Increasing criminalization of dissent and protest in Western liberal democracies received relatively little attention in the past but is now becoming a significant field of research within criminology and the social sciences more generally. The specialist literature can usefully be linked to a wider literature that extends to work on protest policing and social movements and to sociolegal analyses of criminalization. There is a striking connection, still relatively unexplored, between criminalization of ordinary crime and urban marginality and criminalization of protest. Both are often treated by policy makers as serious threats to the use of public space in the neoliberal city and are increasingly being dealt with by means of similar criminal and noncriminal measures. The literature on the “punitive turn,” mostly related to street crime, for example, provides theoretical insights and concepts that illuminate efforts to understand punitive responses to activists in the context of profit-driven neoliberal societies. Recent experience and research, particularly in Spain, Italy, and England and Wales, demonstrate these processes of criminalization and the existence of strong similarities between punitive methods targeting ordinary crime, urban marginality and disorder, and political protest, including recent eco-activism.
{"title":"The Criminalization of Dissent and Protest","authors":"Rossella Selmini, Anna Di Ronco","doi":"10.1086/727553","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727553","url":null,"abstract":"Increasing criminalization of dissent and protest in Western liberal democracies received relatively little attention in the past but is now becoming a significant field of research within criminology and the social sciences more generally. The specialist literature can usefully be linked to a wider literature that extends to work on protest policing and social movements and to sociolegal analyses of criminalization. There is a striking connection, still relatively unexplored, between criminalization of ordinary crime and urban marginality and criminalization of protest. Both are often treated by policy makers as serious threats to the use of public space in the neoliberal city and are increasingly being dealt with by means of similar criminal and noncriminal measures. The literature on the “punitive turn,” mostly related to street crime, for example, provides theoretical insights and concepts that illuminate efforts to understand punitive responses to activists in the context of profit-driven neoliberal societies. Recent experience and research, particularly in Spain, Italy, and England and Wales, demonstrate these processes of criminalization and the existence of strong similarities between punitive methods targeting ordinary crime, urban marginality and disorder, and political protest, including recent eco-activism.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136013332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Among Western countries, the United States is an exceptionally violent place. Serious intentional violence—homicides, other violent gun crimes, mass killings, and police killings of civilians—is dramatically more common. Many American laws—regarding self-defense retreat doctrines, stand-your-ground laws, permissive or minimal regulation of access to handguns and semiautomatic weapons, corporal punishment of children—are much more tolerant of behaviors that inherently present increased risks of violence and victimization. American laws governing sentencing are unique among those of Western countries in both the absolute severity of the punishments they prescribe and allow and the absence of viable legal mechanisms for challenging sentences on the basis that either their absolute severity violates minimum human rights standards or they are disproportionately severe in relation to the seriousness of the wrongdoing for which they are imposed (in either case, a form of unjustifiable state violence).
{"title":"Why Americans Are a People of Exceptional Violence","authors":"Michael Tonry","doi":"10.1086/727313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727313","url":null,"abstract":"Among Western countries, the United States is an exceptionally violent place. Serious intentional violence—homicides, other violent gun crimes, mass killings, and police killings of civilians—is dramatically more common. Many American laws—regarding self-defense retreat doctrines, stand-your-ground laws, permissive or minimal regulation of access to handguns and semiautomatic weapons, corporal punishment of children—are much more tolerant of behaviors that inherently present increased risks of violence and victimization. American laws governing sentencing are unique among those of Western countries in both the absolute severity of the punishments they prescribe and allow and the absence of viable legal mechanisms for challenging sentences on the basis that either their absolute severity violates minimum human rights standards or they are disproportionately severe in relation to the seriousness of the wrongdoing for which they are imposed (in either case, a form of unjustifiable state violence).","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135826523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the broadest and most interdisciplinary areas of research concerns victimization and its developmental consequences. Although a wealth of literature has been produced, it remains siloed across multiple fields, including criminology, sociology, psychology, education, social work, and public health, with such work rarely crossing disciplinary boundaries. The fragmentation of scholarship along disciplinary lines makes it difficult to recognize common findings or to solve shared theoretical, methodological, or policy problems. To remedy these issues, the multidisciplinary research on the sources and consequences of victimization should be synthesized through the lens of the life-course paradigm and couched within a developmental ecological framework. Across early life, childhood, adolescence, emerging adulthood, adulthood to midlife, and old age, the sources and consequences of victimization are multilevel and complex. Some stages of the life course are more understudied than others, and the literature is not immune from measurement issues, concerns of spuriousness and selection, and unexplained variation. And while conceptual and methodological challenges remain, theory and policy can be enhanced through embracing life-course victimology. Research can advance by unifying opportunity and vulnerability perspectives on victimization through a context-contingent approach, emphasizing age-graded changes in autonomy over the life span and placing more focus on heterogeneity in the sources and consequences of victimization across individuals, life stages, and generational cohorts.
