Qualifiers

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Prison Privatization[/b][/center]

Logan (1990) – Review privatization arguments. IDed: A) would minimize cost but reduce quality. B) Whether private sector training and supervision lead to abuse. C) Whether financial markers would increase opportunity for corruption.

Marquet (2008) – Not public or private that matters, it’s all about leadership.

Rynne et al. (2008) – Examine woodfield correctional agency, had riot after being open for 3 weeks. Factors included: reforms suggested to win the bid were unrealistic, undertrained staff and veteran inmates. Policy was not well thought out. Private prisons are less likely to have as many external pressures.

Tatge (1998) – Cut cost by understaffing, training, and paying. Abuse and mismanagement rampant. Northeast Ohio Correction Center had in 1 year: abuse, 20 stabbings, 2 killings, and 3 escapes.

US General Accounting Office (1996) – no evidence that private prisons are cheaper.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Juveniles[/b][/center]

Roper v Simmons (2005) – Supreme Court says you can’t execute for a crime committed as a minor.

In Re Gault (1967) – Supreme Court says juveniles have a right to counsel and other adult rights.

Juvenile Law Center (2010) – 6 reccomendations for juvenile justice reform based on the Cash 4 Kids Scandal: A) Ensure access to counsel. B) Institute meaningful appellate review. C) Increase transparency and accountability. D) Reducing referrals to juvenile justice courts. E) Ensure respectable treatment (not
for profit entities). F) Reduce consequences of juvenile records (limit the availability).

Cash 4 Kids (2009-2010) – 2 judges in Lucerne County, PA. Took millions of dollars in kickbacks to send kids to private facilities for months, even if the offense was relatively minor.

Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice (2010) – Four recommendations: A) judge should state on recording the reason for the decision. B) Recommend juvenile court judges commission be given the resources to correct and analyze data. C) Every juvenile should be deemed indigent and call for state funds to support counsel if they don’t want it. D) Discourage the use of zero tolerance policies.

Tannenhaus (2004) – 1[sup]st[/sup] juvenile court was founded in 1899 in Cook County, Illinois. The state should act as the parent and in the best interest of the child. Treatment is preferable to imprisonment. Informal proceedings.

Feld (2010) – Argued against blended sentencing. It increases punitiveness of juvenile courts. Suggested age as a mitigating factor for reduced sentencing.

Pettus-Davis & Garland (2010) – Suggest ban on juvenile transfers and switch to blended sentencing approach. Transfer maybe when older and if rehabilitation does not work.

Benekos & Merlo (2006) – We shifted from rehabilitation to punishment. Offense instead of the offender dominates the decisions. Judicial waiver is evil.

Myers (2003) – Study juvenile waiver in PA, found recidivism highest for those sent to adult courts.

Mears et al. (2010) – Juvenile waiver is bad.

Lanza-Kaduce et al. (2010) – Interviewed juveniles incarcerated as adults, said they had never understood the true consequences until then. Florida.

Zeidenberg & Schiraldi (1997) – Youth and adults mixed in correctional system are bad for youth. More likely to commit suicide and be sexually assaulted.

Sherman et al. (2002) – After systematic review, no difference between comparison and control groups.

Benekos & Merlo (2006) – Focus prevention against drop out, family, drug treatment, need to use evidence based practices. Also we need to use intervention for those in the system.

Kappeler & Potter (2005) – Juvenile crime related to age. Despite DiIoullio’s super predator myth, 1993 to 2002 saw a greater decline in juvenile violent crime than adult crime.

Sampson & Laub – Juvenile delinquency directly explained by “family context” factors. Parental rejection, erratic discipline. Juvenile offenders more likely to offend in adulthood. Suggested prevention.

Snyder (2003) – Reported lowest juvenile arrests since 1987, data overshadowed by sensationalist news.

Feld & Schaefer (2010) – Found Minnesota juveniles who were younger, male, felons, prior history, are more likely to have counsel. Also found Minnesota lacks funds to grant indigent juveniles the right o counsel. Many juveniles charges were modified to strip that right.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Payday Loans[/b][/center]

Messner (2011) – Predatory lending practice on the poor.

Kubrin & Squires (2011) – Seattle study found crime goes up with payday lenders in the area. Reccomends Congress cap the interest rate like they did with credit cards and loans, zoning laws to limit number and location of payday lenders.

