Lecture 1 - Galton Eugenics: Galton - known for eugenics - influenced by darwin - parallel work - - - - Cleanse the population of problematic folk Negative criticism Type of eugenics that he had in mind is very different than the type that came to be practiced “Eugenics is the science which deals with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race; also with those the develop them to the utmost advantage” Sexe is an immutable aspect, race - belief at the time that this was concerning particular groups more prone to crime, and certain sorts of crime Important to understating what is crime and doing something to address these Good stock, make sure that the good stock is producing more good stock Quantitative “[E]ugenics is a virile creed, full of hopefulness an appealing to many of the noblest feelings of our nature Upon evolution “Human nature is such that we rarely find out way by the pure light of reason” Philosophy works from a distance “An extended civilization like ours comprises more interests, than the ordinary statesmen or philosophers of our present race are capable of dealing with, and it exacts more intelligent work than our ordinary artisans and labourers are capable of performing. Our race is over-weighted, and appears likely to be drudged into degeneracy by demands that exceed its powers.” Can only be addresses scientifically Our race as we know it is overburdened by particular races “The aim of Eugenics is to represent each class or sect by its best specimens; that done, to leave them to work out their common civilization in their own way.” Focus on the best and the let best proceed to do what they do best “Eugenics strengthens the sense of social duty in so many important particulars that the conclusions derived from its study ought to find a welcome home in every tolerant religion. It is promotes a far-sighted philanthropy, the acceptance of parentage as a serious responsibility, and higher conception of patriotism.” Society as we know it is going down the drain, science is going to fix it Men and women are born different Lecture 2 - The improvement of the human race is not just something that is immediately necessary bu a social obligation to drag society out of degeneracy - - - “The natural characters and faculties of human beings differ at least as widely as those of domesticated animals. Whether it be in character, disposition, energy, intellect of physical power, we each receive at our birth a definite endowment, some receiving many talents, others few” We are all given different traits Human beings are different due to biology and genetics - argument is not that you can't do things over time, but that the starting position is important Difference is tied directly to biology and genetics, different varies by a lot of things, stretch, energy levels, disposition, characteristics “As it is easy,…to obtain by careful selection a permanent breed of dogs or horses gifted with peculiar powers of running, or of doing anything else, so it would be quite practicable to produce a highly-gifted race of men by judicious marriages during several consecutive generations.” “Eugenics is a virile creed full of hopefulness and appealing to many of our own personal feelings of nature.” Eugenics wants to play with these imuntivle traits, breed people like dogs Lombroso - crime gene Focused directly on procreation Lecture 3 - Group people in a particular meaning - What couldn't have been changed before can now be changed due to science - “[A] man’s natural abilities are derived from inheritance […]” - Relationship between heredity and ability - Increase the average potential - People are born in a particular way, making society better as a whole - focus on the better stock - improve the score - eminent men in britton - based on work, leaders, physical aspects - dexterity, strength - Genius - inherited - abilities or actions - Illustriousness - proxy - either not there or not accessible to you A-C-B, approximating it - Eminence is met where one person or many persons has achieved a position which is attended by only 250 people for each Million 1 for 4000 people - Lead people to do and say thing that give them a particular reputation - qualities are gifted, inherited - Take the concept of illustrious and use it as a proxy for eminence - to illustrate the reputation that is at hand - Illustriousness - saving grace od society can be found in men from particular stock - in the future will be set to be important story characters - folks who when they die will have a public funeral - when the well educated intelligent person are mourned - their illustriousness is gaged from their reputation - When the world believed that the world in largely indebted to that person - Do we as a society owe something for what that person has accomplished - Takes different people from different professions and draws the conclusion that those who are at the end of the day eminent - they have their natural skills inherited Lecture 4 - “In each class of society there is a strong tendency to inter-marriage, which produces a marked effect in the richness of brain power of the more cultured families. It produces a still more marked effect of another kind at the lowest step of the social scale.” - ”The brains of the nation lie in the higher of our classes - Wants to break down society into different segments/classes - intelligence, race - Divided based upon race - People tend to marry in their groups, reproduce same group - Higher of our classes are bright - white europeans - Low step of social scale is not smart - african race - “It seems to me most essential to the well-being of future generations, that the