In 2017, Louisiana had the highest incarceration rate in the nation with 1,420 of every 100,000 adult males being placed in a state or local penitentiary. To address this issue, a series of criminal justice reforms were passed within the Louisiana legislature that released thousands of former offenders back into the community. The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand the attitudes, thoughts, and opinions of citizens in a single Louisiana city regarding ex-offender re-integration and disparities within the criminal justice system. March and Olsen's Rational Choice Institutionalism was used to explain how environment impacts individual perception and choices at the community and political level with policy implications. Data were obtained through interviews with 22 citizens from the selected city. Data were coded using a deductive iterative coding process, then subjected to thematic analysis. The findings indicated that the construction of perceptions on disparities within the criminal justice system and ex-offender reintegration was primarily formed through volunteerism, personal experiences, observations, conversations with others, exposure to different cultures, mass media, and family upbringing. Several factors were involved in residents formulating perceptions on the criminal justice system and ex-offender reintegration. These factors are embedded in the structures of mass media, community, political, educational, social, and economic systems. The results of this study may impact social change by informing policymakers about the necessity to construct policies focused on acknowledging and addressing current structural and systemic criminal justice policies that are respectful of the experiences and needs of restored citizens as well as citizens from all communities.

Gun violence is a problem in many communities across the United States that are characterized by poverty, and lack of quality education, yet little is known about the experiences of victims of gun violence in these places. The purpose of this phenomenological study was to better understand how people who have been victims of gun violence perceive problems and solutions associated with the production, distribution, and ownership of guns. Based on the theoretical framework of Rousseau's social contract theory, this study explored gun violence from the perspectives of 10 victims whose lives were directly or indirectly affected by gun violence to understand how victims perceive the obligations of government to the governed in terms of response to gun violence. Data from individual interviews were subjected to selective and open coding followed by a thematic analysis procedure. The key findings from this study revealed that gun violence victims were able to differentiate between the intended use of firearms and its abuse. The victims associated the abuse of firearms to deteriorating social factors. In accordance with the classic premise of the social contract theory, the victims thought that the fight against gun violence needed to be led by the affected communities. The results of this study demonstrated what appeared to be a new rendition of theory, that instead of challenging local authorities, the victims opted for a leadership-based collaborative approach to eradicate the underlying social weaknesses that lead to gun violence. The conclusions drawn from this study may provide insight into appropriate measures that can aid in social uplift among affected communities, such as modifications to existing gun control laws to promote safety and efficiency and citizen collaboration toward improved regulation.

For decades, research has consistently demonstrated that minorities are overrepresented in the prison population, yet relatively little is known about whether juror perceptions about race and criminal culpability may impact this problem in the United States. Using Hill's folk theory of race and racism as the theoretical foundation, this cross sectional study examined the relationship between perceptions of the race of the defendant and the verdicts to be handed down. Data were collected from a convenience sample of 25 people who self-reported having served on a jury or were eligible for jury service within the past 5 years in a southwest Georgia community. The instrument used was original and designed to capture basic demographics of the respondents and perceptions about traits of the criminal defendants and their criminal culpability. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to examine whether participants' perceptions of race, income, and education of the defendant were statistically associated. Income and educational ranges were assigned to the defendants. Findings revealed 76% of respondents believed that baggy clothes are predictors of criminality. Furthermore, 72% of participants associated baggy pants with African Americans. It is possible that a correlation exists between associating African Americans with baggy pants and baggy clothes with criminality. Chi square results indicate that participants' beliefs of whether defendants were 'likely or extremely likely' to commit criminal offenses based on race, education level, and income of the defendants were not statistically significant. These findings may be important to court systems in terms of better understanding race relations in the United States as it relates to justice system equality.

Employer Attitudes and Beliefs About Hiring Post-Incarcerated Offenders in Mississippi by Ora Starks MS, Criminal Justice, 1999 BS, Criminal Justice,1994 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Human Services Program Criminal Justice Specialization Walden University May 2018

No description available.

