(11-25-2010, 04:36 AM)kandrathe Wrote: Then you didn't understand what Franck wrote.Allright, then show the page where you got the quote from. That should provide some context.
(11-25-2010, 04:36 AM)kandrathe Wrote: Marxist here... Leftist there...Really good arguments you got there.
(11-25-2010, 06:20 PM)--Pete Wrote: That was the big 'rehabilitation' argument of the '60s. Mostly, it doesn't work. That's not opinion, that's measurable fact. Recidivism rates run as high as 75% depending on the crime. The average person sentenced to jail has been arrested for about 20 crimes
The exceptional high recidivism rates in the US are more likely to be connected with the circumstances in your jails. Each year, as many as 70% of inmates in these prisons are assaulted by another inmate. Rehabilitation programs, otoh, generally reduce recidivism by 10% or more. That's not opinion, but a statistically proven tendency. In terms of crime reduction, rehabilitation is much cheaper as prolongued incarceration. There are plenty of links on this, but I'll just present this one:
The Effectiveness of Correctional Rehabilitation: A Review of Systematic Reviews
Quote:Supervision and sanctions, at best, show modest mean reductions in recidivism and, in some instances, have the opposite effect and increase reoffense rates. The mean recidivism effects found in studies of rehabilitation treatment, by comparison, are consistently positive and relatively large.
PS. Tried to make seperate replies, but the forum software kept joining them. Is that a feature, or something I must have done wrong?