average standard of ability of the present time should be raised” - Ability - genius - capacity that one has to do - ability in relation to what is given at birth - “We can, in some degree, raise the nature of men to a level with the new conditions imposed by his existence, and we can also in to some degree, modify the conditions to suit his nature. It is clearly right that both these powers should be exerted, with the view of bringing his nature and the condition of his existence into a close proximity as possible” - Star with what is natural - the inborn qualities - Hitler is an example - Positive eugenics - refers to enhancing the top tier of the population inter-marriage, education and resources helps - social and natural go together - White europeans to marry within that group - positive eugenics, no inter-mixing (completely controversial) - Wanted the policy of england to prohibit inter-mixed marriage - Negative eugenics - whipping out/restricting the procreation of the lower tier of the population - casturing - decimating the population - Negative eugenics does not form the sort of proximous program - negative eugenics is not what he's promoting - restrict procreation - Believes that people are genetically exposed to crime - It would be an economy and great benefit to the country if all habitual criminals were resolutely segregated under mericfl surveillance and peremptorily denied opportunities for producing offspring. It would abolish a source of suffering and misery to a future generation - The restrictions that he wants placed upon this group are different than negative eugenics - Merciful - mercy - compassion when not needed to be shown ex. Have the right to punish but chooses not to - Deny the opportunities to produce more - produce problems by producing bad stock - “The possibility of improving the race of a nation depends on the power of increasing the productivity of the best stock. This is far more important than that of repressing the productivity of the worst” MILL Lecture 1 - relevance - freedom - VS Locke - - Mills work resonates - is more relevant Civil liberty - liberty that is a product of the state - restrictions that are put upon one liberty, restrictions are product of the state - ones liberty is enhanced Law is means to increase and enhance liberty - must remove liberty - state and relation to one's liberty is important Civil liberties don't exist in isolation Social liberty - freedom and liberty that exists in society - liberty that is informal - less formal in relation to the state State is the epidemie of liberty that is formalized and institutionalized Social liberty is less formal than the states Informal manner, or informal manner - in a way that does not reach the formality of the state (laws) Civil and social are connected and related “The subject of this essay is [...] civil and social liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual What is power, where does it come from, what does it do, the limits of power “Exercised by society over the individual” - refers to what is formal and informal exercised by the “state” - exercised by the “people” Formal VS informal - state is the highest Concerned by the limits of the power (mill) - that is has to rightfully exercise Relates closely with what concerned Locke ( Mill - the power of the state and legitimacy and power abuse) Locke - freedom Locke - concerned with what the state give and takes away Mill - concerned with the people, community Utilitarianism - disagrees with a lot of the social contract - incoherent Benthem - founding father of utilitarianism - mill is a utilitarian Liberty and the state (mill and locke) Mill - Liberty as a concept and right is meaningful only if and when it is tied to rationality and reason - if you want to be free you have to be rational - rational people should not have the right to particular liberty Locke - notion of liberty is also tied to rationality and reason - presupposes a rational being MAJOR DIFFERENCE - for mill liberty is not and cannot be a product of natural principles - cannot be the basis to ground society and liberty - state of nature cannot be the basis - - Locke - perfect freedom is taken from state of nature - basis Natural principles are not subject to thinking - not a product of reason (not natural law) Natural laws are discovered by rational persons - thinking and discovery in natural law already presupposes rationality Laws of nature - their content never changes Not subject to be put under the scrutiny of thinking Once laws of nature are discovered - there is no room to change - mill sees this a problematic When mill say that liberty as a concept and right comes right out of liberty and reason what is driving this claim is a concerted attempt to rescue rationality - what he sees as the decline of rational men - sees in the social contract itself He wants to rescue rationality Lecture 2 - rationality - liberty - individualism - utility - tyranny - Liberty cannot be formed from the social contract Takes some of the parts of state of nature and law of nature as factual The essence of individuality is coming undone Prior to the social contract - individuality at its peak - no state no government - freedom at its peak Hobbes - one has to give up the right to all things Locke - Executive part of law of nature When we approach and enter into society its not our natural selves - manufactured products (shell) True self is somewhere in the state of nature Real self masquerading somewhere in society Mill believes the social contract cannot explain society Major reason - he wants to explicitly distance himself and his argument from the social contract