{"title":"Victimization and Its Consequences over the Life Course","authors":"J. Turanovic","doi":"10.1086/727029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727029","url":null,"abstract":"One of the broadest and most interdisciplinary areas of research concerns victimization and its developmental consequences. Although a wealth of literature has been produced, it remains siloed across multiple fields, including criminology, sociology, psychology, education, social work, and public health, with such work rarely crossing disciplinary boundaries. The fragmentation of scholarship along disciplinary lines makes it difficult to recognize common findings or to solve shared theoretical, methodological, or policy problems. To remedy these issues, the multidisciplinary research on the sources and consequences of victimization should be synthesized through the lens of the life-course paradigm and couched within a developmental ecological framework. Across early life, childhood, adolescence, emerging adulthood, adulthood to midlife, and old age, the sources and consequences of victimization are multilevel and complex. Some stages of the life course are more understudied than others, and the literature is not immune from measurement issues, concerns of spuriousness and selection, and unexplained variation. And while conceptual and methodological challenges remain, theory and policy can be enhanced through embracing life-course victimology. Research can advance by unifying opportunity and vulnerability perspectives on victimization through a context-contingent approach, emphasizing age-graded changes in autonomy over the life span and placing more focus on heterogeneity in the sources and consequences of victimization across individuals, life stages, and generational cohorts.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45022841","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Some individuals resort to crime; others refrain. Why is that? Different answers to this question have been proposed within criminology while paying surprisingly little attention to the concept of personality. On closer inspection, though, concepts akin to personality (e.g., criminal character, criminal propensity, self-control) run like a unifying thread through the field of criminology, including in its most prominent theories, to account for the apparent individual differences in crime. Nonetheless, there is considerable conceptual and empirical heterogeneity relating to these individual differences, and efforts to integrate different perspectives are currently lacking. I argue that the different approaches can usefully be integrated under the umbrella of the personality concept and that the field of criminology would benefit from more explicitly and systematically incorporating personality into its theories and research. Studies linking personality traits to crime, in turn, show that diverse findings can be boiled down to three key criminogenic characteristics—low morality, shortsightedness, and negative affectivity—that provide a parsimonious account of individual differences in crime. Future research should draw on the concept of personality to foster theoretical and empirical integration and eventually solve the puzzle of who engages in crime and why.