Wilcox & Eck (2011) – high traffic areas = high crime.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Problem Oriented Policing[/b][/center]

Clarke (1998) – Concluded police departments should work more with academics to analyze data.
Sherman et al. (2002) – Systematic review showed that evidence shows for POP works. For reducing gun carrying, promising cracking down on gun carrying reduces gun crimes.

Weisburg et al. (2010) – Meta analysis of past POP studies. Concluded reliable evidence, weak in strength and quality that POP works. Effect size between .110 and .120. Need more evaluation of Problem Oriented Policing but recommend its continued use.

Goldstein (1979) – Methods such as rapid patrol not effective. Call for paradigm shift to POP. Process has four steps (SARA): Scanning (ID problem), Analyze (Collect data), Response (Respond), and Assess (analyze response).

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Economics and Violent Victimization[/b][/center]

Cook (2011) – Legitimate opportunities: recession increases property crime by reducing legitimate means for standard of living. Criminal opportunities: Recession might affect quality of criminal opportunities, potential burglary victims home to be capable guardians and robbers get less cash. Drugs and alcohol: intox down in recession, violence due to intox goes down. Drugs cycles are less clear. Cops and corrections: Recession poses threat due to tax collections and budget cuts.

Warren (2011) – Need community and cops to work together.

Lauritsen and Heimer (2010) – NCVS over 30 years. Violence has dropped across all races.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Terrorism[/b][/center]

Useem & Clayton (2009) – Interviewed correction workers and inmates in 27 prisons. Determined that the threat of radicalization (jihad) in prison is modest. Prisoners in US are not appalled by terrorism.

Smith & Damohouse (2009) – Environmental terrorists take less time to plan.

Lafree, Yang, Crenshaw (2009) – Used global terrorism database to examine terror attacks from 1970 to 2004. 16,916 attacks, 3% targeted US citizens, 99% of these while abroad. Policy implications are that terrorism is like normal crime, more likely near a group’s base of operations. Suggest efforts to strength local governments abroad to fight.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: White Collar Crime[/b][/center]

Reichman (2010) – Regulation works when combine fear, persuasion, and normative duties. SEC teams are inexperienced with regulatory laws.

Pontell & Geiss (2010) – a body of law should be established for corporations.

Minkes (2010) – Whistleblowers always suffer. Corporate crime leads to tougher policy.

Laufer (2010) – Corporate crime in the US is episodic.

van de Bunt (2010) – Madoff and Dutch Construction price fixing scandals. Encourage employees to speak out.

Shaver & Grabosky (2010) – Legislators believe crime is a choice.

Torgler (2010) – Non-compliance is 16%. Media can be used to shame them.

Leighton (2010) – Anti-tax sentiment leads politicians to discourage tax enforcement. GAO IDed several strats to generate big revenue.

Braithwaite (2010) – Norms and attitudes need considered for tax evasion. Need to differentiate on non-compliance. Intentional vs. bad choice.

Levi (2010) – Tax evasion usually dealt through civil penalty. Social and political pressure to pay taxes.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: After School Programs[/b][/center]

Cross et al. (2009) – Examined an ASP. Found participation in ASP had minimal effect, those who identified were already more active. ASP need to target and draw in at-risk youth.

Gottfredson (2007) – Evaluated 35 ASPs. Found program structure, size, and staffing to be important in producing results.

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Evidence Based Prevention[/b][/center]

Sherman et al. (2002) – update and expansion of Sherman et al. (1997), one of the most comprehensive evaluations of prevention. Goal of determine what worked. Focus impact evaluations and crime. Created scale to assess scientific rigor of study evaluations, 1 – 5. What works – need 2 level 3 studies support, 3 preponderance of evidence in same direction. Not works, 2 level 3s of no support. Promising, 1 level 3 that works.

Aos et al. (2006) – Study in Washington, systematic review of what works in corrections.

Clear (2010) – 2009 ASC presidential address. Caution not to let strong emphasis on evidence based stifle innovation. Multiple studies establish evidence based, but only need one to spread doubt.
Campbell Collaboration- International effort aimed at organizing systematic reviews.

