[hiddencost]

People will change their behavior. The function of prison sentences is deterrence.

[JumpCrisscross]

> function of prison sentences is deterrence

As well as incapacitation and retribution.

[Aachen]

As well as making acquaintances with other criminals at a time where you're losing your job, apartment, your social network if the sentence lasts long enough

But, yes, also those two. It's a very multifaceted sword, and thankfully not the only option, not for any of the three goals

[kelseyfrog]

Impulsivity is definitionally the absence of forethought. Deterrence doesn't affect crimes born from impulse.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Deterrence doesn't affect crimes born from impulse

And yet I've seen way more people call an Uber instead of drive home drunk not because they thought they'd kill someone, but because they didn't want a DUI.

[kelseyfrog]

Sounds like the insight is that people have varying degrees of forethought. Crime isn't mono-causal and therefore solutions shouldn't be expected to be monolithic.

[JumpCrisscross]

> solutions shouldn't be expected to be monolithic

I don’t see anyone in this thread arguing for this. Just backing up the notion that vehicular manslaughter is almost tolerated by the justice system.

[kelseyfrog]

Perhaps an unintentional use of the definite article?

> The function of prison sentences is deterrence.

The definite article is typically used to indicate 'there is only one'[1].

1. https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/free-resources/gramm...

[loeg]

To put it another way: crimes of pure impulse, with zero forethought, are a subset of all crimes.

[loeg]

And incapacitation!

[Aachen]

And taking away a license in order to achieve that in the case of traffic offences couldn't possibly be the cheaper option for deterrence or incapacitation

[loeg]

It's both cheaper and less effective. (And Mary Lau didn't even lose her license.)

[Aachen]

And they're the only option, right?