Criminal Violence Patterns Causes and Prevention Riedel and

Criminal Violence: Patterns, Causes, and Prevention Riedel and Welsh, Ch. 15 “Prevention and Punishment: A Delicate Balance”

OUTLINE n CJ APPROACHES n CJ Goals n n n n Deterrence Rehabilitation Incapacitation Restoration Examples: Death Penalty, Three Strikes The Limits of Punishment PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACHES n n Multilevel Risk Approach OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy Community-Based Approaches Blueprints for Violence Prevention

Deterrence n n General Deterrence refers to the inhibiting effect that punishment has on potential offenders in the public. Specific Deterrence seeks to prevent future criminal acts only by the individual punished. n n Evidence: A National Academy of Sciences panel found that studies did not strongly support deterrent effects. Where effects on crime rates were found, they were stronger where certainty was increased (probability of arrest and incarceration) rather than severity. Problems n Most research has been based on official statistics (UCR). n Many studies are unable to eliminate other factors that could account for observed effects (e. g. , biases in measures, regional variations in data collection and reporting, and other factors that might influence crime rates). Stafford & Warr: Need to examine-- Both direct and indirect experience, with n Punishment and punishment avoidance n

Rehabilitation n n Rehabilitation refers to any postconviction treatment aimed at reducing an offender's future likelihood of committing crimes. Evidence: A National Academy of Sciences panel concluded that we know very little about what works or what does not. The best studies show that some types of treatment work for some types of offenders, at least some of the time. Problems 1. Evaluation methodologies have often been inadequate, limiting conclusions from research. 2. Few programs are available to prisoners (e. g. , many want drug treatment but can't get it). 3. Many inmates refuse to participate. 4. Inmates are often not allowed to participate for security reasons.

Incapacitation n Incapacitation: an offender is restrained from committing any further crimes against the public, at least during the period he/she is confined n Selective: attempts to incapacitate worst offenders (e. g. , career criminals) n General: attempts to reduce crime by locking up offenders for as long as possible Evidence: difficult to evaluate n Can’t control for many factors that influence crime rates. Some claim that incapacitation effects are evidenced by recent downturns in violent crime. Problems 1. Selective: we can't predict with any accuracy who is likely to become a career criminal until after he/she has already amassed a lengthy criminal career. 2. General: would strain criminal justice resources (e. g. , overcrowded jails and prisons). Expenses would far exceed available resources.

CJ Example #1: Death Penalty Both death sentences and executions are disproportionately likely for African Americans, given their representation in the general population (about 12% of the U. S. population). Arguments in favor of the death penalty n 1) public support n 2) deterrence n 3) retribution n 4) cost-effectiveness Arguments against the death penalty n 1) improper use of state power n 2) racial discrimination n 3) possibility of errors n

CJ Example #2: Three Strikes Laws n n n Example: California's law calls for a doubling of the prison sentence for a second felony, and for a sentence of 25 years to life for a third conviction. The law covers 500 felonies, including many nonviolent offenses (e. g. , petty theft, burglary). About 85% of offenders sentenced under the “three strikes'' laws were involved in non-violent crimes (e. g. , marijuana possession). Problems: poorly defined target populations, discrimination, lack of acceptance by prosecutors, lack of prison space.

Public Health Approaches Multilevel Risk Approach n We need to examine the interactions of individual, institutional, social structural, and cultural factors related to violence. n National Academy of Sciences Panel on the Understanding and Causes of Violent Behavior n n n We have many promising directions for intervention and prevention to pursue from research findings, but Better measures and more controlled research (esp. evaluations of promising efforts) are needed to identify causes and opportunities for prevention. There are multiple options for intervening, and a much greater need for interagency collaboration.

OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy Risk factors associated with violent juvenile offending: n Individual risk factors: pregnancy and delivery complications; hyperactivity; concentration problems; restlessness; risk-taking behavior; early aggressiveness; early involvement in other forms of antisocial behavior, and beliefs and attitudes favorable to deviant or antisocial behavior n Family factors: delinquent siblings; criminal behavior of parents; harsh discipline; physical abuse or neglect; poor family-management practices; low levels of parent-child involvement; high levels of family conflict; parental attitudes favorable to violence; and separation of the child from family n School factors: academic failure; low commitment to education; truancy; early dropout; frequent changes of schools; association with delinquent peers; and gang membership n Community or neighborhood factors: high population density; high residential mobility; high poverty rate; availability of weapons and drugs; and a high rate of adult involvement in crime

OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy: 5 Key Objectives Provide immediate intervention and appropriate sanctions and treatment for delinquents (e. g. , graduated sanctions) 1. n Safe Futures: continuum of care for youths and their families (includes human service and juvenile justice systems, health, mental health, child welfare, education, police, probation, courts, and corrections) Prosecute serious, violent, chronic juvenile offenders in criminal court 2. n Includes waiver and transfer mechanisms that allow serious juvenile offenders to be tried as adults in criminal court Reduce youth involvement with guns, drugs, and gangs 3. n Partnerships to Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence attempts to strengthen linkages among community groups, schools, law enforcement, and the juvenile justice system. Provide opportunities for children and youth 4. n Includes mentoring, after-school activities, conflict resolution training, remedial education, and vocational education Breaking the cycle of violence by addressing youth victimization, abuse, and neglect 5. n Safe Kids/Safe Streets: strengthens the response of criminal and juvenile justice systems to child abuse and neglect.

Community-Based Approaches n Programs located in specific neighborhoods, designed and implemented mainly by nonprofit community groups rather than justice or social service agencies http: //www. phillyblueprint. com/index. cfm n Child and Family Resource Centers (1970 s): provided a wide range of services to families (e. g. , day care, tutoring, parenting skills, family counseling). n n Youth unemployment in high-crime communities n n The centers enhanced family functioning at very low cost, and they reduced delinquency by improving parentchild relations and school performance (U. S. General Accounting Office). Many of the better job-training programs (1960 -1970 s) were successful at reducing crime, improving earnings, and reducing long-term costs. But: If job training leads to dead-end jobs, illegal opportunities may become even more attractive to youths. Long-term community economic and social development must also be addressed.

Blueprints for Violence Prevention n n A comprehensive effort to provide communities with a set of programs whose effectiveness has been scientifically demonstrated The standards for effectiveness include four criteria: 1. An experimental or quasi-experimental design with random assignment or matched control group 2. Evidence of a statistically significant deterrent effect on delinquency, drug use, and/or violence 3. Replication in at least one additional site with demonstrated effects 4. Evidence that the deterrent effect was sustained for at least 1 year following treatment http: //www. colorado. edu/cspv/blueprints/

Conclusions n n Violence prevention in the U. S. has a promising but unpredictable future. To the degree that interventions can reasonably balance punishment and prevention and take a rational approach based upon existing and emerging knowledge, that promise may yet be realized. Much further research on risk factors and causes contributing to violence is needed, and more rigorous, valid evaluations of programs and policies are needed. In the absence of such information, untested assumptions and hunches will continue to drive critical policy decisions.