Kent's post about High Supervision brought to mind one I wrote three weeks ago about the things a career criminal can get done on Enhanced Probation. The whole idea would be laughable, if it were funny.
It goes beyond air-headed callousness to put thugs back on the street knowing in advance that a very high percentage of them will do it (or worse) again. The only way the let-them-out-now crowd gets away with it is by shouting from the rooftops the cost of incarceration while effectively censoring (by refusing anything resembling similarly robust coverage) any account of the increase in crime that is certain to occur. What makes this particularly galling is that the additional crime will have, not just human costs, but substantial economic costs as well.
Indeed, now that I think of it, one thing our side could really use is a sober and loudly publicized study of the economic costs of crime, so that every time the NACDL et al. comes out with the money to be saved by avoiding prison and instead putting criminals on "high supervision" or "enhanced probation" or whatever the scam is to be called next time, we'll be able to remind them that the they have "forgotten" to subtract from their "cost savings" the cost additions their plans are certain to bring about.