This study is about the meaning of tolerance in relation to people's reactions to crime and disorder. I was drawn to this topic by curiosity about why people respond differently to local problems with crime and disorder. Some people choose to tackle crime, whilst others do not. This is quite remarkable given the fact that crime is considered by many to be an undesirable and unwanted attribute of our local communities. Crime can penetrate deep into the lives of people. We know that crime - or the threat of it, may affect our quality of life, the communities in which we live, the environments in which we work and the places in which our children play. As Garland subtly states: For most people crime is no longer an aberration or an unexpected, abnormal event. Instead, the threat of crime has become a routine part of modern consciousness, an everyday risk to be assessed and managed in much the same way that we deal with road traffic - another modern danger which has been routinized and 'normalized' over time (Garland, 1996: 446). As high levels of crime and problems with disorder are now an inherent feature of our society it is argued by some critics that the government has lost the fight against crime. Instead of relying upon state agencies, such as the police and courts to manage crime, the government has adopted a relatively new approach in prompting non-state agencies and organisations to shoulder some of the responSibility and take action (see for instance, Garland, 1996). The rationale behind this strategy is that the state cannot counter crime alone. Garland argues that this method of governing crime characterises a 'responsibilization strategy' and the language that is used by the state is indicative of this: Its key phrases are terms such as 'partnership', 'inter-agency cooperation', 'the multi-agency approach', 'activating communities', creating 'active citizens', 'help for self-help'. Its primary concern is to devolve responSibility for crime prevention on to agencies, organizations and individuals which are quite outside the state and to persuade them to act appropriately (Garland, 1996: 452). As a result in the past decade or so, there has been a noticeable shift in responsibility for the reduction of crime from the state to local communities. Legislation has been passed to encourage different groups and organisations in a community to work together so that crime may be more effectively tackled. The Crime and Disorder Act places responsibility upon various agencies to act as a collective force to tackle crime and related issues. People have also been encouraged to act collectively and set up self-help groups and crime prevention schemes in their communities. A popular example of this is Neighbourhood Watch which as a national scheme has the political backing of the state. Indeed, for quite some time ordinary citizens have been expected to perform 'quasi-police' functions themselves and assume an increased responsibility for the management of crime (Miers, 1992). The public appear to have responded well to this call for assistance by the Government to tackle crime, for there has been a decisive movement towards reducing the opportunities for crime. People appear to be more than willing to embrace any measure or method which may limit the risks of crime, that is if the booming private security industry is anything to go by. In reality the public appear to have little option but to 'manage' high levels of crime and the threat that this poses to them. Given this current climate I felt that it was an appropriate time to look closely at how people typically respond to crime and disorder in their communities. It would be interesting to discover the different kinds of actions they take in response to criminal incidents, and to understand what motivates them to react. However, even though crime or the risk of crime is ubiquitous, people do differ in their willingness to react to crime and disorder problems. These differences persist even at the community level. Whereas residents of one community are prepared to tackle crime and disorder problems, residents from another community may not be so inclined and prefer instead to shy away from such problems. There may be a multitude of reasons for this. Perhaps people's reactions are connected to their tolerance or intolerance towards different kinds of criminal activity and these in turn to the sort of environment and community in which they live. These kinds of issues about reactions to crime are intriguing and of importance since we live in a society which has yet to counter and control the tide of deviant behaviour. The reaction of the public to deviant behaviour attracted the attention of the sociologist Lemert (1951) some fifty years ago. Lemert then suggested that a concept known as the 'tolerance quotient' may be useful to compare how residents from different communities respond to increases in crime, although this concept (originally formulated by Van Vechten, 1940), is quite complex for it is expressed as a mathematical ratio. However, there is some value in drawing attention to it at this early stage for it had a part to play in directing this research. Lemert suggested that residents of a particular locality accept a certain amount of deviant behaviour, but there is some 'critical point' at which they will no longer accept more crime. When residents decide to respond to the deviant behaviour this constitutes the critical point or 'threshold' in the tolerance quotient. The idea of the tolerance 'threshold' raises some challenging issues about the reactions of people to crime. For instance, the tolerance 'threshold' for collective action may vary across communities. The notion of a 'threshold' may be applicable to the reactions of individuals to crime. There may even be instances where people's tolerance to crime changes, and if so, there may be particular reasons for this. Perhaps people's tolerance and their reactions to crime are predictable. The nature of these questions suggest that the concept of tolerance could be complex. This study will seek to determine whether or not this is the case. The aims of the research are to discover: (1) What factors affect the tolerance of individuals or collectives to crime or disorder? (2) What are the differences, if any, in the factors that affect individual and collective tolerance? (3) Under what circumstances does the tolerance of an individual or community change or vary? (4) How does the concept of tolerance relate, if at all, to reactions? (5) What kind of effects can reactions to crime and disorder have upon individuals and communities? To examine the relationship between tolerance and reactions to crime, a working model will be devised. The construction of a theoretical model is a challenging part of the thesis. It is the task of this study to examine whether the model stands up to empirical testing. In order to do this it is necessary to learn about how people respond to crime, and why they choose to do so. The suitability of the subject matter for community based research is for me one of the most attractive parts of the thesis. It is important to hear what people think about crime and disorder issues in their area. There is also a sense of discovery for people if they have to consider (perhaps for the first time) what they would do in response to certain kinds of crime and disorder. As people need to identify with an incident before they can respond to it, the focus is upon crimes and acts of disorder which are prevalent in our society. As a result the concern of this research is with the reactions of ordinary people to ordinary crimes. Since there appear to be good reasons to compare the reactions of residents from different areas, the fieldwork for this research will be conducted in several communities. As a result of engaging in an empirical 'adventure' it is hoped that the mystery and intrigue that drew me to the topic of tolerance and reactions to crime will be uncovered.

No description available.