Benekos & Merlo (2006) – often duality in CJ policy (treatment vs. punishment).

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Community Policing[/b][/center]

Sherman et al. (2002) – Goal of community policing is to increase amount and quality of contact with cops and citizens. Community policing practices can increase police legitimacy which is linked to crime.

National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorder (1968) – State 1960 race riots contributed to by police behaviors. Claim police lost contact with minority groups by changing from foot patrols to radio cars.

Police Foundation (1981) – Data from Newark, NJ, study on foot patrols found they do not reduce crime. But asked if foot patrols alone would improve quality anyhow.

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Gun Violence[/b][/center]

Pittsburgh Initiative to Reduce Crime (2010)/Kennedy (2010) – Just started in the summer of 2010, modeled after ceasefire call-in programs.

Violence Policy Center (2010) – 36.6 per 100,000

PA Health Care Cost Containment council (2004) – cost of gunshot wounds are $127 million per year in PA.

McDonald v. Chicago – 2[sup]nd[/sup] amendment applies to the states.

Kennedy (2010) – Talks about norms and narratives. Most important if someone thinks obeying the law is right/wrong (informal control). Street norms are ideas such as “If I am disrespected, I must respond with violence”. Changing norms and narratives can impact crime. programs to change norms can be call-ins, intervention partners would include cops, the communities, faith groups. Call in troubled groups and talk about changing goals. Hard to determine the success of call ins as other strategies are also used. Survey in Chicago showed they were less likely to carry a gun if they participated. Key themes for call-ins include the 8 following: A) None of us entirely right, we all want change. B) Law enforcement respects you. C) Law enforcement is part of the problem and would like to change. D) No justification for violence. E) Community needs violence to stop. F) You are valuable and important to us. G) Ideas of the code of the street are wrong. H) We will help you if we can.

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Racial Profiling[/b][/center]
U.S. v Sokolow (1989) – Profiling began in the 1970s when feds used it to target drug users. Skeptics claim that lead to undue harassment of minorities. Supreme Court upheld that drug carrier profiling was adequate to temporarily detain someone.

Alpert (2007) – Profiling often result of compstat that allows real time access to data that shows more blacks involved in crime. Allows agencies to target specific places and groups. Problem is circular reasoning, if blacks stopped more, they’re more likely to be charged.

Piquero (2009) – Events in 90s made profiling a hot topic. ACLU study found blacks accounted for 78% of stops but 42% of population.

[BG45]

Since I promised to put my replies at the end! (more Policy up tomorrow!)

[quote name='MissScripture' timestamp='1325016757' post='2358180']
[center]
[/center]
[center] [/center]
[center] [/center]
[/quote]

Thanks MS!!

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1325010274' post='2358154']
is this a bad time to tell you about my photographic memory?
[/quote]

Jason, if I could send you in my place, I probably would after having you review my study materials...

[quote name='MissyP89' timestamp='1325009830' post='2358150']
That cheerleading smiley is the reason I got my driver's license. Just sayin.

You got this, dude.
[/quote]

Thanks Missy, that's my hope. Got first four practice Qs back from one of my readers. Not heartening to read, but glad to read it with this much time until the 13th.

[quote name='MissScripture' timestamp='1325009126' post='2358146']
No, but it seems to be my automatic response to such situations, too. Really, why is that wired into us? I mean, is it going to help in a fight or flight situation to start puking your guts out? I would think it would be kind of counter-productive! (Well, unless you puked ON someone, and then they would be grossed out and leave you alone, I suppose...)


If you don't (though I'm sure you will) you should submit this thread as evidence that you DO, in fact, know what you're talking about.

Oh, and
[/quote]

Thanks MS! And I know! I don't get why we're wired that way. I don't know what was up with me that night though; I didn't have a fever or anything, but between the vomiting, shaking, chills, and crying you'd think I had the flu!

[quote name='brandelynmarie' timestamp='1325008899' post='2358144']

[/quote]

Thanks brandelynmarie!!

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Homelessness and Crime[/b][/center]

Eck (2010) – Policy is about what works, when it works, and with whom it works. No program is 100% generalizable, just because SCI worked one place, doesn’t mean it will in another.

