Carl Heastie is the poster boy for the glaring ignorance and incredible stupidity that leftist progressive (regressive) Democrats wallow in. I think he should show proof that his IQ is higher than room temperature.
There have been untold numbers of studies PROVING that a vast majority of crimes in our cities are committed by a small minority of criminal thugs. They have also shown that by keeping these criminal thugs OFF our streets, crime statistics improve dramatically. New Yorks broken windows policy is a testimony to that.
Carl Heastie wants proof of how penalties curb crime? Here you go
Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie demands proof that tougher penalties deter crime. Seriously.
Facing public outrage (including our contempt) over his first remarks on the issue, Heastie doubled down Tuesday, insisting, “I don’t believe, in the history of increasing penalties, has that ever been the reason that crime has gone down” — and “I’d love somebody to give me an example as to when that happened.”
Uh, just one? We won’t even break a sweat.
As Manhattan Institute crime expert Rafael Mangual documents in The Post, there’s a ton of compelling evidence that “harsher criminal penalties can and do deter crime.”
He cites, for instance, a study showing that California’s three-strikes law cut felony arrests among those with two strikes by as much as 20%.
Another study found that including incarceration among the penalties for court-fine scofflaws made payments more likely.
Not to mention the indisputable fact that anyone locked up for longer can’t reoffend during that time.
The likelihood of being arrested and locked up is also critical: When Mayors David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani boosted the number of city cops nearly 30% — from 31,000 to 40,000 — major felonies plunged, from 430,460 in 1993 to 162,064 by 2001.
Murders those years went from 1,927 to 649 — a 66% drop — and kept falling, to 292 in 2017, a whopping 87% off the 1990 high of 2,262.
Broken Windows policing, i.e., cracking down on minor crimes, also helped.
https://nypost.com/2024/04/03/opini...-proof-of-how-penalties-curb-crime-hows-this/
There have been untold numbers of studies PROVING that a vast majority of crimes in our cities are committed by a small minority of criminal thugs. They have also shown that by keeping these criminal thugs OFF our streets, crime statistics improve dramatically. New Yorks broken windows policy is a testimony to that.
Carl Heastie wants proof of how penalties curb crime? Here you go
Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie demands proof that tougher penalties deter crime. Seriously.
Facing public outrage (including our contempt) over his first remarks on the issue, Heastie doubled down Tuesday, insisting, “I don’t believe, in the history of increasing penalties, has that ever been the reason that crime has gone down” — and “I’d love somebody to give me an example as to when that happened.”
Uh, just one? We won’t even break a sweat.
As Manhattan Institute crime expert Rafael Mangual documents in The Post, there’s a ton of compelling evidence that “harsher criminal penalties can and do deter crime.”
He cites, for instance, a study showing that California’s three-strikes law cut felony arrests among those with two strikes by as much as 20%.
Another study found that including incarceration among the penalties for court-fine scofflaws made payments more likely.
Not to mention the indisputable fact that anyone locked up for longer can’t reoffend during that time.
The likelihood of being arrested and locked up is also critical: When Mayors David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani boosted the number of city cops nearly 30% — from 31,000 to 40,000 — major felonies plunged, from 430,460 in 1993 to 162,064 by 2001.
Murders those years went from 1,927 to 649 — a 66% drop — and kept falling, to 292 in 2017, a whopping 87% off the 1990 high of 2,262.
Broken Windows policing, i.e., cracking down on minor crimes, also helped.
https://nypost.com/2024/04/03/opini...-proof-of-how-penalties-curb-crime-hows-this/