This doctoral thesis is intended to demonstrate that my research, scholarship and publications have made a significant and coherent contribution to the development of criminology as a popular discipline in the higher education sector. My growing interest and research into the relationship between the media and crime and criminal justice is reflected in the structuring of this thesis, with the major substantive sections being examples of my work in this area (chapters 2 to 8). This interest has also been driven by an essentially realist position and belief that crime is a real issue for both people and society. This submission consists of a brief contextualizing introduction to my research, scholarship, writing and publication in relation to my own career in higher education and to the development of the discipline of criminology plus a number of chapters containing specific examples from my publications. The final section continues from the commentary provided in the introduction, reviewing the body of my work in relation to my academic career generally as it moved from sociology to criminology as that discipline emerged and grew within the higher education sector. Here I have attempted to summarise my theoretical stance; this is not a straightforward task as I have been involved in scholarship, research, writing and publishing in sociology and criminology for well over thirty years, as well as teaching and developing courses and programmes at undergraduate and postgraduate levels; and it is difficult to step outside of this work to envisage it as an academic journey. Nevertheless, I feel in recent years that my work has come to represent almost a complete circle, or at the least to have a recognisable path and pattern, which is really the impetus behind this submission. The submission is based around my more recent scholarship and writing on the media, crime and criminal justice; this work is a development and to some extent culmination of my academic career as a researcher, scholar, lecturer and writer. Although I have written quite widely on social theory, sociology and particularly criminology and criminal justice, my more recent research and writing has been to examine and analyse the importance of the media’s representation of crime and justice. In doing this, and in the body of my writing and publishing, there has been what might be termed a theoretical style or thread which I feel indicates a certain coherence and also provides a cogent case for this doctoral submission. Overall, my argument is that my work generally and as evidenced in this submission particularly, has helped to conceptualise how media representations have played a key role in helping develop a greater understanding of crime, criminals and justice. Furthermore, and while adopting an objective and critical approach, how such representations deserve to be accepted as real and therefore legitimate and important areas of examination. I have tried to argue that the academic study of crime and justice, in all its forms, should take account of the importance of the media, both historically and throughout its development, in helping an understanding of the extent and form of, and also the explanations for, crime and the control of it.

<p> Antiquities are looted from archaeological sites across the world, seemingly more often in areas of armed conflict. Previously, the relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict has been assessed with qualitative case studies and journalistic evidence?due to a lack of data. This study considers the relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict in Egypt from 1997 &ndash; 2014 with a newly collected time series dataset. A combination of Lag-augmented Vector Autoregression (LA-VAR) and Autoregressive Distributed Lag Models (ARDL)?is used to look at both the overall relationship between these two phenomena and their temporal ordering. Ultimately, this thesis finds that: (1) antiquities looting and armed conflict have a positive statistically significant relationship, (2) there is stronger support for antiquities looting preceding armed conflict than for the reverse temporal ordering, and (3) this relationship varies by type of conflict.</p>

<p>This dissertation aims to contribute to our understanding of contemporary state strategies targeting social movements by examining the case of Occupy Oakland. Emphasizing how state strategies, both tactical and discursive, dynamically evolve through their iterative relation to movement strategies, it presents a detailed empirical account that is disaggregated into three ?moments?, each of which are characterized by the predominance of a distinct state strategic repertoire. The objective is to highlight an underlying transformation through which the state?s strategies evolve from being highly reactive, indiscriminate and vulnerable to spectacularization to becoming increasingly pre-emptive, targeted and discursively buttressed. The first ?moment? commences with the movement?s occupation of Oscar Grant Plaza. Faced with Occupy Oakland?s highly disruptive tactics and its firm rejection of any forms of negotiation or cooperation with City officials, the state resorts to a strategy of Naked Coercion (reactive, indiscriminate violence that is highly vulnerable to spectacularization) which backfires and results in an internationally televised disaster on the evening of October 25th. This creates an extraordinary window of opportunity for the movement, dramatically increasing public support and enabling it to undertake the first general strike in the U.S. since 1946. This fuels a process of adaptation as the struggle proceeds into the second ?moment?, and the state shifts to a strategy of Targeted Repression that is increasingly pro-active, targeted and discursively buttressed so as to diminish the danger of its spectacularization. The new strategy succeeds in permanently dislodging the occupation of Oscar Grant Plaza, as well as criminalizing the tactic of occupation and excising it from movement?s repertoire. Still unsatisfied with the repression it had achieved, in the third and final ?moment? the state introduces a strategy of Pre-emptive Neutralization that is pre-emptively oriented, targeted at high ?risk? populations and discursively buttressed by powerful spectacles of ?risk?. This enables a thorough incapacitation of the movement ? fully neutralizing its potential for collective action by rendering Occupiers a target population that could no longer even publicly assemble without inciting highly militarized police responses that were now pre-emptively justified by the risk of ?violence? they collectively posed.