Pay Criminals to Stop Criminal Behaviour

[Big Guy]

Every once in a while, people of good faith begin to look “outside the box” for solutions to problems that seemed insurmountable. Back in 2010, Richmond California was a hell hole of about 100,000 people. It was considered one of the ten most violent cities in the USA. They decided to do something different with the problem. They found that 70 percent of the 45 homicides and 200-plus firearm assaults in 2009 were committed by just 17 people.

They decided to pay criminals for not doing crime.

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/6/6/a-city-that-payscriminalstobehave.html

These hard core criminals were given opportunities for counselling and pay. Over an 18-month period, if the men demonstrate better behaviour, the city offers them up to $1,000 a month in cash, plus opportunities to travel beyond Richmond.

Result?

Regular crime was greatly decreased and homicides went down 70%.

Cost was $70,000 – Chump change compared to the average cost of $400,000 for each gun crime.

There are solutions if we are prepared to analyze why a problem exists, what is causing people to create this problem and then come up with well thought out actions which alleviate the problem.

If you are doing the same thing time and time again and getting the same result, then maybe it is time to try something else.

[TimG]

Cost was $70,000 – Chump change compared to the average cost of $400,000 for each gun crime.

One thing that people often don't take into account is that behavior will change to maximum benefit and reduce effort. i.e. it may have been possible to solve a local problem with a little extra cash it was only possible because no one expected that response. As soon as it becomes known the government is willing to pay cash for crimes you will see a rapid rise in the crime rate as new "criminals" seeking to cash in on the bonanza appear. The end result is the program would become too expensive and would have to be scrapped.

What we need are solutions that work even when taking into account the fact that people will exploit any system that allows itself to be exploited.

Edited February 29, 2016 by TimG

[Big Guy]

.... As soon as it becomes known the government is willing to pay cash for crimes you will see a rapid rise in the crime rate as new "criminals" seeking to cash in on the bonanza appear. The end result is the program would become too expensive and would have to be scrapped.

What we need are solutions that work even when taking into account the fact that people will exploit any system that allows itself to be exploited.

Interesting - What are you basing your projection upon?

Do you suggest any other solutions - that have been proven successful?

[TimG]

Interesting - What are you basing your projection upon?

A realistic understanding of human nature.

Do you suggest any other solutions - that have been proven successful?

Maybe there aren't any solutions. You should not assume that government can fix every problem. Sometimes all it can do is protect the public by locking criminals up.

[dre]

One thing that people often don't take into account is that behavior will change to maximum benefit and reduce effort. i.e. it may have been possible to solve a local problem with a little extra cash it was only possible because no one expected that response. As soon as it becomes known the government is willing to pay cash for crimes you will see a rapid rise in the crime rate as new "criminals" seeking to cash in on the bonanza appear. The end result is the program would become too expensive and would have to be scrapped.

What we need are solutions that work even when taking into account the fact that people will exploit any system that allows itself to be exploited.

These are hardcore criminals. I doubt very people are going to murder someone and get caught intentionally because they MIGHT get 1000 dollars a month. Also its "UP TO" 1000 dollars so they wouldn't really know how much they would get if anything.

You're just making stuff up.

[TimG]

These are hardcore criminals. I doubt very people are going to murder someone and get caught intentionally because they MIGHT get 1000 dollars a month. Also its "UP TO" 1000 dollars so they wouldn't really know how much they would get if anything.

And I doubt someone is going to NOT murder someone because they get paid. The point of the payments is to reduce the likelihood of someone being in a position where they might murder someone.

You're just making stuff up.

It is simple economics: reward people for a behavior and you will get more of that behavior. Any other conclusion is nonsense. Edited February 29, 2016 by TimG

[dre]

It is simple economics: reward people for a behavior and you will get more of that behavior. Any other conclusion is nonsense.

Sorry that's just not always true. That's not what happened in this case, and it wasn't the case in Iraq when the US put 80 thousand terrorists on the payroll to fight the Iraq insurgency either.