and the dangers from the social contract Social contract kills the innate nature of men Fundamentally makes people people - individuality - freedom ^ that has come undone Mill is seeking to distance himself from the social construct - liberty can only come from reasoning - wants to rescue rationality State of nature does not give rights to thinking Individuality is decreasing because the social contract forces people to give themselves up Writes against social contract Rights as he has it are not abstract - rights do not exist in nature - product of thinking (and doing) Concept of liberty and rights Rights tied to and depend on - utility Retraction of social liberty is very dangerous - - Utility - original word that jeremy benthem gives to utilitarianism - concerned with happiness - doctrine maximizing happiness, minimizing pain, one goes up, other goes down The ultimate appeal on all ethical questions (mill and utility) - gives society liberty Civil and social liberty - how much liberty can be legitimately restricted by government and community Erosion of rationality and individuality Liberty meant the protection against the tyranny of the political rulers Tyrannical state is dangerous to ones liberty Locke does not go far enough Epidemie of the death of men - tyrannical government Mill says there is something far more concerning and dangerous - tyranny of the majority Tyranny of the majority is more concerning than the tyranny of the few Lecture 3 - tyranny of the majority - Tyranny of the majority - “Protection… against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling; against the tendency of society to impose by other means than cibil penalties, its own ideals and practices as rules of conduct as those who dissent from them; to fetter the development, and if possible, prevent the formation, of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own” - Nevertheless an acknowledgement that the tyranny of the magistrate is a problem - He is not coming anyone close to saying that the tyranny of the magistrate is not important - Magistrate - anything that is formalized is terms of par - state is the example, things that fall under the state is a good example - State is the example, tools at the disposal of the state also an example - police - Tyranny of magistrate is important to account for - Mill and locke are on the same page, but the form of how they came to their decisions are different - Tyranny of magistrate is not tyranny of the majority - it is tyranny of the minority - The state is a small group with massive power - possibly do a great deal of harm - Tyranny of the minority is extremely problematic - Need protection against the tyranny of the minority - That is not the only thing that we need protection from - Mill wants to widen the ambit of tyranny - Tyranny of the majority The tyranny against prevailing opinion and feelings Tyranny of minority comes from state and is institutionalized by laws and penalties that carry heavy oppression - death penalty - - Ideas, opinions, feelings - these ideas can be dangerous Ideas suport freedom, sustain freedom - the ideas are not the issues - the issue is something is particularly happening to ideas Concerned theses ideas will affect rationality and individuality These feelings get imposed on society as a whole even on those who don’t agree with the same set of values and feelings It gets imposed upon them as a matter of a rule - such groups have very little choice but to follow the status quo The opinions, values, ideas One needs protection from the tyranny of the majority - from the tyranny of feeling, ideas, values, opinions One needs protection from his or her peers, mates, colleagues, community Locke presents problems as us VS them - argument against hobbes- them is the minority Mill is saying it is if not more than equally For Locke the problem is outside the state, for Mill problem is within For mill - we are all the issue Where the prevailing opinion rules where one is unable to voice a counter attack - you have tyranny Does the state make you un-free - yes do you make yourself un-free - yes It's almost as if we are unable to see the way we are making ourselves un-free Prevailing opinion goes on and on without being questioned Mill explains what happens when prevailing ideas are left to themselves To fetter the development - effort to bring the centers, minority, into the position of the minority Unfettered - without boundaries, without restraint Fetter - to restraint Prisoners - restrain them with chains around their ankles When opinions prevail so much so that they become a rule - you are being fettered, chained, to move in a particular way - muzzled to think and speak in a particular way tyranny of the majority Your progress, development and growth is restrained They want you not to grow but to be in line with what they think Kill individuality Protection from that type of tyranny is not the only thing that we have to be focused on Mill is saying there is something evil lurking that we cant see Do it purposefully to fetter growth and development Lecture 4 - validity - opinion - Tyranny of the majority in relation to freedom - We should essentially be comporting ourselves in a way where an opinion is simply an opinion and should not be held to sway other people - Opinion should not be the basis upon which we expect other people to change their minds - The only way is if there are sufficient and pogent reasons that are provided - argument or position - If you make a statement and that statement gives one your opinion - we have only given our opinion and nothing more - The numbers don’t change your opinion to be a fact - doesn't mean it is right - “An opinion on a point of conduct, not supported by reasons, can only count as one person’s preference; and if these reasons, when given, are a mere appeal to similar preference felt by other people, it is still only many people’s liking instead of one” - He’s saying that one needs to provide a valid basis for why others ought to listen to what you’re saying - why should it be taken seriously - Mill is saying that all you have given is your preference - Without anything to support it is simply a preference 1. The validity of an opinion is reasons and rationality 2. Absence of validity to that opinion makes that opinion a preference 3. A preference is a matter of taste 4. Taste is not something that you can legislate against - When the tyranny of the majority rules - what is funneled into the minority and what is making them change their minds is preference - “If all of mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind” - If they have the justification for silencing you, then you have the justification for silencing them - 99 people silencing one person is as absurd as 1 person silencing 99 - its the very fact that anyone is being silenced Lecture 5 - liberty - 2 reasons for the claim - Issues over liberty - Issues over truth - Liberty - if one is silenced (or many) the first thing that will do is infringe upon liberty violate one's liberty “No society in which these liberties are not on the whole respected, is free. And none is completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified” Society where anyone is silenced is not free Freedom = no restrictions on speech Lecture 6 - liberty and truth - - “There ought to exist the fullest liberty of professing and discussing, as a matter of ethical conviction, any doctrine, however immoral it may be considered” Freedom has to be at the highest - at the most Anything goes - must be permitted regardless of how immoral something might be thought to be It would be unethical to not permit one to say and discuss any doctrine Necessitates the fullest freedom to voice any opinion on any matter - not matter how disgraceful it might be To silence an opinion is unethical Any society that places any kind of limit on speech is already unfree - all are completely unfree - not interested in truth, right, morality Freedom is connected to the absence of tyranny (minority but mostly majority) concerned about the freedom to voice a position Mill is saying any limit upon freedom is unfreedom “Not society in which these liberties [the opinions of the minority] are not, on the whole, respected is free… and none is completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified” Any opinion should be given a place to be heard Lecture 7 - - The ideal of what life should be can never hold - dangerous Some sort of restrictions upon freedom and freedom of speech must be implemented Without - would implode on its own terms Freedom is the absence of restrictions One cannot have absolute freedom - if one does things will quickly get bad Issues becomes how much freedom should be restricted - how much restrictions can be put on that liberty One does have right to voice their opinions - already restrictions Right to voice the opinion is not absolute Basis of self-protection - preservation of harm - protection in the communal sense As long as statements are not affecting other people in a harmful matter - free to say what they want “Acts, of whatever kind, which, without justifiable cause, do harm to others, may be, and in the more important cases absolutely require to be, controlled by the unfavorable sentiments, and when needful, by the active interference of mankind.” However, “in things which do not primarily concern others, individuality should assert itself”. If we are interested in putting restrictions - it must meet the threshold of harm If no harm has been done or is set to have been done The very fact that harm was done is not going to suffice for restrictions Was the harm done to other people unjustifiable? Where the harm is justifiable there is no basis to restrict freedom Mills effort to balance the ideal and the practical - Ideal - what freedom is Moving closer to the threshold of regulation Interference of mankind - the state when it forcefully comes down upon its citizens Harm is the basis upon which the conversation starts Mill is working hard to ensure that he draws and balances a fine line between freedom in this ideal sense and a threshold where you move to too much regulation Harm - harm has to be unjustifiable - even after that does not mean that the basis for restriction materializes Balance freedom with restrictions You have to let individuality be - you do not want to restrict this 2 important things that are driving mill Deterioration of rationality & individuality Lecture 8 - Harm - - What is harm? “To individuality should belong the part of life in which it is chiefly the individual that is interested; to society, the part which chiefly interests society” Fulfill Full VS fulfilled - amount that you eat might not be relevant to the fulfillment - stomach can be full but you feel sick - not fulfilled Fulfilled - to be content, happy Fulfill - achieved or reached To affect one prejuditon - affects you to your detriment - has negative effects At the very moment that someone does something that affects you negatively jurisdiction over it. Interest - like want and need to do - these are the things that bring you happiness For the most part people do things because they want to do it Fulfillment - achievement of what one decides or wants - mill looks at it as happiness Harm = unhappiness = when you are prohibited from