Review of Developments in Crime and Crime Control Research: German Studies on Victims, Offenders, and the Public.

1992 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-179
Author(s):  
No authorship indicated
1992 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 697
Author(s):  
William J. Chambliss ◽  
Klaus Sessar ◽  
Hans-Jurgen Kerner

Author(s):  
Nick Tilley

Crime problems largely result from opportunities, temptations, and provocations that have been provided to offenders unintentionally by those pursuing other private interests. There is a widespread notion that the state and its agencies can and ought to take full responsibility for crime control and that there is, therefore, nothing that nonstate actors can or need to do. In practice, there is little that the state can do directly to address the opportunities, temptations, and provocations for crime; but where crime control responsibilities have been accepted in the private sector, successful measures to reduce opportunities and temptations have been devised and adopted, preventing many crimes and reducing costs that would otherwise fall on the state as well as on victims. This article sets out the reasons why a shift in responsibility for crime prevention from the public to private sector can produce patterns of crime control that are both effective and socially desirable, albeit important roles remain for the public sector in stimulating and supporting such measures.


Author(s):  
Gabrielle Watson

In this chapter, there is a shift in focus to the statutory power of the police to stop and search, the controversial status of which is not new. Less well documented, however, is that stop and search is highly relevant to the study of respect, since the practice tends to undermine the value, if not render it conspicuously absent. The chapter is organised as follows. The opening section explores how we might sharpen our critique of stop and search by framing it in terms of respect. Stop and search—a common form of adversarial contact between the police and the public—taps into deep and ingrained tensions between preventive policing, the exercise of coercive state authority, due process, and crime control. Among the most incisive criticisms of the power are its disproportionate and discriminatory exercise in relation to minority ethnic groups, its role in eroding police legitimacy, and the invasion of privacy and violation of bodily integrity necessitated by the search itself. The next section assesses three prominent proposals for the reform of stop and search—procedural justice training for police officers, tighter legal regulation of the power, and abolition—in terms of respect.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 533-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Ebert ◽  
Wenjie Liao ◽  
Emily P. Estrada

Despite several widely covered scandals involving the role of for-profit corporations in administering immigration policy, the privatization of immigration control continues apace with the criminalization of immigration. How does this practice sustain its legitimacy among the public amid so much controversy? Recent studies on the criminalization of immigration suggest that supporters would explicitly vilify immigrants to defend the privatization of immigration control. Research on racialized social control, on the other hand, implies that proponents would avoid explicit racism and vilification and instead rely on subtler narratives to validate the practice. Drawing on a qualitative analysis of over 600 frames derived from nearly 200 news media articles spanning over 20 years, we find that journalists and their sources rarely vilify immigrants to justify the privatization of immigration control. Instead, they frame the privatization of immigration detention as a normal component of population management and an integral part of the U.S. economy through what we call the apathy strategy—a pattern of void in which not only the systematic oppression of immigrants is underplayed, immigrant themselves also become invisible.


Author(s):  
Maria E. Fernandez ◽  
Patricia Dolan Mullen ◽  
Jennifer Leeman ◽  
Timothy J. Walker ◽  
Cam Escoffery

There are many evidence-based interventions, cancer control practices, programs, treatments, and clinical practice guidelines across cancer control and prevention topic areas that have great potential for decreasing the cancer burden. Nevertheless, challenges in identifying evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that match the needs of community and practice settings, adapting EBIs for new populations and contexts, and implementing EBIs in real-world settings limit the public health impact of cancer control research and its products. This chapter provides an introduction to existing EBIs for cancer control and provides examples of different types of EBIs across the cancer continuum. It highlights issues related to the identification of EBIs, including the evaluation of EBI resources. It also describes processes that can be used to enhance the development, adaptation, and implementation of evidence-based cancer control interventions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document