[TimG]

Sorry that's just not always true. That's not what happened in this case, and it wasn't the case in Iraq when the US put 80 thousand terrorists on the payroll to fight the Iraq insurgency either.

I did not say it would not work when the policy was unexpected. But anecdotal cases do not make a good policy.

[dre]

I did not say it would not work when the policy was unexpected. But anecdotal cases do not make a good policy.

It worked in Iraq for years. And in any case Ill take real examples over your wild guesses.

[Big Guy]

Why nthen

A realistic understanding of human nature.

Maybe there aren't any solutions. You should not assume that government can fix every problem. Sometimes all it can do is protect the public by locking criminals up.

There are always solutions to any problem.

Locking people up has not made things any better, people any safer or fewer people going to jail.

[TimG]

There are always solutions to any problem.

A very naive statement.

Locking people up has not made things any better, people any safer or fewer people going to jail.

Keeping criminals off the street will make people safer which is better. Often the government can't do anything other than minimize the harm caused. The are no "solutions" to find. Edited March 1, 2016 by TimG

[Bonam]

Every once in a while, people of good faith begin to look “outside the box” for solutions to problems that seemed insurmountable. Back in 2010, Richmond California was a hell hole of about 100,000 people. It was considered one of the ten most violent cities in the USA. They decided to do something different with the problem. They found that 70 percent of the 45 homicides and 200-plus firearm assaults in 2009 were committed by just 17 people.

They decided to pay criminals for not doing crime.

If they knew who these 17 serial killers were, why were they unable to prosecute them and get them imprisoned for life rather than paying them?

[dialamah]

Every once in a while, people of good faith begin to look “outside the box” for solutions to problems that seemed insurmountable. Back in 2010, Richmond California was a hell hole of about 100,000 people. It was considered one of the ten most violent cities in the USA. They decided to do something different with the problem. They found that 70 percent of the 45 homicides and 200-plus firearm assaults in 2009 were committed by just 17 people.

They decided to pay criminals for not doing crime.

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/6/6/a-city-that-payscriminalstobehave.html

These hard core criminals were given opportunities for counselling and pay. Over an 18-month period, if the men demonstrate better behaviour, the city offers them up to $1,000 a month in cash, plus opportunities to travel beyond Richmond.

Result?

Regular crime was greatly decreased and homicides went down 70%.

Cost was $70,000 – Chump change compared to the average cost of $400,000 for each gun crime.

There are solutions if we are prepared to analyze why a problem exists, what is causing people to create this problem and then come up with well thought out actions which alleviate the problem.

If you are doing the same thing time and time again and getting the same result, then maybe it is time to try something else.

Crime does pay?

[Big Guy]

I cannot think of any problems for which there are not solutions. Some people will use the excuse that there is not a solution to any particular problem in order to satisfy their ideology that the problem (for them) is more acceptable than the solution.

In fact, the term "problem" has been replaced in most dissertations by "challenge".

For example, for many years, the major problem (challenge) for schools who wished to fulfill their mandate, was absenteeism. It has been proven for years that in most cases, if you can find something to motivate a youngster to attend and participate that the positive experience of attending classes and passing grades then the experience will feed on itself. It will progress to where the initial motivation is no longer required and the success in the classroom becomes its own reward.

So the challenge was how to get these youngsters into class and participate.

One solution has been to pay students to attend and to distribute financial bonuses as well as grades.

For one example: "New York City’s Spark program (now in its second year), awards fourth- and seventh-graders cash for high achievement on a series of math and reading tests throughout the year. A fourth-grader can earn up to $250 a year, while a seventh-grader can earn up to $500."

If you Google "Paying students to go to school and for good grades" you will find dozens of programs using that philosophy.

For every problem there is a solution and for every unique problem there is a unique solution!

Edited March 1, 2016 by Big Guy

[sharkman]

For every sucker there is a bridge to buy.

[Skybolts]

Perhaps there may not be a solution. There is always an option.