Reply to Cognitive Dissonance

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Cognitive Dissonance"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous]TL;DR for carjackings in DC, there's a 21% chance of police actually doing something, and a 5% chance of it actually resulting in conviction.

Does anyone think those numbers are acceptable?[/quote]

I don't think those numbers are acceptable. I also don't think that fixating on whether the minimum sentence is 4 or 7 years makes a lot of sense given how few perpetrators make it that far. [/quote]

well then why does the code rewrite fixate on changing the maximum? answer: to reduce actual sentences. which yes, will result in more carjacking.

https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2022/20220621_Recidivsm-SentLength.pdf[/quote]

The maximum in the revision is 24 years. Judges have rarely given that much so it is really immaterial. What do you think is the proper maximum?[/quote]

I'm vaguely undecided on the code bill, not that it matters now, but the idea behind this bothers me.  The proponents of the bill were always proclaiming that judges don't give maximum penalties now, so changing the maximum and minimums would have no effect.  But that's very unclear to me.  If you change the max and min, judges could easily change their sentencing, even if their old sentencing is within the new range.  It's really a change in equilibrium, not a simple change.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics