Michael Lynch's Deterrence Theory

Michael .J. Lynch testing hypothesis is whether trends in imprisonment have an effect on people committing more crime. The specific problem is seeing if the deterrence theory actually works or not. Lynch looks at “basic claims of deterrence theory, popular appeal, recent time series crime, imprisonment trends, average U.S. cross sectional changes in crime and imprisonment rate trends for the 1980’s in order to assess the claim that imprisonment deters crime” (Lynch, 1999). This theory is tested because in society it is believed that if the justice system is tough on offenders then there will be a decrease in crime rates. Retributive theory is also looked and examined at and shows that United States penal system does not fit into the goals of

This shows that there is truth to deterrence. He concluded that there is no sign of deterrence working at the aggregate level between 1972- 1993. There also is no sign of deterrence theory working on cross sectional crime and imprisonment trends for 1980-1991. He also concluded that we still need to take into consideration other factors for different generations and the causes for the crime. He also concluded that it is hard to see if there is a deterrent affect because of the changes in the economy. Lynch stated that “if we could show that economic, political and social conditions were relatively constant”. (Lynch,

It makes it harder to want to believe what he is saying. If he would have took those pieces out the paper it would make it easier to believe. Another thing that I would change about this analysis is the way he worded it. there were parts of this analysis that I didn’t understand because the way he wrote it. An example of this would be in his conclusion he says there is some truth to deterrence, then goes to say in the next sentence that deterrence doesn’t work. A strength that he has in his analysis is that the time period he chose only shows a positive increase in imprisonment rates. This helps the idea that he deterrence theory does not work because if imprisonment rates increase for 22 years straight then it makes the argument that being hard on offenders doesn’t work. But this also can be a weakness for his paper because it makes it seem like he is not trying to open to having a different answer than what he wants. This can cause people not want to read his paper or see what conclusion he came