NCJ Number
146267
Date Published
1994
Length
347 pages
Annotation
Quantitative data on criminal careers, including offense and arrest data, are used to assess the impact of incapacitation policies on the criminal justice system and to derive an economic model of crime control through incapacitation.
Abstract
Collective incapacitation is viewed as a gamble, particularly since direct benefits are much less than direct costs. If crime reduction produces significant indirect benefits, however, such as anxiety reduction, collective incapacitation may pay off. Selective incapacitation is a relatively sure thing, based on existing criminal justice approaches, resources, and techniques. Because every jurisdiction in the United States is different, however, deterrent effects may enhance, offset, or even overwhelm incapacitative effects of a particular criminal justice system approach. Intermediate sanctions, for example, may be more or less cost-effective than full incapacitation. Although more prisons make better sense if the criminal justice system becomes more selective, even an optimally selective system cannot justify additional beds without recourse to signficant indirect benefits. Selective incapacitation policies have some support, but others believe a just deserts sentencing scheme is unfair. Benefits of selective incapacitation depend on the selection method and on characteristics of the criminal population and the criminal justice system. Even so, estimates indicate that incapacitation can prevent no more than 22 percent of potential crimes. Criminal justice policies are also needed that ameliorate such social problems as chronic poverty, unemployment, teenage pregnancy, and child abuse. Data on offense rates, arrest probabilities, and differences among offenders are provided. References, tables, and figures