

The Milwaukee Experiment - danso
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/11/the-milwaukee-experiment

======
rayiner
> “What the reformers never want to talk about is that, in the eighties and
> nineties, once we incarcerated a lot of people, the crime rate went down
> dramatically around the country.”

> It is true that the over-all level of crime has fallen in the United States
> over the past two decades, but the debate over whether mass incarceration is
> the reason for this decline has been inconclusive.

I tend to believe that mass incarceration isn't responsible for the dramatic
decrease in crime rates from the 1970's, but I do think criminal justice
reformers take that conclusion as an article of faith.

Just looking at the graphs, it's quite reasonable to conclude that increased
incarceration was a response to increased crime rates, and once it kicked in
had the effect of decreasing crime rates: [http://cdn1.vox-
cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/694562/inc...](http://cdn1.vox-
cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/694562/incarceration_vs._crime.0.png).
Again, I don't believe that conclusion, but I don't think the argument has
been convincingly rebutted.

~~~
wyldfire
> I tend to believe that mass incarceration isn't responsible for the dramatic
> decrease in crime rates...

In fact, wasn't there some research that concluded that it was indeed the
introduction of unleaded gasoline which decreased the crime?

~~~
nosuchthing
Birth control & legalized abortion correlation with youth crime rates [0]

[0] [http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-
sh...](http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-
believe/)

------
powertower
Did the study account for previous convictions, having a criminal record,
being on probation, having other charges present in the case, etc...

Or did it just look at race and a specific charge (ex: 'possession of drug
paraphernalia'), and used that to compare white vs black?

~~~
bilbo0s
The data, at least in the Milwaukee prosecutor's office, does account for a
lot of that. In fact, it apparently accounts for really obscure state like
"two or more prior convictions", "arrested under 16", and "ever suspended or
expelled from school". So all of that would have been part of the study. But I
think what's important to understand is that different people are going to
have different advocates. And that will not be part of the study.

Maybe a lot of the white kids had better lawyers, as opposed to the black kids
who had overworked public defenders ??? Also... we shouldn't minimize the
impact that parents can have on the process. Maybe a lot of the white parents
were very involved and maybe even talking to the prosecutors ??? So then the
prosecutor says "well... this kid only had a joint... I'll just let his or her
mother/father take care of it." The mothers may not be that active as
advocates in the case of the black kids.

What advocates were acting on behalf of a kid... we don't know. And it's just
the sort of thing that would, typically, not be recorded - and, at the same
time, have an enormous impact on outcomes.

------
JackFr
John Chisolm is a not a good prosecutor.

He seems to have little issue with using the states prosecutorial apparatus
for political ends. I think in general John Doe & no-knock, kick-in warrants
are an abomination, but to use them for basically political harassment is
beyond the pale.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2750225/Report-
Cryin...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2750225/Report-Crying-wife-
drove-Democratic-DA-target-Republican-governor-s-staff-conservative-activists-
five-year-investigation.html)

