in the Netherlands and not all are positive. Crime reporting rate has never been lower. People have very little confidence that reporting a crime will lead to the criminal getting caught or even convicted. Many crimes are not solved. The crime solve rate is about 2-3% which means out of that small number of actual reported crimes only a marginal amount…
I suspect you are doing the same: "2-3%" probably does include everything: Scratches on parked cars, lost passports or IDs that are reported stolen instead of "lost" and so on (read: all that is reported as a crime for convenience or for insurance claims).
And I fail to see the negative reasons you hint at in your opening sentence: Should people be convicted just to reach some quota or only when the case is proven? Should people go to prison for minor crimes or should they be able to keep their job by wearing a electronic bracelet and being restricted to their house and way to/from their work place?
There are a couple reasons why there are so little people in jail in the Netherlands and not all are positive. Crime reporting rate has never been lower. People have very little confidence that reporting a crime will lead to the criminal getting caught or even convicted. Many crimes are not solved. The crime solve rate is about 2-3% which means out of that small number of actual reported crimes only a marginal amount…
Crime is decreasing. Violent crime is decreasing.
Electronic ankle bracelet house arrests are both a cost saving measure (~50k euro a year per person) and contribute to rehabilitation.
These rehabilitation programs in the Netherlands are top-notch, lessening the recidivism rates.
Progressive (hard) drug laws target dealers and manufacturers over (recreative) users. Hard drug addicts have (sponsored) access to rehab programs, also inside prisons.
No, or little, privatization, makes prisons focus on quality and long-term efficiency, not quantity and short-term profits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Many crimes are not solved. The crime solve rate is about 2-3% which means out of that small number of actual reported crimes only a marginal amounts get solved. How is this number different from other developed nations? > It's very common for judges to pass a community services punishment or an electronic ankle bracelet house arrest. If recidivism is low, how is that possibly not a positive?
> How is this number different from other developed nations? Germany fares much better in this regard, about 56% gets solved I think.
The German rate ("Aufklärungsquote") (percentage of solved crimes) includes cases that, according to the police, were sufficiently looked into. They don't care whether or not a case went before a judge or not. Fun fact: The rate can even surpass 100% since its sets solved crimes and reported crimes of one period in relation. That is, crimes solved from previous periods inflate the percentage.
http://www.krimlex.de/artikel.php?BUCHSTABE=&KL_ID=23
As for the Netherlands, their rate of solved crimes in indeed quite low (https://www.uni-muenster.de/NiederlandeNet/nl-wissen/politik... --
There are a couple reasons why there are so little people in jail in the Netherlands and not all are positive. Crime reporting rate has never been lower. People have very little confidence that reporting a crime will lead to the criminal getting caught or even convicted. Many crimes are not solved. The crime solve rate is about 2-3% which means out of that small number of actual reported crimes only a marginal amount…
1. does a low crime reporting rate indicate distrust of the justice system? I can imagine that it might also indicate tight community cohesion.
2. does a low crime solve rate indicate ineffectiveness of the justice system? does this figure arise from "cold" police investigations alone, or are there other factors involved?
3. does a low conviction rate indicate a problem with legal frameworks or prosecutors? why are so many defendants acquitted?
4. does a low incarceration rate indicate a problem with sentencing guidelines? how does this correlate with recidivism?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Completely agree. I lived in Hungary, where the crime rate is relatively low compared to the whole Europe. But you can't actually go to an open market without securing your pockets. Now I live in Scotland, which amongst the highest crime rate countries in Europe, but it feels much safer to walk through Glasgow than to walk through Budapest. This is because every single small pickpocket is reported and usually caught.…
I'd be more scared to get stabbed in Glasgow than in Amsterdam though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Many crimes are not solved. The crime solve rate is about 2-3% which means out of that small number of actual reported crimes only a marginal amounts get solved. How is this number different from other developed nations? > It's very common for judges to pass a community services punishment or an electronic ankle bracelet house arrest. If recidivism is low, how is that possibly not a positive?
> How is this number different from other developed nations? Germany fares much better in this regard, about 56% gets solved I think.
These kind of numbers are hard to interpret anyhow; they're so dependent on methodology that I'd wager their primary purpose is to influence opinion one way or the other, alas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm going and will take my daughter (who's bike it was) there to learn... Risky, as she may learn "The system doesn't care about me, and due to a small technical glitch will let a guilty person walk free" Don't envy having to explain that one...
Isn't that a pretty good lesson to learn?
Whether it's a good lesson to learn now depends (or at least it would for me) on the child's age.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US at least, community service is typically only an option if: - It's your first offense - You more-or-less admit to the crime (not necessarily meaning you turned yourself in, but you didn't go through a trial while maintaining your innocence the whole time) - You are clearly remorseful - The crime is minor and non-violent - The odds are seen as low or very low that you'd do it again There are exceptions of co…
>> if you commit armed robbery... There are significantly less guns available compared to the US, so armed robberies are likely heavily punished too. While I don't say all sentences should be light as a feather, there are a lot of 'jails' (especially in Norway) where the inmates can go home for the evening or weekend.
I'm not even sure if just the implied threat of a weapon elevates it to armed robbery. But if you threaten somebody with a knife or club, I think you still get charged with armed robbery.