Hacker News Reader

Comment by at-fates-hands | Hacker News Reader

The statistic mentioned in the article for recidivism was around 16% "the lowest in Europe"

That's interesting considering the US had the same rate in 2007 and we have treat our criminals completely different. This would lead me to believe treating criminals like people isn't the key to successful punishment and eventual rehabilitation.

"During 2007, a total of 1,180,469 persons on parole were at-risk of reincarceration. This includes persons under parole supervision on January 1 or those entering parole during the year. Of these parolees, about 16% were returned to incarceration in 2007."

source: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=17

View on HN

The articles mentions that the reoffending rate is 16%. I'm pretty sure they're referring to the lifetime reoffending rate vs the one-year rate. On the same page you linked, the US reoffending rate is about 67.5%.

EDIT to add: To further support that interpretation of the figures, the European reoffending rate is about 70%, and it's a lot more likely that the discrepancy between Europe and the US is ~2% vs ~50%.

Isn't that the % of people breaking parole, not the total recidivism rate?

Elsewhere:

> recidivism rates between 1994 and 2007 have consistently remained around 40 percent.

http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Repor...

That article is one of the most thoughtful I've read -- at its heart it is not a simple or obvious problem.

"For example, why do Wyoming and Oregon have the lowest overall recidivism rates for offenders released in 2004, and why do Minnesota and California have the highest? Why does North Carolina return relatively few ex-offenders to prison for technical violations of their parole, but reincarcerate a comparatively large proportion for new crimes? What drove the recidivism rate down by 22.1 percent in Kansas between 1999 and 2004, and what drove it up 34.9 percent in South Dakota during the same time period?"

"Florida and New York began the twenty-first century with nearly the same size prison population (about 70,000 inmates). During the ensuing decade, Florida added 30,000 inmates and now has more than 100,000 persons behind bars. Meanwhile, New York’s prison population fell below 60,000. Yet the crime rate dropped in both states by about the same rate. In fact, New York’s crime drop was slightly larger (29.2 percent) compared with Florida’s (28.2 percent)."

"Among nearly 300,000 prisoners released in 15 states in 1994, 67.5% were rearrested within 3 years. A study of prisoners released in 1983 estimated 62.5%" - next bullet point on the same page, for convenience.

The 16% is for Bastøy, not for everyone. Statistics Norway has a better article on the recidivism rate (from 2005), but not in English unfortunately[1]. Among released prisoners 20% went back to prison at least once because of a new crime (33% after 4 years).

The closest comparisons I could find between your link and mine were:

* Reconvictions of released prisoners after 3 years: 46.9% vs ~38% (fig 3, yellow line)

* Resentenced to prison after 3 years: 25.4% vs 30% (fig 3, red line) (US numbers from 1994, Norwegian from 2005)

Translation for the figures from SSB:

* Fig 1: People who were charged with a crime

* Fig 2: People who were sentenced

* Fig 3: People released from jail

* Blue line: Charged with new crime

* Yellow: New sentence

* Red: New incarceration

[1] http://ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-pu...

> Of these parolees

16% of parolees, not 16% of ex-inmates, right?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com