Operation Varsity Blues

[Ethel mermania]

Prevention has value but you are not going to prevent all crimes.

You certainly won't prevent any crimes if you don't do anything to prevent crimes.

Plus from a cost benefit analysis the cost of eliminating all admission standards is much worse than this issue.

Nah, I bet it'd be fine.

The existence of a crime does not always necessitate extreme preventive actions.
I mean we could also ban college to stop this, but obviously that would be a bad idea.

Saying one particular proposal does more harm than good =/= saying no action should be taken.

But you are saying that nothing should be done to address this issue, just convict the people involved.

Also deference is prevention.
I doubt many celebrities are willing knowingly to risk jail over getting their kid into a school with a fancy name, they just thought there would be no punishment.

Punish these idiots hard enough so that others see this shit is not worth the cost.

Do you imagine that all the people involved thought that what they were doing was legal? Because if they knew that this was illegal then deterrence clearly doesn't work.

They didn't think they would get caught, there is a difference. Although tbf the guy who tried to deduct this on his taxes may have thought it was on the up and up.

[Ifreann]

You certainly won't prevent any crimes if you don't do anything to prevent crimes.

Nah, I bet it'd be fine.


But you are saying that nothing should be done to address this issue, just convict the people involved.


Do you imagine that all the people involved thought that what they were doing was legal? Because if they knew that this was illegal then deterrence clearly doesn't work.

I never said nothing should be done. I simply said ending all admission standards to do so is a bad idea. Better transparency in the admissions process should be pursued.

Or just throw the people involved in jail.

Convicting the people involved does help fix the issue. The are unlikely to do it again, and if you publicly punish them harshly enough it deters others.

Whether or not people think something is a crime or not has very little to do with deterrence.
People know going 5 mph over the speed limit is illegal, but barely enforced so they generally do go 5 over. However people rarely go 25 mph over the speed limit because they know that is enforced and gets much bigger punishments.

It is not whether or not they think it illegal, it is whether or not the severity and likelyhood of the punishment is greater than the likely benefit.

They obviously thought that even if it was illegal, it would not be punished.

Did you know that even in places where murder is punishable by death, people still commit murders?

If you can't deter people with executions then what do you imagine prison sentences and fines will accomplish?

[Novus America]

I never said nothing should be done. I simply said ending all admission standards to do so is a bad idea. Better transparency in the admissions process should be pursued.

Or just throw the people involved in jail.

Convicting the people involved does help fix the issue. The are unlikely to do it again, and if you publicly punish them harshly enough it deters others.

Whether or not people think something is a crime or not has very little to do with deterrence.
People know going 5 mph over the speed limit is illegal, but barely enforced so they generally do go 5 over. However people rarely go 25 mph over the speed limit because they know that is enforced and gets much bigger punishments.

It is not whether or not they think it illegal, it is whether or not the severity and likelyhood of the punishment is greater than the likely benefit.

They obviously thought that even if it was illegal, it would not be punished.

Did you know that even in places where murder is punishable by death, people still commit murders?

If you can't deter people with executions then what do you imagine prison sentences and fines will accomplish?

Just because something does not work 100% does not mean it never works.

You obviously can deter many people from doing many things.
If there was no punishment for murde the murder rate would be much higher.

Plus it is all a cost benefit analysis.
Murder is something people risk their life over.
Getting into a fancy name school is not something people are as likely to risk nearly as much for.

[Ifreann]

Did you know that even in places where murder is punishable by death, people still commit murders?

If you can't deter people with executions then what do you imagine prison sentences and fines will accomplish?

Just because something does not work 100% does not mean it never works.

You obviously can deter many people from doing many things.
If there was no punishment for murde the murder rate would be much higher.

The murder rate isn't much higher where murder isn't punished by death.

Plus it is all a cost benefit analysis.
Murder is something people risk their life over.
Getting into a fancy name school is not something people are as likely to risk nearly as much for.

Clearly it is, a small fortune has been spent on exactly that.

You're not going to suggest that all these people be executed, are you?

[Novus America]

Just because something does not work 100% does not mean it never works.

You obviously can deter many people from doing many things.
If there was no punishment for murde the murder rate would be much higher.

The murder rate isn't much higher where murder isn't punished by death.

Plus it is all a cost benefit analysis.
Murder is something people risk their life over.
Getting into a fancy name school is not something people are as likely to risk nearly as much for.

Clearly it is, a small fortune has been spent on exactly that.

You're not going to suggest that all these people be executed, are you?

The murder rate is highest in places where people can easily get away with murder.
Where laws are not enforced.

For them it was not that much money, and going to jail is absolutely something they do not want.
No I do not think they should be executed, a decade or so in prison should suffice.

[Ifreann]

The murder rate isn't much higher where murder isn't punished by death.


Clearly it is, a small fortune has been spent on exactly that.

You're not going to suggest that all these people be executed, are you?

The murder rate is highest in places where people can easily get away with murder.
Where laws are not enforced.

For them it was not that much money, and going to jail is absolutely something they do not want.
No I do not think they should be executed, a decade or so in prison should suffice.

So is it the severity of punishment that deters people, or the likelihood of being caught?

[Novus America]

The murder rate is highest in places where people can easily get away with murder.
Where laws are not enforced.

For them it was not that much money, and going to jail is absolutely something they do not want.
No I do not think they should be executed, a decade or so in prison should suffice.

So is it the severity of punishment that deters people, or the likelihood of being caught?

A combination really. A decision to commit a crime is generally a cost benefit analysis. If Perceived benefit x perceived likelyhood of benefit < perceived cost x perceived likelihood of cost you are not going to commit the crime.