{"title":"(Re)Considering Personality in Criminological Research","authors":"Isabel Thielmann","doi":"10.1086/726781","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/726781","url":null,"abstract":"Some individuals resort to crime; others refrain. Why is that? Different answers to this question have been proposed within criminology while paying surprisingly little attention to the concept of personality. On closer inspection, though, concepts akin to personality (e.g., criminal character, criminal propensity, self-control) run like a unifying thread through the field of criminology, including in its most prominent theories, to account for the apparent individual differences in crime. Nonetheless, there is considerable conceptual and empirical heterogeneity relating to these individual differences, and efforts to integrate different perspectives are currently lacking. I argue that the different approaches can usefully be integrated under the umbrella of the personality concept and that the field of criminology would benefit from more explicitly and systematically incorporating personality into its theories and research. Studies linking personality traits to crime, in turn, show that diverse findings can be boiled down to three key criminogenic characteristics—low morality, shortsightedness, and negative affectivity—that provide a parsimonious account of individual differences in crime. Future research should draw on the concept of personality to foster theoretical and empirical integration and eventually solve the puzzle of who engages in crime and why.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42848911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Patrick Lussier, Evan McCuish, Elizabeth L. Jeglic
Since the late 1930s, laws and policies based on assumptions about high rates of sexual recidivism have been enacted to respond to individuals who perpetrated sexual offenses. The first sex offender laws in the United States and Canada were quite similar. Since then, the two countries have diverged. More recent American policies have included the enactment of public registration and notification laws and postsentence civil commitment laws. Canadian policies reaffirming rehabilitation were criticized by various groups for being too lenient. Little has been done to monitor the evolution of sexual recidivism rates, including effects, if any, of significant policy changes. The lack of centralized databases in Canada and the United States for monitoring recidivism rates over time is a major reason. In lieu of that, a systematic review and meta-analysis were used to examine 227 Canadian and 399 American estimations of sexual recidivism among 388,994 perpetrators of sexual offenses. Weighted pooled estimates of sexual recidivism rates were investigated between 1940 and 2019. Sexual recidivism rates reported in American studies have been low and dropping since the 1970s, well before enactment of public registration and notification laws. A more pronounced drop was observed in Canadian studies despite the absence of public registration and notification laws.
{"title":"Against All Odds: The Unexplained Sexual Recidivism Drop in the United States and Canada","authors":"Patrick Lussier, Evan McCuish, Elizabeth L. Jeglic","doi":"10.1086/727028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727028","url":null,"abstract":"Since the late 1930s, laws and policies based on assumptions about high rates of sexual recidivism have been enacted to respond to individuals who perpetrated sexual offenses. The first sex offender laws in the United States and Canada were quite similar. Since then, the two countries have diverged. More recent American policies have included the enactment of public registration and notification laws and postsentence civil commitment laws. Canadian policies reaffirming rehabilitation were criticized by various groups for being too lenient. Little has been done to monitor the evolution of sexual recidivism rates, including effects, if any, of significant policy changes. The lack of centralized databases in Canada and the United States for monitoring recidivism rates over time is a major reason. In lieu of that, a systematic review and meta-analysis were used to examine 227 Canadian and 399 American estimations of sexual recidivism among 388,994 perpetrators of sexual offenses. Weighted pooled estimates of sexual recidivism rates were investigated between 1940 and 2019. Sexual recidivism rates reported in American studies have been low and dropping since the 1970s, well before enactment of public registration and notification laws. A more pronounced drop was observed in Canadian studies despite the absence of public registration and notification laws.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136019781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Whites have been afraid of Black people since “20 or so” were “purchased” in Jamestown, the first permanent British colony, in 1619. Southern Whites’ fears of racial insurrections and wars pervaded American politics through the Civil War. For nearly a century afterward, southern and many other Whites feared economic and social competition from Black people and believed they were inferior human beings. Since the 1960s, most Whites have ceased believing in inherent Black inferiority but have continued to oppose integration of schools and housing and exaggeratedly feared Black criminals. Two widespread earlier practices, vigilantism and lynching, although in retrospect reviled, have modern equivalents that target Black people. Police use of the “third degree,” curbside punishment, and brutal prisons were for long acceptable to fearful and angry White citizens, just as racial profiling, police violence, and extreme punishment disparities are in our time. Call that “delegated vigilantism.” White citizens no longer themselves capture and kill alleged wrongdoers but, not so different, majorities have for a half century supported policies that authorize or mandate routine use of unprecedentedly severe punishments that ruin lives. Call that “less-than-lethal lynching.”