achieving what you desire Harm is the basis upon which one starts a conversation “[T]he inconveniences which are strictly inseparable from the unfavorable judgements of others, are the only ones to which a person should ever by subjected for that portion of his conduct and character which concerns his own good, but which does not affect the interests of others in their relations with them.” Should allow where someone is doing something that does not harm someone else or society Only at that moment when society's ability to fulfill its interest - society may intervene officially How do we gauge when harm is caused? Any particular individual action is going to affect others - directly or indirectly “No person ought to be punished for being drunk, but a soldier or a policeman should…. For being drunk on duty. Whenever …. There is definite damage, or a definite risk of - damage, either to the individual or to the public, the case is taken out of the province liberty and placed in that of morality or law” Society expects people to act in a particular matter Not punishing the drunk because he's a drunk - but the status of being drunk - a breach of duty You can only punish if someone doesn't do what someone is suppose to do Society may only intervene when duty’s are breached Draw a distinction between individual and society - always overlap Draws a distinction between the status of something and breaches of duty The law should only intervene when its a breach of a definite duty and there is damage or a risk of damage (harm) Locke and criminology - Vagrancy Lecture 1 - - Hobbe mobilizes his conversation around fear Locke - Response to what he saw as the excessive power of the government - rein in the amount of power provided to the government - if not government becomes tyrannical Enhance the power of citizens - liberties and freedom Pays particular attention to the natural state of men Interested in what is happening in society - in order the rein in that access power he conceptualizes the discourse as one of freedom and liberty Problem of vagrancy Legal problem of vagrancy Term itself is quite slippery - extremely vast in term of what exactly it is Vagrancy - vagrant Term vagrant brings to light a particular type of thinking - particular cultural/social resonance - wandering and moving about - homeless person Important because when one looks historical it's not just figures or activities - there are massive amounts of things that make the problem of vagrancy Vagrant is someone that does not have a lot - is in need Think of vagrancy politically Vagrancy law was probably the most important legal tool that was enacted and deployed to address social problems - absolutely massive One concern of vagrancy law was scholars - cambridge and oxford who traveled during the … months in search of arms and money to faucet tuition costs - the regulations of their wanderings were proghuhf under the purview of vagrancy legislation - students permitted by license in search of donations - give them permission to beg for donations on particular sites during particular months Monks who lived in monasteries were permitted under vagrancy law to move upon their country in search of donations - - Vagrancy law regulated families - a father who had left his wife and specifically left his children to be taken care of by the wife or parish/city their father - vagrancy legislation where a father failed to fulfill his fatherly duty Vagrancy law - wide net Today student is not governed by vagrancy legislation Criminal activity is also brought within the realm of vagrancy law - disturbing the peace, loitering, Criminal to the regulation of education, religion, household Catch all offense - every social problem imaginable made into a problem of vagrancy Legal problem of vagrancy much different from cultural and social vagrancy Legal framing is extremely different from the social of cultural - distinction between legal and social world when it come to the term vagrant and vagrancy Lecture 2 - stigma - action and status - decriminalization - - Vagrancy law is constructed - has to name and create that problem - doesn't exist naturally Vagrancy law is outdated - due to the question is it really appropriate to use the criminal law to regulate these kinds of things Loose idle and disorderly - stigma of being vagrant - carries an immense burden even today Makes it difficult to get a job after a criminal conviction Stigma that goes with the offender The stigma that goes along with being a vagrant has massive implications - loose idle and disorderly Different experience for a man to be labeled loose than a woman - society is heavily gendered - you don't want the baggage of being called loose, idle or disorderly as a woman 1950’s - worse to be labeled as loose, idle and disorderly Stigma does something to the person's reputation One's reputation was all one had By the 1950’s law makers realize vagrancy law may be a little far reached Locke's concerns - what is the reason for law One can only be found guilty of action - actus reus (action) mens rea (guilty mind) Criminal code actus reus and mens rea must be met - only convict where there's a reasonable doubt the person intended to do what was done Vagrancy law has operated differently - taught to operate differently - the status of the individual that is important to secure conviction - action is not important Technical sense - vagrancy law (in canada at least) always concerned action, never governed simply status The belief is that it was status that was being governed Loose idle disorderly had to be shown Leaving the technical side of the law - status sufficed - - Problematic about