We can’t ‘incarcerate our way out of crime.’ But we can deter a lot more of it. – Niskanen Center

A post on X that went viral recently laid out a series of statistics about the percentage of serious crimes — murder, rape, robbery, assault, and so on — that are committed by people with prior arrests. All hovered between 60 percent and 79 percent. The post’s conclusion: “You can incarcerate your way out of crime. Facts.” Elon Musk, the platform’s owner, amplified the post to his hundreds of millions of followers and sharpened the point: “Either incarcerate or innocent people suffer.” To date, these two posts have nearly 50 million views each. 

The claims in these posts are worth unpacking. First, Musk uses the correct metric: Reducing the suffering of innocent people is the proper goal of any criminal justice system, and public safety policy should be evaluated primarily by that standard. Musk is also correct in an important, albeit limited, sense: Failing to incapacitate genuinely dangerous people will lead to some level of crime and suffering that would have otherwise been avoided.

— Read on www.niskanencenter.org/we-cant-incarcerate-our-way-out-of-crime-but-we-can-deter-a-lot-more-of-it/

JACOB P. ZORN v. SHELA M. LINTON

No. 25–297. Decided March 23, 2026

PER CURIAM.

On the Governor’s inauguration day in Vermont, protesters staged a sit-in at the state capitol. When the capitol closed for the day, police officers told them that they would be arrested for trespassing. They refused to leave. As officers removed the protesters one by one, Sergeant Jacob

Zorn asked Shela Linton to stand up and warned her that he would eventually have to use force to remove her. She refused to stand. Zorn took Linton’s arm, put it behind her back, placed pressure on her wrist, and lifted her to her feet.

Linton sued Zorn for using excessive force, claiming that the arrest left her with arm injuries and psychological disorders. The Second Circuit held that Zorn was not entitled to qualified immunity. We reverse.

Reassessing police de-escalation training: Evidence, gaps, and policy priorities – Niskanen Center

Overview

In recent years, de-escalation training has become a key approach in law enforcement,  providing officers with tactics, skills, and tools to better manage interactions with the public. This focus reflects growing community and law enforcement interest in resolving conflicts and handling challenging, often emotionally charged interactions with members of the public more effectively than in the past, particularly when encountering individuals in crisis. Proponents of de-escalation training argue that it equips officers with enhanced skills to resolve conflicts in highly confrontational situations without the use of force or less severe force (Oliva et al., 2010). Others, however, have raised concerns about the use of de-escalation tactics, suggesting that the training increases officers’ risk of injury by encouraging slower and less effective responses to potentially volatile situations than the operational responses of traditional policing (Blake, 2017; Jackman, 2016a; Zaiser et al., 2023).
— Read on www.niskanencenter.org/reassessing-police-de-escalation-training-evidence-gaps-and-policy-priorities/

Use of Force Policy – New Jersey Office of Attorney General

New Jersey is in the midst of implementing sweeping new rules designed to limit when the state’s 38,000 law enforcement officers use force against civilians. These policies reflect an entirely new framework for police interactions with civilians—one which calls upon officers to protect the life, liberty, and dignity of residents in every encounter.
— Read on www.njoag.gov/force/

Escape from New York

“Escape From New York” by Jarrod Shanahan analyzes the 1970s New York City carceral crisis, centering on prisoner-led resistance against the Department of Correction. The text highlights how alleged liberal reforms fueled the expansion of mass incarceration while documenting heroic, rebellious actions from within facilities like Rikers Island.

Read on HERE