Most of a nation on probation?

[Sandy Sandfort]

Sampo Syreeni

> But just as Tim argues, the latter
> always involves cost-effectiveness
> too...There should always be a
> sufficient, predictable cost
> associated with putting people
> away to guard against
> criminalization for convenience,
> prudence and political gain only.

I'm sure that "cost-effectiveness" has a role to play here.  I just don't
agree that the cost savings of parole are all that big a factor.  The US has
more prisoners per capital than just about anyone (I think the US is
surpassed by Russia and maybe South Africa).  So we've already made the
decision that we can afford to lock up a lot of people.

Also, the assumption that locking up more people comes at some sort of
linear increase in costs.  One of the simplest answers is to just overcrowd
the facilities "we" already have.

No, I think Tim and Sampo have the cart before the horse.  We have the
criminal laws we have because that feeds the government, not because we save
so much with parole.  Eliminating parole by overcrowding or by building
still more prisons would increase, not decrease human suffering.

Honestly, would you rather wear a ankle transponder or be Bruno's bitch?


 S a n d y