Ah, I think we’ve both made the same mistake (believing recidivism rates were similar across countries). It appears recidivism has quite a large range.
“For all reported outcomes, a 2-year follow-up period was the most commonly used. The 2-year rearrest rates ranged from 26% (Singapore) to 60% (USA), two-year reconviction rates ranged from 20% (Norway) to 63% (Denmark), and two-year reimprisonment rates ranged from 14% (USA – Oregon) to 43% (Canada – Quebec, New Zealand) (see Table 3 for 2-year rates from included countries).”
In any case, my argument doesn’t hinge on what the true statistics are.
Ah, I think we’ve both made the same mistake (believing recidivism rates were similar across countries). It appears recidivism has quite a large range.
“For all reported outcomes, a 2-year follow-up period was the most commonly used. The 2-year rearrest rates ranged from 26% (Singapore) to 60% (USA), two-year reconviction rates ranged from 20% (Norway) to 63% (Denmark), and two-year reimprisonment rates ranged from 14% (USA – Oregon) to 43% (Canada – Quebec, New Zealand) (see Table 3 for 2-year rates from included countries).”
In any case, my argument doesn’t hinge on what the true statistics are.