{"title":"Delegated Vigilantism and Less-than-Lethal Lynching in Twenty-First-Century America","authors":"M. Tonry","doi":"10.1086/726880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/726880","url":null,"abstract":"Whites have been afraid of Black people since “20 or so” were “purchased” in Jamestown, the first permanent British colony, in 1619. Southern Whites’ fears of racial insurrections and wars pervaded American politics through the Civil War. For nearly a century afterward, southern and many other Whites feared economic and social competition from Black people and believed they were inferior human beings. Since the 1960s, most Whites have ceased believing in inherent Black inferiority but have continued to oppose integration of schools and housing and exaggeratedly feared Black criminals. Two widespread earlier practices, vigilantism and lynching, although in retrospect reviled, have modern equivalents that target Black people. Police use of the “third degree,” curbside punishment, and brutal prisons were for long acceptable to fearful and angry White citizens, just as racial profiling, police violence, and extreme punishment disparities are in our time. Call that “delegated vigilantism.” White citizens no longer themselves capture and kill alleged wrongdoers but, not so different, majorities have for a half century supported policies that authorize or mandate routine use of unprecedentedly severe punishments that ruin lives. Call that “less-than-lethal lynching.”","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43430043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Virtual reality (VR) technology offers unique and as yet largely untapped potential for criminology. It can address problems that have traditionally plagued the field, provide an ecologically valid alternative for conventional research methods, and create novel possibilities for theory testing, and it allows for the study of phenomena that are difficult to research in the real world for ethical, safety, or practical reasons. This essay reviews the budding research literature using VR in criminogenic contexts, as well as relevant research from other disciplines, and explains the technology’s basic features, current limitations, and ethical challenges. It concludes that within the foreseeable future, VR may become the criminological equivalent of the petri dish, offering the possibility to study the unfolding of highly complex behavioral processes in very detailed ways and help achieve step changes in our understanding of crime.
{"title":"Virtual Reality for Criminologists: A Road Map","authors":"Jean-Louis van Gelder","doi":"10.1086/726691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/726691","url":null,"abstract":"Virtual reality (VR) technology offers unique and as yet largely untapped potential for criminology. It can address problems that have traditionally plagued the field, provide an ecologically valid alternative for conventional research methods, and create novel possibilities for theory testing, and it allows for the study of phenomena that are difficult to research in the real world for ethical, safety, or practical reasons. This essay reviews the budding research literature using VR in criminogenic contexts, as well as relevant research from other disciplines, and explains the technology’s basic features, current limitations, and ethical challenges. It concludes that within the foreseeable future, VR may become the criminological equivalent of the petri dish, offering the possibility to study the unfolding of highly complex behavioral processes in very detailed ways and help achieve step changes in our understanding of crime.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48521670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Guardianship, a key element of informal social control, is central to two influential theories in criminology and sociology: routine activity theory and collective efficacy. A variety of underlying mechanisms inform individual choices to serve as a guardian. Two distinct forms, reactive and proactive, should be distinguished. In reactive guardianship, an individual or a small group responds to an ongoing criminal incident or a potentially harmful situation. People balance prosocial motivation to help others against safety and social costs associated with intervening. The psychological literature on bystander intervention and prosociality, along with research on personal safety, physical prowess, and social and moral attitudes, can illuminate the complex decision-making processes underlying reactive guardianship. In proactive guardianship, community members come together to improve public safety, such as by organizing block watches. It requires ongoing participation rather than a one-shot reactive decision to intervene. A challenge is to overcome the “free rider” problem of individuals who benefit from improved public safety but do not contribute to it. Collective efficacy theory and the economics literature on public goods provide frameworks for identifying factors that influence individual choices to contribute. These include willingness to contribute, knowledge that others are contributing, and active social approval of contributors and disapproval of noncontributors.
