51–60 of 244 posts
>The majority of violent crimes are perpetrated by a small number of persistent violent offenders, typically males, characterized by early onset of violent criminality, substance abuse, personality disorders, and nonviolent criminality.
Very interesting, so if you get past your teens without criminality you seem to not become a criminal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess it’s easier in Sweden which is not especially diverse. Also it’s worth noting that these are convictions so will be missing any unreported violence, or that police didn’t follow up on, or that got off on technicalities
Sweden is as diverse as the US, or more so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me put it this way: the current “standard” criminal justice system is exceedingly effective at dissuading the sort of people who designed and operate the system from committing crime, but those folks are not the population that in fact commit crimes.
> exceedingly effective at dissuading the sort of people who designed and operate the system from committing crime More like the people who designed and operate the system consider everything they do legal and only criminalize the activity of people not like them.
This is true by definition. Anyway, what sort of violent crime do you propose to legalize?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. Looking at the data, we could prevent 90% of violent crimes by locking up all men. Somehow, I don't think most people here would go for that.
That's because it's half of the population. Also, the stronger and more aggressive half which presents a very serious practical obstacle: who would lock them up?
A very low number of people are ever convicted of a violent crime (they could have also written "3.9% of population accountable for 100% of violent crime convictions"). I think a better way of saying the same thing as the title is "26% of violent criminals commit 63% of violent crimes."
1.) Violent crime is a rare event (in post-WW2 European societies), so the proportion of offenders is rather small. 2.) One time offenders have a hard time getting their feet on the ground after being released from prison. Without appropriate support & back in their old networks, they often have few alternatives than going down that road again. IMHO that's not exactly news. I personally find it slightly surprising th…
Maybe in Europe? Not in the USA it isn’t. We’ve seen drops in homicides and the like in some cities (NYC), but disturbing trends in homicides places like Baltimore and Chicago.
Humans consistently make the same mistake about understand the motivations, the inhibiting and promoting pressures of other people. We assume that everyone else is exactly like us. Therefore, when we build systems and institutions that attempt to alter behavior, we encode our own motivations and desires as the impetus. I.E. why we have UX researchers, do user testing, A/B testing etc when we develop products. Our ins…
Let me put it this way: the current “standard” criminal justice system is exceedingly effective at dissuading the sort of people who designed and operate the system from committing crime, but those folks are not the population that in fact commit crimes.
The system may be very effective at deterring many would-be criminals. Any system will be ineffective against some subset and so this statement would still apply.
Under any system, most crime will be committed by those whom that system does not effectively deter.
Studies like this are hard, because they're usually labeled 'racist', or it turns into an ad hominem attack on the authors, or struck down in the media for singling out some minority group. I love the wording as it has a focus on the positive; summed up it basically says: we can't help those who we can't identity.
"Studies like this are hard, because they're usually labeled 'racist'," Please provide some factual, quantified basis for this statement.
“These studies can be socially controversial, and so authors must be especially careful in the way they conduct their research and present their conclusions.”
At a certain point, demanding empirical evidence for a clearly observable societal zeitgeist becomes disingenuous or obtuse, regardless of how well-intentioned the request is. It stifles discussion that can otherwise proceed.
Humans consistently make the same mistake about understand the motivations, the inhibiting and promoting pressures of other people. We assume that everyone else is exactly like us. Therefore, when we build systems and institutions that attempt to alter behavior, we encode our own motivations and desires as the impetus. I.E. why we have UX researchers, do user testing, A/B testing etc when we develop products. Our ins…
Prison is a deterrent, certainly, but it also exists to keep violent folks away from the rest of society so they can't do more harm.
As for the public safety element, yes, but these people mostly weren’t locked up for life. What this shows, at least, in my opinion, is that much more intensive psychological and therapeutic interventions are needed, because if anything, incarceration as it currently exists would seem to exacerbate the problem.