Interesting analysis but it raises a lot of questions.
By focusing on convicts, does this miss a broader distribution of people who are “getting away with it”? Are these people repeat offenders not because they commit more crimes but because they are disproportionately scrutinized or arrested? For example, racialized people, the homeless, etc. may have reasons beyond repeated criminality that they face repeated arrests.
Given that most convicts here are previous offenders, it suggests a serious lack of effectiveness in the justice system. In fact, the data seem to suggest that the justice system may itself be a causal factor in reoffending, which is an idea that has been discussed elsewhere and has some evidence behind it.
But what can be done differently? Locking people up until they pass out of the prime crime-committing years might work but it’s very expensive and arguably not very humane. Other types of rehabilitative justice might be more effective but may have greater up-front costs and haven’t been widely adopted. I would be interested to see data on their effectiveness where they have been tried though, given the failures of the current system.
Given it’s such a small number of people just lock them up forever after the 3rd or 5th offence - the needs of the many…
Ah yes, no need to look at questions like socioeconomic causes, psychological issues or the failure of the prison system at rehabilitating people.
Just lock them up indefinetly. And then what is now considered the medium persistency group can be split into a new high persisting and a smaller medium persisting group. What to do then is obvious. You must permanently lock away the new high persistency group. Just rinse and repeat until a large part of the population is in prison and the economic and social consequences of having so many people incarcerated will cause crimerates to spike as people need to survive in a dysfunctional society. Luckily we can just lock up these people too, until the entire country is imprisonend.
