[Fargren]

Is there any proof that higher punishment works as a deterrent for any crime? I would assume that some punishment works better than no punishment at all, but here's probably a point of dimishing returns.

Does anyone know of any studies on the subject?

[jeffmould]

I know there have been studies on the effectiveness of the death penalty in deterring crimes where the death penalty is either the given punishment or a punishment option. All of the studies have found little to no effectiveness in the death penalty being a deterrent.

As for other crimes and punishments I am not aware of any specific studies. Although I would say that for the most part the threat of a jail sentence for any length of time is a deterrent in my opinion. If it were not a deterrent society would see much higher crime rates than we currently do as simply no one would be deterred by the threat of going to jail. That's just my opinion though.

[Fargren]

Yeah, I've read the death penalties studies, but I was hoping for something more general. Instinctually, I agree with your opinion, but I think this is teh kind of thing that really needs to be verfied. We are basing a very important part of our society in this assumption, and it could just be wrong. Maybe people who don't do crimes do it simply because they believe it's wrong.

[jeffmould]

I asked someone I work with and they forwarded me this report. It brings up some interesting points regarding deterrence.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/deterrence%20briefing%2...

EDITED TO ADD: To note I do agree with you that what if jail/prison is not a deterrent then we are doing it wrong. To some extent this is a true statement. It has been shown that some collateral consequences of punishment can actually lead to increased crime. A collateral consequence being one that is not handed down by a judge but is the result of another law, policy, regulation, etc.. For example, if you are arrested for DWI the judge may sentence you to 30 days in jail. The collateral consequence is that your driver's license may be suspended by the Department of Motor Vehicles.

If you are arrested and convicted of a felony drug charge, serve your time, and get out a collateral consequence can be that no one will hire you because of your conviction. Many states, counties, and cities are starting to realize this actually creates more crime and are passing Ban the Box laws that prohibit asking about criminal convictions on job applications and delay background screening.

[Fargren]

"the studies reviewed do not provide a basis for inferring that increasing the severity of sentences generally is capable of enhancing deterrent effects."

I find it very disturbing that this is not included the basis of legislation and investigated further.

[jeffmould]

I think the telling statement in the whole report is:

"Research to date generally indicates that increases in the certainty of punishment, as opposed to the severity of punishment, are more likely to produce deterrent benefits."

I am not saying that plea deals are all bad or that they should be eliminated. I think they serve a purpose with first time offenders or to secure testimony in cases where there are significantly bigger stakes. But some plea deals are just absolutely absurd and destroy the certainty of punishment. If people knew that there were guaranteed consequences I think we could reduce jail sentences to some extent. Instead we have increased jail sentences because we have increased the plea deals. What used to be a guaranteed 30-day sentence now has turned into 90-days because with the plea deal and good time the person will only serve the original 30 days.

[jeffmould]

A good resource on collateral consequences is: http://www.abacollateralconsequences.org/