Q Welcome to week six's discussion, where we'll briefly foray into the economics of law enforcement. Please make an initial response to the below question by Wednesday 9/26, and respond to at least three classmates' posts by Friday 9/28. Responses to an ongoing thread may count toward your three replies. In making your posts, please bear in mind the following: 1. All posts should be respectful and professional and use language appropriate for an academic environment. 2. While I do not prohibit discussion of political and social issues as these are often closely linked with criminal justice issues and merit our attention, please constrain your comments to the assigned question and remain respectful. Comments should focus on substantial and honest critiques of policy rather than attacks on political opponents. 3. You do not have to cite sources for discussion posts but may do so if you wish. Sources for discussion posts do not have to be scholarly but must be reputable. The Onion is not a reputable source. The New York Times or Wall Street Journal is. If you are unsure whether a source is appropriate, please ask. 4. You must complete all four posts (Initial response and three replies) to receive any credit for discussion assignments. New Philadelphia District Attorney Lawrence Krasner has launched an unprecedented experiment. When recommending incarceration, Philly prosecutors must justify the cost. In other words, for example, if a prosecutor recommends a four-year prison sentence which would ultimately cost Pennsylvania taxpayers $160,000, the prosecutor must show how Pennsylvanians will get $160,000 worth of benefits as a result. What are your thoughts on this policy? Do you think it will have any effect, good or bad, on the CJ system?