concept of "sending a message" with prison and long sentences has come up a lot lately, in convos with DA candidates and in public debates. but does anyone ever look at this concept beyond anecdotal evidence? are these "messages" we send received as intended? r they effective?
-
-
yeah the data we do have tends to focus on mandatory minimums / long sentences. i would really love to see some data across offenses and sentence recs, because i really think the whole concept is a figment of imagination
-
Beyond just being conventional wisdom about tough-on-crime electoral politics (which may, hopefully, be changing), I think they’re really talking about sending a message to public defenders. It’s not about dissuading possible offenders, or only secondarily so.
-
You mean in terms for forcing a plea?
-
Yeah, in terms of setting terms of negotiation—i.e. your client is fucked if this goes to trial—so the defender’s more likely to say it’s worth taking whatever deal.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I heard the
@Beyond_Prison podcast say that the carceral system is full of pseudoscience, and that really clicked with me. Deterrence is pseudoscience, sentencing length is pseudoscience, the idea of penitence is pseudoscience, basically the whole thing is pseudoscience. -
yep. historically speaking, the system built upon overtly religious and racist ideologies. it was not developed from any kind of evidence-based perspective but from a particular view of "humanity" and who does & doesnt have access to that
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.