Folks,
I haven't discussed it yet but I am past my first year in earning a BS in criminal justice. Once I have that in hand I intend to go for a law degree.
For the most part the CJ classes have been fairly boring, until a recent assignment in a class on criminal motivations came along, and I was asked to do a paper commenting on this:
http://courses.washington.edu/pbafhall/514/514 Readings/tyler justice.pdf
What this is about is a theory being proposed by a group of criminologists and psychologists called "procedural justice". Tom Tyler PhD has spent his whole life on this more or less, and he has a bit of a following. See also:
http://www.psych.nyu.edu/tyler/lab/
http://www.psych.nyu.edu/tyler/
I intend to see just how much traction this guy and his followers are getting. I'm not even 100% sure he's the lead guy on this yet, but if not he's pretty deep in.
What Tyler and company have is a theory that says people being sentenced in the criminal justice system have a much higher rate of "acceptance" of the corrective action (and therefore a lower rate of being a repeat offender) if they see the criminal justice system and process that was applied to them as "fair".
If this is correct, and we can prove it is correct, it is really a manifesto calling for top-to-bottom reforms of the US criminal justice system. As some examples of concepts that follow logically from this core work:
* Everything law enforcement does that even *appears* biased will tend to increase crime. That includes "stop and frisk" the way NYC practices it and "driving while black" types of police activities, and in my opinion it also includes obvious CCW discrimination.
* It is also a very bad thing to let politically and/or financially powerful criminals get away with crimes on the basis of their wealth or power - a classic example is Jon Corzine's nearly $2bil in fraud while CEO of MFGlobal and his total escape due to his political and financial ties (former Governor and Senator from NJ, former Goldman-Sachs CEO).
* Victimless crimes that are seen as wrongful crimes also cause feelings of resentment in the people sentenced and the people that they know.
Put another way: if somebody is sentenced to two years for a crime, what you want them thinking afterwards is "well I screwed up, better get my act together" as opposed to "I WILL HAVE MY REVENGE YOU %$#!%^@^%#$". If any of us got busted for illegal carry in, say, New York City where the main reason we're popped is because we're not Donald Trump or Howard Stern (known holders of rare NYC CCW permits) then we're going to be far more angry than personally committed to self reform. I know where my head would be at.
Attached find the paper I wrote that scored a perfect 300 out of 300 in my class a few days ago. It directly goes into the CCW situation in California as Tyler's research impacts it. If we can enlist the help of Tyler and his people and get them to say that obvious CCW discrimination is a bad thing, that could be useful in court filings on discretionary CCW.
I haven't discussed it yet but I am past my first year in earning a BS in criminal justice. Once I have that in hand I intend to go for a law degree.
For the most part the CJ classes have been fairly boring, until a recent assignment in a class on criminal motivations came along, and I was asked to do a paper commenting on this:
http://courses.washington.edu/pbafhall/514/514 Readings/tyler justice.pdf
What this is about is a theory being proposed by a group of criminologists and psychologists called "procedural justice". Tom Tyler PhD has spent his whole life on this more or less, and he has a bit of a following. See also:
http://www.psych.nyu.edu/tyler/lab/
http://www.psych.nyu.edu/tyler/
I intend to see just how much traction this guy and his followers are getting. I'm not even 100% sure he's the lead guy on this yet, but if not he's pretty deep in.
What Tyler and company have is a theory that says people being sentenced in the criminal justice system have a much higher rate of "acceptance" of the corrective action (and therefore a lower rate of being a repeat offender) if they see the criminal justice system and process that was applied to them as "fair".
If this is correct, and we can prove it is correct, it is really a manifesto calling for top-to-bottom reforms of the US criminal justice system. As some examples of concepts that follow logically from this core work:
* Everything law enforcement does that even *appears* biased will tend to increase crime. That includes "stop and frisk" the way NYC practices it and "driving while black" types of police activities, and in my opinion it also includes obvious CCW discrimination.
* It is also a very bad thing to let politically and/or financially powerful criminals get away with crimes on the basis of their wealth or power - a classic example is Jon Corzine's nearly $2bil in fraud while CEO of MFGlobal and his total escape due to his political and financial ties (former Governor and Senator from NJ, former Goldman-Sachs CEO).
* Victimless crimes that are seen as wrongful crimes also cause feelings of resentment in the people sentenced and the people that they know.
Put another way: if somebody is sentenced to two years for a crime, what you want them thinking afterwards is "well I screwed up, better get my act together" as opposed to "I WILL HAVE MY REVENGE YOU %$#!%^@^%#$". If any of us got busted for illegal carry in, say, New York City where the main reason we're popped is because we're not Donald Trump or Howard Stern (known holders of rare NYC CCW permits) then we're going to be far more angry than personally committed to self reform. I know where my head would be at.
Attached find the paper I wrote that scored a perfect 300 out of 300 in my class a few days ago. It directly goes into the CCW situation in California as Tyler's research impacts it. If we can enlist the help of Tyler and his people and get them to say that obvious CCW discrimination is a bad thing, that could be useful in court filings on discretionary CCW.