Thread by @JohnFPfaff

One thing to add to this.

I was once told that the median age of ADMISSION for someone sentenced to life without parole under PA’s 3-strike laws was... 40.

Forty. Look at those graphs. Forty.

Just when they are fundamentally changing away from what we punish them for.

https://twitter.com/JohnFPfaff/status/1378179052490604550

That said, at the end of 2013, ~50% of all ppl aged 65+ in prison had been ADMITTED at age 55+ (only 50.4% of 65+ had served over 10 yrs), a much higher % than in the past (ie, in earlier studies a much greater % of those 65+ had been admitted when much younger).

This matters.

The US, at least, has a sizable cohort of older ppl who have not aged out of crime to the degree expected, and it’s not entirely clear why.

Some have tied it to life-long complications w elevated drug use in the 1960s-80s... tho that also implicates how we CHOSE to address that.

But it is an imp, non-trivial wrinkle to the “everyone old in prison was admitted when young.” That’s less true today than in the past.

Which is NOT—NOT!—to say admitting older ppl therefore makes sense!! Still likely generally a bad idea!

But need to frame solutions better:

Lots of bills to cut aging in prison are of the “if you’re x yrs old, have served at least y yrs, then more parole.”

But a lot of x > 65 (and esp x > 55) have fairly short y’s-served (since bills usually set y at 15-20).

Again: comforting story will yield disappointing results.