A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

[Oldjohnw]

I am not aware that the threat of imprisonment is a deterrent to any crime let alone a driving offence.

Short sentences don’t work; long sentences don’t work. Prison as it is completely fails everyone, whether offender or victim. Prisons simply do not rehabilitate to any significant extent. They are a costly indulgence for politicians pretending that they are tough.

Edited for typos

[Pete Owens]

Across all crimes prison sentences up to six months (and probably up to one year) are more expensive and less deterrent than alternatives

While this is true in terms of rehabilitation - and may also be the case for hardenned career criminals who regard prison as an occupational risk. The thought that bad driving might result in time inside rather than a nominal fine is self evidently more of a deterrent.

Is there any evidence for crimes related to driving that imprisonment is a greater deterrent than alternatives?

OK here is a thought experimint for you.

Let us take the offence of speeding. And change the punishment from 3 points to 3 years inside.
Do you seriously think that would make no difference?

Your case is frankly so absurd that really the onus is really on you to prove that the thought of spending time inside would have no impact whatsoever on the behaviour of drivers. Of course to collect such evidence (either way) there would have to be a trial period where motoring offences were routinely subject to imprisonment rather than wrist slapping.

Or that it leads to lower subsequent reoffending?

Again you are talking about rehabilitation rather than deterence - whiich prison is not good at.
Though iIt certainly protects us from their offending while they are inside.

And while those of us of a lefty liberal outlook don't really like to talk about it. One function of prison is as just retribution. This man has done a serious wrong and should be punished as a consequence. It may not make him a better person, it might not change others behaviour, but there has to be some sence that the punisment reflects the severity of the crime.

[Oldjohnw]

Virtually all the criminology studies from around the world are quite clear: prison sentences don’t really work unless accompanied by significant rehabilitation, and of course where the public really does need protection from an individual.

And the general public, in study after study, remarkably and in a quite contradictory way claim they want tougher sentences whilst not wanting retribution.

[DaveReading]

Let us take the offence of speeding. And change the punishment from 3 points to 3 years inside.
Do you seriously think that would make no difference?

The risk a motorist runs when breaking a speed limit is, like any other risk, a combination of the severity of the downside (i.e. the type and extent of the punishment) factored by the probability of that happening (i.e. being prosecuted, such a punishment being handed down, or indeed the likelihood of being found guilty at all).

So it's by no means certain that it would make any real difference to motorists' behaviour.

[Pete Owens]

I am not aware that the threat of imprisonment is a deterrent to any crime let alone a driving offence.

Short sentences don’t work; long sentences don’t work.


Prison as it is completely fails everyone, whether offender

I don't think we are primarily concerned with with offenders enjoy the experience.

or victim.

And you speak from personal experience of someone whose spouse has killed by a criminal?

We sometimes see examples of victims of crime who do not wish to see the perpetrators punished. And I admire them greatly. I am not sure I could bring myself to act with such magnanimity - however much I think I ought to. There is a ligitimate role for retribution in the criminal justice system.

Prisons simply do not rehabilitate to any significant extent.

I think we are all in agreement with that

They are a costly indulgence for politicians pretending that they are tough.

sound like a quote from Simon Jenkins. Now as it happens I do think that we send far too many petty criminals to prison - it is just that I don't consider killer drivers to be petty criminals.

[Pete Owens]

Let us take the offence of speeding. And change the punishment from 3 points to 3 years inside.
Do you seriously think that would make no difference?

The risk a motorist runs when breaking a speed limit is, like any other risk, a combination of the severity of the downside (i.e. the type and extent of the punishment) factored by the probability of that happening (i.e. being prosecuted, such a punishment being handed down, or indeed the likelihood of being found guilty at all).

So it's by no means certain that it would make any real difference to motorists' behaviour.

You honestly believe that?????

[thirdcrank]

Virtually all the criminology studies from around the world are quite clear: prison sentences don’t really work unless accompanied by significant rehabilitation, and of course where the public really does need protection from an individual.

And the general public, in study after study, remarkably and in a quite contradictory way claim they want tougher sentences whilst not wanting retribution.

I presume that you use "work" to mean reduce re-offending. I suspect that one problem with deterrence is that it's not quite so easy to measure. Obviously, every offence committed is a failure of deterrence but I not sure how to measure those who are deterred as against those who simply would not behave in that way. Some offending involves a deliberate / planned course of action and it's hard to believe that the possibility of punishment has no influence on this.