vagrancy law - policed people, focused on the status, was used to regulate young black men, night walkers (prostitutes, sex workers) It was believed that status is what brought people into the system and thought thats what secured the conviction 1970’s - decriminalization - to a bunch of sections of the criminal code Most of this was the desire to make the law clear and precise Lead to problems with ambiguity When one is decriminalized - not one lawmaker is saying these are not problems ex: begging - are these issues problematic? Yes. Should they be regulated? Yes. through the criminal code? No. Relates to Locke and abuse of power Reflection of the state using its powers in the appropriate manner Lecture 3 - - In canada hand of the state - US hand of the courts Papachristou v. city of jacksonville You need the state and its laws if the state is to protect society If it does not have what is legal and what is illegal - unconstitutional Cannot plan your life if the laws are unclear The court is saying that every vagrancy law in the us give to the police unfettered discretion Discretion - freedom to choose - police have when it comes to laying or not laying a charge Reason why police are equipped with discretion Discretion is necessary, good, and has a function They way that it is used is what is problematic Unfettered discretion is what is problematic and dangerous, permits the police to use the vague standards of vagrancy law and apply it to a bunch of people in a discriminatory manner is unconstitutional - unfettered discretion Unfettered - no restrictions - without boundaries Without any accountability Almost as if the court is saying that the police are perfectly free to use and apply their discretion Locke - when you enter society you must give up perfect freedom Vagrancy laws - furnish and facilitate - court is saying, but this is not right, fair, its unjust Where you have unfettered discretion you encourage your police to participate in arbitrary use of the law - “A presumption that people who might walk or loaf or loiter or stroll or frequent houses where liquor is sold, or who are supported by their wives or who look suspicious to the police are to become future criminals is too precarious for a rule of law. The implicit presumption in these generalized vagrancy standards – that crime is being nipped in the bud – is too extravagant to deserve extended treatment (…) [T]he rule of law implies - equality and justice in its application. Vagrancy laws of Jacksonville type teach that the scales of justice are so tipped that even-handed administration of the law is not possible. The rule of law, evenly applied to minorities as well as majorities, to the poor as well as the rich, is great mucilage that holds society together. The Jacksonville ordinance cannot be squared with our constitutional standards and is plainly unconstitutional.” Decriminalization - ties in with things locke was stating - resonate Freedom matters, enhance freedom - certain things must be at play Vagrancy law - they do not facilitate freedom Lecture 4 - vagrancy and eclecticism - - The form of the problem changes, the problem itself does not change Begging was never unproblematic - the way it was regulated was problematic - change the form (the substance changes too) The ways the problem is addressed changes 1990 - vagrancy is not a problem because the name is changed - public disorder Protitution became sex work Squeegee became a problem Loitering Address through legislation that mimic vagrancy law Shift between begging - panhandling - soliciting Impossible to sell a piece of law that put under scrutiny the problem of begging - if it was to be regulated at the time it was removed from the criminal code - should be regulated by something like bylaw Begging was believed to target status Claimed that status is what controlled vagrancy law Hobbes and criminology - Importance of fear to hobbes discussion - Fear connects to other things - rationality - Concept of fear - fear as paramount in the construction of the problem - Fear becomes absolutely crucial in the solution to that problem - Concept of fear rains heavily in social contract theory - Criminology focuses upon crime its causes effect and solution - under this banner of crime as a problem there is a whole bunch of other issues - focuses of problems of order and security - Broken windows theory - “But how can a neighborhood be “safer” when the crime rate has gone down – in fact, may have gone up? Finding the answer requires first that we understand what most often frightens people in public places. Many citizens, of course, are primarily frightened by crime, especially crime involving a sudden, violent attack by a stranger. This is very real […]. But we tend to overlook another source of fear-the fear of being bothered by - disorderly people. Not violent people, nor, necessarily, criminals, but disreputable or obstreperous or unpredictable people; panhandlers, drunks, addicts, rowdy teenagers, prostitutes, loiterers, the mentally disturbed.” 1960’s in north america - problem that emerges - large metropolitan cities - public disorder - urban blight - urban decay Urban decay - city coming undone - quality of life coming undone Police in patrol cars do a poor job a reducing crime - what can be done to mobilize police so they can be more effective - READ PROFESSORS TEXTS
0
advertisement
Related documents
Download
advertisement
Add this document to collection(s)
You can add this document to your study collection(s)
Sign in Available only to authorized usersAdd this document to saved
You can add this document to your saved list
Sign in Available only to authorized users