Deterrence My Arse
I see that Steve over on Pub Philosopher has a post extolling the punitive regime in Japanese prisons. Apparently, according to an article in The Independent,
"While Japan incarcerates its citizens at less than half the rate of Britain, prison time is notoriously harsh. Inmates are kept isolated and mostly in silence, and forced to obey hundreds of military-like rules. Strip searches are common, as are beatings."
Steve's comment on this is that "perhaps Japan locks up fewer people then the UK because most would-be criminals are shit-scared of going to prison."
Then again perhaps not.
Research done a full forty years ago and repeated on countless occasions since suggests that for your average rime-intending punter the severity of prison terms only has an effect on the decision to commit a crime if they are already pretty certain that they'll get caught. For the most part, it's the risk of apprehension that deters potential criminals.
Moreover, while prison might have visual appeal for punishment fantasists, experiencing of actual prisons obviously doesn't deter many offenders (though education probably does). And, again obviously given that throwing thousands of criminals into prison doesn't tend to reduce the crime rate, neither does it deter potential criminals.
It really irritates me that we think having the highest prison population in Europe is a good thing and not entirely screwed up. The notion that prison deters is even undermined by a cursory look at who is actually in the UK's prisons.
Couldn't it possibly be the case that some of them would be better off elsewhere? Like in care units for the mentally ill? Or, in proper drug rehabilitation units, thus increasing the likelihood that they won't reoffend?
And then there's the female prison population. In 1994 the percentage of women who were in prison because they failed to pay their TV licence peaked at 57%. Why? Because the BBC went on an enforcement drive by outsourcing their licence bureau. And the licence company got a commission for every new licence they collected. So, when they came to your door and you didn't have a licence, they'd turn a blind eye if you buy one on the spot. Otherwise you get fined.
And guess who couldn't afford either licence or (surprise surprise) fine? Single mums. So they get carted off for a short spell in jail and their kids are sent to grandparents or into care. Thus setting up the cycle for another generation.
So these people wouldn't be there if we had the Japanese prison system and everything else stayed the same? Really?
Navigation
Recent blog posts
Recent comments
- Thanks Paddy, not that you'll
5 days 20 hours ago - That's a facetious remark
6 days 9 hours ago - I friend is a submariner
2 weeks 22 hours ago - Off to look at it now Fergus.
2 weeks 2 days ago - Thanks Fergus. I think it's
2 weeks 2 days ago - In the latest issue of the
2 weeks 2 days ago - We didn't tell the EU to
2 weeks 2 days ago - Maybe so, but experience
3 weeks 4 days ago - Imagine if there were vast
3 weeks 4 days ago - Thanks Stefan. I'll take a
3 weeks 5 days ago
Comments
Cleanthes:
"the highest prison population in Europe "
Well, that depends. There are other, possibly more interesting, measures where this is not the case.
For example, the UK's rate of imprisonment PER CRIME COMMITTED is only a quarter of Spain's.
i.e. if our prison population is only a quarter of the level it should be given the number of crimes committed.
"Moreover, while prison might have visual appeal for punishment fantasists, experiencing of actual prisons obviously doesn't deter many offenders "
That's the whole point of Steve's post. If we instituted Japanese prison regimes, perhaps it might.
Ciarán:
Thanks for the comment Cleanthes: I think I was being a bit rude towards Steve when I wrote the post, which wasn't very nice of me. So sorry about that.
On Spain, well I didn't know that. Interesting.
On Steve's post, well my point still stands. There is very little evidence indeed of a correlation between punitive prison regimes and deterrence. Steve might imagine that Japanese prisons might work, but we pretty much know that they won't. Punitive regimes only appear as deterrents when criminals think that they are almost certain to get caught.
Which means that, if we had the Japanese regime and the current apprehension rates (which your first point establishes are quite low), there would be no difference in crime rates. After all, take a look at the American incarceration system: not precisely Club Med. And absolutely no effect on crime rates.
Moreover, there is absolutely tonnes of evidence that education works in preventing a return to crime post-prison. And also there's evidence that drug therapy works in getting people off drugs (in 75% of cases according to yesterday's Irish Times). So in fact, it might well be that the opposite of what Steve says is true.
Locking up poor women, the drug-addled and the insane is simply an expensive sop by politicians to appease law and order enthusiasts. And, because it's sold as a solution to crime, it's a fraud.
Post new comment