{"title":"Collective Guardianship, Reactive and Proactive","authors":"D. Nagin, Shaina Herman, Tim Barnum","doi":"10.1086/726140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/726140","url":null,"abstract":"Guardianship, a key element of informal social control, is central to two influential theories in criminology and sociology: routine activity theory and collective efficacy. A variety of underlying mechanisms inform individual choices to serve as a guardian. Two distinct forms, reactive and proactive, should be distinguished. In reactive guardianship, an individual or a small group responds to an ongoing criminal incident or a potentially harmful situation. People balance prosocial motivation to help others against safety and social costs associated with intervening. The psychological literature on bystander intervention and prosociality, along with research on personal safety, physical prowess, and social and moral attitudes, can illuminate the complex decision-making processes underlying reactive guardianship. In proactive guardianship, community members come together to improve public safety, such as by organizing block watches. It requires ongoing participation rather than a one-shot reactive decision to intervene. A challenge is to overcome the “free rider” problem of individuals who benefit from improved public safety but do not contribute to it. Collective efficacy theory and the economics literature on public goods provide frameworks for identifying factors that influence individual choices to contribute. These include willingness to contribute, knowledge that others are contributing, and active social approval of contributors and disapproval of noncontributors.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42228611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Prisons disproportionately confine people who have extensive histories of illicit drug use and tend to hold groups of people who continue using drugs, albeit in different forms and amounts. Prisoners’ desire or physical compulsion to use illicit drugs fundamentally structures almost all aspects of everyday prison life. This extends to individuals who do not use illicit drugs and is felt even in prisons in which drugs are not readily available. Architectural features of prisons and logistical regimes are designed in ways meant to curtail the drug trade. Nonetheless, prisoners persistently strategize about how to acquire, transport, and consume hard drugs such as opioids (heroin and fentanyl), methamphetamine, cocaine, and alcohol. Prisoners display considerable ingenuity in modifying the prison’s physical environment to advance their drug-related agendas.
{"title":"The Everyday Life of Drugs in Prison","authors":"Sandra M. Bucerius, Kevin D. Haggerty, L. Berardi","doi":"10.1086/726139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/726139","url":null,"abstract":"Prisons disproportionately confine people who have extensive histories of illicit drug use and tend to hold groups of people who continue using drugs, albeit in different forms and amounts. Prisoners’ desire or physical compulsion to use illicit drugs fundamentally structures almost all aspects of everyday prison life. This extends to individuals who do not use illicit drugs and is felt even in prisons in which drugs are not readily available. Architectural features of prisons and logistical regimes are designed in ways meant to curtail the drug trade. Nonetheless, prisoners persistently strategize about how to acquire, transport, and consume hard drugs such as opioids (heroin and fentanyl), methamphetamine, cocaine, and alcohol. Prisoners display considerable ingenuity in modifying the prison’s physical environment to advance their drug-related agendas.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44424170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Collateral consequences of criminal convictions such as occupational restrictions, ineligibility for welfare benefits, and disenfranchisement from voting have drastic and long-lasting effects. They hinder successful reintegration into society of people with criminal records and undermine efforts to reduce recidivism. In recent years, awareness that they are counterproductive and often undermine public safety has increased. There is growing recognition of their detrimental effects on individuals, families, communities, and the economy. Non- and bipartisan efforts are underway to change these laws and policies, mostly at the state level, but many changes so far have been limited in ambition and scope. More, bolder, and more comprehensive changes are needed. Reforms should not only reduce the sheer number of collateral restrictions and eliminate or mitigate their adverse effects but also incorporate awareness of their existence and knowledge of their effects into the day-to-day operations of the criminal justice system.
{"title":"Collateral Consequences and Criminal Justice Reform: Successes and Challenges","authors":"A. Corda","doi":"10.1086/725720","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725720","url":null,"abstract":"Collateral consequences of criminal convictions such as occupational restrictions, ineligibility for welfare benefits, and disenfranchisement from voting have drastic and long-lasting effects. They hinder successful reintegration into society of people with criminal records and undermine efforts to reduce recidivism. In recent years, awareness that they are counterproductive and often undermine public safety has increased. There is growing recognition of their detrimental effects on individuals, families, communities, and the economy. Non- and bipartisan efforts are underway to change these laws and policies, mostly at the state level, but many changes so far have been limited in ambition and scope. More, bolder, and more comprehensive changes are needed. Reforms should not only reduce the sheer number of collateral restrictions and eliminate or mitigate their adverse effects but also incorporate awareness of their existence and knowledge of their effects into the day-to-day operations of the criminal justice system.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48188531","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：