States
May Regret Reforms
by
John R. Lott, Jr.
Prison
deters crime. It also keeps violent criminals off the street. Research
by economists consistently indicates that while most of the drop
in violent crime during the 1990s occurred because of more arrests
and convictions, longer prison sentences also played a role, albeit
a lesser one.
As
crime has fallen, we have had more and more resources devoted to
catching and punishing fewer and fewer criminals. That further raises
the likelihood of detection, punishment and reducing crime.
Unfortunately,
after years of large increases in state government expenditures,
many states face big deficits. Although expenditures on incarceration
make up less than 4% of state budgets, the pressure to cut is still
there. Some states are considering eliminating mandatory minimum
sentencing, revisiting three-strike rules or reforming sentencing
guidelines.
Whatever
the budget implications, some welcome the changes simply because
they believe many penalties are too harsh. A number of studies indicate
that three-strike rules significantly reduce crime, and states that
have implemented them experience thousands of fewer violent crimes.
Stiffer penalties for repeat criminals may also be justified simply
because there is less doubt that the party being punished is really
guilty.
But
not all increases in penalties are equally successful in reducing
crime. Some misguidedly focus on how the crime is committed such
as with a gun rather than on the crime itself. Criminals frequently
enough can change the weapon used in a crime. Unfortunately, none
of the studies examining statutory minimums for using a gun in a
crime has found a significant reduction in violent rates.
Sentencing
reforms have produced some perverse results. For example, the primary
goal of sentencing guidelines was to reduce the disparity among
criminals who committed the same crime. Yet, by equalizing only
prison sentences, the guidelines make it impossible for judges to
equalize the "total" penalty, which can include fines and restitution.
How these are imposed can vary dramatically among criminals.
Sentencing
can be improved, and some penalties are too high, but if the reformers
get their way, expect one thing: higher violent crime rates.
July
2, 2003
John
Lott [send him mail], a resident
scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of the
newly released The
Bias Against Guns, which examines the evidence on multiple
victim killings.
Copyright
© 2003 John Lott
John
Lott Archives
|