Boris has come up with a wheeze to cut crime - longer prison sentences - but there are those who maintain it has no effect. While I can understand the premise that longer sentences has no effect on re-offending, simple logic supports the fact that if a lag is away for longer periods, there is less time available 'outside' in order to reoffend and hence there must therefore be a reduction in overall crime.
"Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that horses may not be stolen," was a saying coined by George Savile, 1st Marquess of Halifax in the 1600s and takes my point to its logical end. The less time an habitual criminal has available to commit a crime means they will commit fewer crimes in the time remaining available, unless they improve their productivity.
Bertrand Russell was famous for using longer sentences in his books, making many of them almost impenetrable, unless read several times...
Bertrand Russell was famous for using longer sentences in his books, making many of them almost impenetrable, unless read several times...
1 comment:
You're right, of course, if we're talking about locking them up for the rest of their life rather than just 15 or 20 years. But if we're talking about 2 years rather than 1 we're doubling the time for them to get embittered against society, taught by their fellow cons and introduced to illegal substances,
Post a Comment