The Roots of Punitiveness in a Democracy
In contrast to one's normal conception of punitiveness as inconsistent with the principles of democracy, the political appeal associated with being 'tough on crime' can become very tempting when the public's concern about crime is aroused. For at least the 50 years from the mid-1...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Print Article |
| Language: | Undetermined language |
| Published: |
2007
|
| In: |
Journal of Scandinavian studies in criminology and crime prevention
Year: 2007, Volume: 8, Pages: 2-16 |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Keywords: |
| Summary: | In contrast to one's normal conception of punitiveness as inconsistent with the principles of democracy, the political appeal associated with being 'tough on crime' can become very tempting when the public's concern about crime is aroused. For at least the 50 years from the mid-1920s to the mid-1970s, the incarceration rate in the US closely followed a stable pattern of 110 per hundred thousand population under the homeostatic control of the criminal justice system. Once crime became an issue of major public concern, incarceration rate increased about 6-8% per year, and is now the highest in the world, almost five times the previously stable rate. Alternative measures of punitiveness are considered, including expected time served per crime or per conviction; the US is also shown to be punitive on these measures, especially for the less serious crimes that have greater room for discretion. Since the political process is limited largely to changes in sentencing policy, those increases were reflected primarily in increasing the probability of commitment to prison and time served, and especially the latter more recently, and not due to more crime or better policing. In comparing incarceration rate and recent trends in that rate across other democracies, we find that upward trends predominate and are greatest in countries with the lowest initial rates |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1404-3858 |
