The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison

THERE IS A COMPLETE REVIEW

STARTING ON PAGE 20

The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison

Chapter 1-Crime Control in America

Crime

what is crime?

action/ omission constituting an offense

if not illegal, then maybe evil/ shameful. wrong (-language-)

may be prosecuted by the state, punished by the law

examples:

threats, harassment

sexual assault

domestic violence

youth dating violence

child abuse/ neglect

elder abuse/ neglect

gang violence

hate crimes

impaired driving

breaking and entering

unlawful possession (drugs, weapons, animals)

white-collar crime

Foundational theories of crime

EDurkheim- crime serves important functions for a society

KMarx- Criminal justice public policies serve the rich/powerful in society

KErikson- institutions intended to deter crime contribute to its existence

RQuinney- “reality” of crime is created in the development of the concept of “criminal” (so, “criminals” created the agents of the law)

JReiman- criminal justice system serves the powerful by its failure to reduce crime

Reiman on crime, criminal justice

criminal justice policies promote (not reduce) crime

deflect middle-america’s discontent from upper classes

maintain image: crime= threat from the poor

“fight crime” only enough to sustain it, make it look real/ “legitimate”

success= failure (if we actually fix the problem, ex criminals wouldn’t really have a purpose in life)

poverty as a source of crime

lower-SES v. middle/upper-SES (re: the same crimes)

get “proof” of the treat

Pyrrhic model of the CJ system

pyrrhic victory

king pyrrhus (epirus) v. roman

Mil victory with great costs in troops and resources, amounts to a defeat

“hallow victory” “victory not worth winning”

Pyrrhic defeat theory (reiman)

failure of CJ system yields benefits, amounts to a victory

despite crime escalation/ decline in rent years

crime must appear a certain way

The CJ system

functions a particular way to:

create, reinforce particular world view

maintain what is (is not) dangerous

maintain who is (and is not) a threat

Eg. 1980-1990s “homicide epidemic”

image: young men with guns

crack cocaine into inner cities

large influx of handguns into inner cities

State/federal prisions: 1969 (197,136)v. 1999 (1,496,629)

$1.2 billion (zero sum: assistance, ed, med)

zero sum: someones win is someones loss

yet, private…..

almost all prison are privately owned

who benefits?

Why does crime persist?

are we too soft?

724/100k (RFSFR, S. Africa; excludes probation and parole)

a cost of modern life?

death, taxes and crime

but, crime varies by rate and types across commentaries

youth of the nation?

2003: persons 15-24 = 14.2% US pop, 41% of people arrested for crime

but, cultural… norms…

who gets the credit for crime reduction?

tough on crime policies?

diligent police officeR?

William Spelman: quadrupling people in prison = 1/4 crime redox

stabilization of drug trade?

unemployment programs?

education programs?

medical/health programs?

Sources of crime = causes of crime?

poverty

25% unemployment, 25+% underemployment (pt, underpaid)

prison

recidivism = 70% prison population

change to commit crime again

inadequate reintegration programs

weakens informal social control outside prison

guns

a paperweight

bullets don’t discriminate

drugs

as motivator (inebriated; for $; systematic via crime/violence/corruption)

SES preferences, SES recourses (to avoid the law)

Informal social controls - influential relationships who affect the way you act in society

family