Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Thomas L. Hutcheson's avatar

Good post, but a strange headline. The benefits of reducing crime is mainly less harm to victims and less cost to the public in behavioral changes to avoid crime. Sure it is also a good thing to reduce the ham done to convicted perpetrators, but surely that's a third order consideration.

Expand full comment
Allan Thoen's avatar

It is often helpful to state and restate the obvious and underlying goal, as this article does, lest it become obscured, and people start to confuse means with ends, which leads to all kinds of cloudy thinking and bad policy.

Here, what should be obvious, but does seem to need regular repeating, is that the prime objective should be elimination of violent and other predatory crime -- building communities where people and their children can go about their lives without fearing, or even thinking about, being victimized by that kind of crime. Everyone should be able to agree on that, wherever else on the political spectrum they fall.

But nobody should get too emotionally attached, or opposed, to any particular means to that end, which is more of an empirical question. Policing and incarceration is only a means, not the end. It has a lot of flaws as a means to that end, but on the other so do all the other proposed means. But this seems like something that should be able to sorted out by well-meaning, empirically and civically minded people, as long as everyone stays on the same page about what the end goal is.

Expand full comment
177 more comments...

No posts