I thought - and it's no more than that - that people not wanting retribution was in individual cases. So, it's reported that there's strong popular support for capital punishment, but eg when on a jury, people tend to become more sympathetic in the case they are trying.
(Slow typing while others were posting.)

[Oldjohnw]

I am not aware that the threat of imprisonment is a deterrent to any crime let alone a driving offence.

Short sentences don’t work; long sentences don’t work.


Prison as it is completely fails everyone, whether offender

I don't think we are primarily concerned with with offenders enjoy the experience.

or victim.

And you speak from personal experience of someone whose spouse has killed by a criminal?

We sometimes see examples of victims of crime who do not wish to see the perpetrators punished. And I admire them greatly. I am not sure I could bring myself to act with such magnanimity - however much I think I ought to. There is a ligitimate role for retribution in the criminal justice system.

Prisons simply do not rehabilitate to any significant extent.

I think we are all in agreement with that

They are a costly indulgence for politicians pretending that they are tough.

sound like a quote from Simon Jenkins. Now as it happens I do think that we send far too many petty criminals to prison - it is just that I don't consider killer drivers to be petty criminals.

I don’t recall ever considering that offenders might enjoy their incarceration.

I write from the standpoint of over 20 years working with offenders and victims and at a senior political level. I know nothing of Mr Jenkins’ views.

It is not the practice - rightly so in my view - of the immediate victim of a crime to either set a sentence or design the law. It is absolutely right that their views are taken into account, as they are.

[Oldjohnw]

Virtually all the criminology studies from around the world are quite clear: prison sentences don’t really work unless accompanied by significant rehabilitation, and of course where the public really does need protection from an individual.

And the general public, in study after study, remarkably and in a quite contradictory way claim they want tougher sentences whilst not wanting retribution.

I presume that you use "work" to mean reduce re-offending. I suspect that one problem with deterrence is that it's not quite so easy to measure. Obviously, every offence committed is a failure of deterrence but I not sure how to measure those who are deterred as against those who simply would not behave in that way. Some offending involves a deliberate / planned course of action and it's hard to believe that the possibility of punishment has no influence on this.

I thought - and it's no more than that - that people not wanting retribution was in individual cases. So, it's reported that there's strong popular support for capital punishment, but eg when on a jury, people tend to become more sympathetic in the case they are trying.
(Slow typing while others were posting.)

One measure of the effect of incarceration on rehabilitation is the amount of recidivism. In excess of 60% of younger offenders reoffend within three years, if my memory serves me correctly.

[thirdcrank]

I've no doubt at all that young offenders institutions - or whatever they call them now - are places which can act as colleges of crime, and the disadvantages of a criminal record, especially one including imprisonment, don't help with a subsequent job search. That says little about deterrence.

[Stradageek]

I am not aware that the threat of imprisonment is a deterrent to any crime let alone a driving offence.

Short sentences don’t work; long sentences don’t work. Prison as it is completely fails everyone, whether offender or victim. Prisons simply do not rehabilitate to any significant extent. They are a costly indulgence for politicians pretending that they are tough.
Edited for typos

This is absolutely true, the USA with draconian sentences and 1/150 citizens in jail has an enormous crime rate.

The only proven deterrent to crime is the certainty of being caught, which is why average speed cameras are so successful.

As for retribution, it has again been proven that forgiveness, impossible as it sometimes seems, is the best way for victims to cope. Bitterness and anger harms the victim not the perpetrator.

Some punishment is often welcomed by offenders as it helps them the move on from their crime but incarceration is a ridiculously inefficient form of punishment that achieves nothing.

As has been said many and oft on this forum, perpetrators need to be pursued and caught and appropriate sentences imposed. In the case of most of what affects us as cyclist, long driving bans are the way forward

[mattheus]

Two words about harsher punishment and deterrence effect:

Drink Driving.

[Oldjohnw]

Two words about harsher punishment and deterrence effect:

Drink Driving.

Being caught is still the main deterrent here, not the severity of the sentence.

[Bonefishblues]

Two words about harsher punishment and deterrence effect:

Drink Driving.

Being caught is still the main deterrent here, not the severity of the sentence.

I think that there's a much more powerful deterrent at play with DD as it's completely socially unacceptable.

[mattheus]

Two words about harsher punishment and deterrence effect:

Drink Driving.

Being caught is still the main deterrent here, not the severity of the sentence.

You can't completely separate them; if the penalty had stayed at 3 points, would the extra enforcement/detection have had the same enormous effect we saw in the UK? Have 3 point penalties for speeding had a measurable effect on speeding offences?