Berk & McDonald (2010) – Safer Cities Initiative in Los Angeles generated a modest crime reduction with no evidence of spatial crime displacement. Not a long term strategy to address homelessness. Implemented in Fall 2005. One of the few “broken windows” approaches not to place undue strain on police/minority relations.

Braga (2010) – SCI. Police should help homeless with services.

White (2010) – Zero tolerance against homeless is a shift from professional policing. Alternatives to arrest are preferable.

Piquero (2010) – SCI used 50 full time officers. Stayed 7 days in an area after stopping crime.

Rowe & O’connell (2010) – Media may hasve led to higher reports of nuisance crimes. SCI study began before formal start date.

Vitale (2010) – Argues SCI was not cost effective.

Culhane (2010) – Notes at the time of SCI, LA stepped up homelessness prevention initiatives. Need to address homelessness, not crime; if we treat for only crime, we treat a symptom, not the real problem.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Hot Spots Policing[/b][/center]

Sherman et al. (2002) – After a systematic review of 10 studies, found evidence that focus patrols and efforts at high crime areas can be effective. Also discussed the possibility of crime being displaced. Neither empirical evidence or theory supports the claim.

Lawton et al. (2005) – Study high crime areas in Philadelphia. Police patrol areas 24/7 for months. Reduction of violent and drug crime for certain places, but not overall in the city because the crime simply relocated.

Robinson & Rengert (2006) – Longitudinal study in Portland modeled after the Lawton study. Drug dealers moved operations due to police presence. Once cops leave, dealers returned.

Koper (1995) – Longer patrols in hot spots mean an area is free of crime longer.

Fritsch, Caeti, Taylor (1999) – Effect saturated patrols in gang violence areas. Use of, 20% drop of crime within control areas. Results are best when combined with problem oriented policing.

Braga (2005) – Systematic review, only experimental designs. Found evidence that it can lower crime, also 5 studies showed that crime was not displaced. Study did not address long term. Does not answer which enforcement strategy is best.

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Death Penalty[/b][/center]

Furman v Georgia (1972) – Declared death penalty unconstitutional, violated the 8[sup]th[/sup] amendment of cruel and unusual punishment.

Gregg v Georgia (1976) – Narrow scope of penalty. Claim Death Penalty could be used as an effective deterrent and retribution. Back in use.

No Cite: Former Governor George Ryan of Illinois put moratorium on death penalty after 13 innocents were released there in 10 years (2010). Illinois abolished the death penalty (2011).

New Jersey Sentencing Commission (2007) – Recommended abolishing the death penalty. Cited the risk of executing innocent people, too much monetary cost (cheaper to keep a person in prison for life than to kill a person), and lack of a deterrent effect.

Sellin (1959) – Death Penalty does not deter. Compared states homicide rates with and without.

Kovandzic et al. (2009) – Many studies find that the death penalty does not deter do not control for other factors. These other factors include the murder rate, 3 strikes laws, drug war, etc. Compared states with and without the death penalty while controlling, and still found there was deterrent effect by the death penalty.

Williams (2011) – CA spends $184 million a year on the death penalty. This is at odds with the anecdotal tales that you’ll live for decades if sentenced to death in California.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Media & Crime, Myths of Government and Corporations[/b][/center]

Kappeler & Potter (2005a) – Examples of government made myths: Marijuana in the 1930s, drug war. Can create or control crime myths by feeing the media, selecting the stats that get funded, the ease of access/more authority to the media, and by keeping reporters dependent upon the authorities.

Kappeler & Potter (2005b) – Once a crime myth have been accepted it creates the basis to form other myths. Established conceptual framework can prevent us from defining issues accurately or exploring new solutions, or finding alternatives. News is far more profitable if it is entertaining.

Kappeler & Potter (2005c) – Estimated cost of corporate crime is 400-500 billion dollars a year, 30 times the cost of street crime. ENRON alone was a 60 billion dollar scam. Thousands of deaths result from injuries at work, 30,000 unsafe products, 20,000 environmental pollution.

Chermak (1994) – Because the news media represents crime in its most extreme form, the public is more likely to think it is representative. This makes the public more fearful.

Butts & Snyder (1997) – Explain how today’s media can lead to crime misunderstanding. Hears incidentals all over the country, repeated often enough, may suggest to the public that crimes are occurring more frequently, even though crime has continued to fall for decades.

