
Study: Potential criminals deterred by longer sentences - selki
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showStoryContent?doi=10.1086%2F%2Fpr.2009.05.12.2243
======
CWuestefeld
So they're saying that incentives actually matter. Huh.

Actually, I think this needs to be qualified. When penalties are pushed so
high that the criminal quickly reaches a penalty plateau, then they "in for a
penny, in for a pound": if they're willing to commit the smaller crimes, it
quickly escalates to larger ones.

So if the penalty for kidnapping is death, then you may as well kill the kid
to eliminate witnesses; the murder charge won't hurt you any further. And if
you're killing one person, you may as well kill a whole roomful: the first is
expensive, the rest are free.

------
hotpockets
This analysis seems way too simplistic. These prisoners were given a gift of a
shorter sentence. People don't like losing something they've been given and so
work hard to avoid losing it. I don't think you'd see this effect if you just
changed the laws and made prison sentences longer for everyone.

Only these people had the potential for a longer sentence, and compared to
society at large, they knew they would be treated more severely. Thus the
relative size of their potential punishment is larger then the rest of the
people walking around outside. Nobody likes being treated harsher than the
person next to them. That has got to have an effect on a person.

~~~
pixcavator
>the relative size of their potential punishment is larger then the rest of
the people walking around outside.

The articla does not compare the prisoners to "the rest of the people" but to
other prisoners in this program. And within this group, they are "deterred by
longer sentences".

~~~
hotpockets
The ones with longer potential sentences

1) have received a larger gift, and would thus lose something larger. They may
also experience a stronger desire to reciprocate this gift back to society.

2) can imagine a larger perceived injustice (compared to everyone else) if
they are put in jail again. People judge things (including the size of
punishment) through comparison, not absolutely. The key concept here is the
punishment you would receive when "compared with others". If a person would
get a larger sentence for an identical crime it offends there sense of justice
and highlights the negative aspects of the punishment making it more salient
in there minds.

I think my opinions above are still valid.

------
hipsterelitist
This is why Hemingway is so popular amongst the rabble, while hardly any of
them touch Joyce or Proust.

------
amichail
If you want to deter crime, use brain scans to identify potential criminals
and give them medication to change the way their brain works.

~~~
CWuestefeld
For deeper thoughts on the use of psychology as a means of control, see Thomas
Szasz, especially _The Myth of Mental Illness_ .
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Mental_Illness>

While there surely exist some disorders rooted in physical defects of the
brain, mental illnesses too often become a means of forcing people into
conformity. Thus, the use of illicit drugs is evidence of mental illness and
must be treated.

~~~
amichail
The two are not mutually exclusive. Mental illness can be used as a means to
forcing people into conformity (don't kill!) while also being a direct result
of a flawed brain (too violent).

