Women Aren’t Always Sentenced by the Book. Maybe Men Shouldn’t Be, Either

Re:Women Aren’t Always Sentenced by the Book. Maybe Men Shou... by ExcelSaga on Monday April 02, 2018 @10:34AM (#16734787)

If you actually read the article and the many citations, it’s a strong data-based approach. If you only read the title or skim, or just react emotionally then it could hit you the wrong way. All of which is to say that this is an important issue, it’s presented well and with sensitivity, and it’s just the kind of thought-provoking article called for in the guidelines.

That it’s already flagged off the front page is a credit to no one.

A selection of some of the embedded links from the piece:

https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/amendment-proce...

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/criminal-hist...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3793850/

https://academic.oup.com/aler/article/17/1/127/212179

https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-pu...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Women Aren’t Always Sentenced by the Book. Maybe Men Shou... by forgottenpass on Monday April 02, 2018 @01:52PM (#16737090)

If you actually read the article and the many citations, it’s a strong data-based approach.

As a review of the federal sentencing guidelines status quo, sure. As a source of proposed remedies, no.

I didn't go into the article looking for an argument that there were problems with that system and the application of it. I had prior knowledge there, and fleshing it out further wasn't my only reason to read this.

I went into the article looking for the proposed remedies (and a ounce of hope that they wouldn't be as hollow as the headline suggested). If they had limited the scope of the article to the problem they wish to describe, I'd agree with you. But the headline and the "lol, trump" paragraphs aim the article higher. Those aspects don't stick to the tough data-driven no-nonsense image fivethrityeight tries to convey.

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

[ Parent | on HN ]