Fishman (1984) – Media created the elderly victimization crime wave that NEVER existed.

Surette (2007) – Anything I’ve ever said positive or negative about the media, he’s said at some point.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Bullying[/b][/center]

Recent news: Multiple cases in media recently. Phoebe Prince killed herself in Massachusetts. Schoolmates faced charges of harassment, stalking, statutory rape, violation of civil rights with bodily injury.

Young Shin Kim (2005) – victims of bullying at high risk of suicide.

Roland (2011) – Norway has taken bullying seriously since 2001 with a suicide, has two major anti-bullying initiatives headed by the Royal Family.

Oweles (1995) – Defined bullying as repeated unwanted physical or verbal intimidation of an individual by multiple people when the person cannot defend himself.

US Secret Service Report (2002) – Looked at school shootings. In 37 attacks, 2/3 of shooters were bullied. Conclude bullying may have played a role in motivating the attacks.

Farrel-Smith (2010) – No unified definition, but usually have certain elements. pattern of behavior over time, repeated exposure to intentional injury or discomfort inflicted by one or more versus another.

Sampson (2002) – Zero tolerance do not solve and can exacerbate problem and discourage reporting.

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Drug Court[/b][/center]

Sherman et al. (2002) – Review found lower participant recidivism for drug courts.

Gottfredson et al. (2003) – drug court participants are less likely to recidivate compared to the control group.

Aos et al. (2008) – Report by Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Looked at a number of evidence based programs. For drug courts, based on 56 evaluations. Found an average decrease of 10.7% in recidivism rates compared to control.

Harrel (2003) – Meta analysis of drug courts found 34 of 40 evals reported lower crime rates for participants. for every dollar invested, $.83 saved on reduced crime. Should focus on ways to improve graduation rates.

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Public Criminologies[/b][/center]

Clear (2010) – Public criminologies, write and conduct studies with practitioners.

Uggen & Inderblitzen (2010) – Public criminology must be given more acceptance and legitimacy in the field. Vibrant public criminology will help bring new voice to discussion while addressing common myths and misconceptions. Some feel that writing to be publically accessible dilutes the science.

Mears (2010) – Balanced portfolio of research. Need more policy oriented research, but we should never stop with basic research.

Tonry (2010) – There is a long history of public criminology. One of the primary voices behind Roosevelt’s New Deal ideas was a sociologist who studied crime. Academics have no entitlement to special weight for their voices.

Loader & Sparks (2010) – Criticize how we put our work into boxes.

Land (2010) – Need to create think tanks to provide for public criminologies.

Rock (2010) – Warns from personal experience with European Union that politics will win out over truth and that relevance is entirely subjective.

[BG45]

[center][b]Policy Note Cards: Human Trafficking[/b][/center]

Skinner (2011) – Budget for human trafficking = 1 day of drug war. Budget is being slashed a further 50% by Congress.

Google (2011) – Google Inc. has supplied $10 million in grants to Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to fight human trafficking, roughly ¼ of the US government budget after the cuts take place.

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (2011) – USCCB human trafficking organizations have been denied federal grant money for lack of abortion services, despite having most developed NGO to counter modern day slavery.

Kangaspunta (2010) – Less than 5% of victims ever IDed as such. Hard to compare stats from one country to another.

David (2010) – Stats hard to come by, qualitative better for this.

Godziak (2010) – Children who are trafficked rarely ask questions that would reveal victimhood. We’re not good at IDing child victims, in fact no single child trafficking victim has ever been IDed at the border.

Stolz (2010) – Victims afraid to help law enforcement in cases. (They fear retaliation and fear the police). Victims rarely self ID and because this isn’t a traditional police matter, it’s harder to investigate, because many cops believe the victims aren’t truly victims.

Farrel et al. (2010) – Defines it as the illicit movement of people for exploitive commercial sex and labor. Interviewed law enforcement agencies. between 2000 and 2008, 9.7% reported investigating human trafficking. 70% of those only investigated 1 type, sex or labor. If trained, they were more likely to investigate the cases. At least 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked per year (MORE THAN WHEN SLAVERY WAS LEGAL WORLDWIDE). Policy recommendations: Train more cops to recognize cases and deal with victims, Department of Justice should develop model protocols.