Criminal Violence:
Patterns, Causes, and
Prevention
Riedel and Welsh, Ch. 15
“Prevention and
Punishment:
A Delicate Balance”
OUTLINE
CJ APPROACHES


CJ Goals






Deterrence
Rehabilitation
Incapacitation
Restoration
Examples: Death Penalty, Three Strikes
The Limits of Punishment
PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACHES





Multilevel Risk Approach
OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy
Community-Based Approaches
Blueprints for Violence Prevention
Deterrence


General Deterrence refers to the inhibiting effect that
punishment has on potential offenders in the public.
Specific Deterrence seeks to prevent future criminal acts
only by the individual punished.




Evidence: A National Academy of Sciences panel found
that studies did not strongly support deterrent effects.
Where effects on crime rates were found, they were
stronger where certainty was increased (probability of
arrest and incarceration) rather than severity.
Problems
 Most research has been based on official statistics (UCR).
 Many studies are unable to eliminate other factors that
could account for observed effects (e.g., biases in
measures, regional variations in data collection and
reporting, and other factors that might influence crime
rates).
Stafford & Warr: Need to examine-

Both direct and indirect experience, with
Punishment and punishment avoidance
Rehabilitation




Rehabilitation refers to any postconviction
treatment aimed at reducing an offender's future
likelihood of committing crimes.
Evidence: A National Academy of Sciences panel
concluded that we know very little about what
works or what does not.
The best studies show that some types of
treatment work for some types of offenders, at
least some of the time.
Problems
1. Evaluation methodologies have often been
inadequate, limiting conclusions from research.
2. Few programs are available to prisoners (e.g.,
many want drug treatment but can't get it).
3. Many inmates refuse to participate.
4. Inmates are often not allowed to participate
for security reasons.
Incapacitation



Incapacitation: an offender is restrained from
committing any further crimes against the public, at
least during the period he/she is confined
 Selective: attempts to incapacitate worst
offenders (e.g., career criminals)
 General: attempts to reduce crime by locking up
offenders for as long as possible
Evidence: difficult to evaluate
 Can’t control for many factors that influence crime
rates. Some claim that incapacitation effects are
evidenced by recent downturns in violent crime.
Problems
1. Selective: we can't predict with any accuracy who
is likely to become a career criminal until after
he/she has already amassed a lengthy criminal
career.
2. General: would strain criminal justice resources
(e.g., overcrowded jails and prisons). Expenses
would far exceed available resources.
CJ Example #1: Death Penalty
Both death sentences and executions are
disproportionately likely for African
Americans, given their representation in
the general population (about 12% of the
U.S. population).
Arguments in favor of the death penalty
 1) public support
 2) deterrence
 3) retribution
 4) cost-effectiveness
Arguments against the death penalty
 1) improper use of state power
 2) racial discrimination
 3) possibility of errors

CJ Example #2: Three Strikes Laws



Example: California's law calls for a doubling of
the prison sentence for a second felony, and for
a sentence of 25 years to life for a third
conviction.
The law covers 500 felonies, including many
nonviolent offenses (e.g., petty theft, burglary).
About 85% of offenders sentenced under the
“three strikes'' laws were involved in non-violent
crimes (e.g., marijuana possession). Problems:
poorly defined target populations, discrimination,
lack of acceptance by prosecutors, lack of prison
space.
Public Health Approaches
Multilevel Risk Approach

We need to examine the interactions of
individual, institutional, social structural,
and cultural factors related to violence.

National Academy of Sciences Panel on the
Understanding and Causes of Violent
Behavior



We have many promising directions for
intervention and prevention to pursue from
research findings, but
Better measures and more controlled
research (esp. evaluations of promising
efforts) are needed to identify causes and
opportunities for prevention.
There are multiple options for intervening,
and a much greater need for interagency
collaboration.
OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy
Risk factors associated with violent juvenile offending:
 Individual risk factors: pregnancy and delivery
complications; hyperactivity; concentration problems;
restlessness; risk-taking behavior; early
aggressiveness; early involvement in other forms of
antisocial behavior, and beliefs and attitudes
favorable to deviant or antisocial behavior
 Family factors: delinquent siblings; criminal behavior
of parents; harsh discipline; physical abuse or neglect;
poor family-management practices; low levels of
parent-child involvement; high levels of family
conflict; parental attitudes favorable to violence; and
separation of the child from family
 School factors: academic failure; low commitment to
education; truancy; early dropout; frequent changes
of schools; association with delinquent peers; and
gang membership
 Community or neighborhood factors: high population
density; high residential mobility; high poverty rate;
availability of weapons and drugs; and a high rate of
adult involvement in crime
OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy: 5 Key Objectives
Provide immediate intervention and appropriate sanctions and
treatment for delinquents (e.g., graduated sanctions)
1.

Safe Futures: continuum of care for youths and their families
(includes human service and juvenile justice systems, health,
mental health, child welfare, education, police, probation, courts,
and corrections)
Prosecute serious, violent, chronic juvenile offenders in criminal court
2.

Includes waiver and transfer mechanisms that allow serious
juvenile offenders to be tried as adults in criminal court
Reduce youth involvement with guns, drugs, and gangs
3.

Partnerships to Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence attempts to
strengthen linkages among community groups, schools, law
enforcement, and the juvenile justice system.
Provide opportunities for children and youth
4.

Includes mentoring, after-school activities, conflict resolution
training, remedial education, and vocational education
Breaking the cycle of violence by addressing youth victimization,
abuse, and neglect
5.

Safe Kids/Safe Streets: strengthens the response of criminal and
juvenile justice systems to child abuse and neglect.
Community-Based Approaches

Programs located in specific neighborhoods, designed and
implemented mainly by nonprofit community groups rather
than justice or social service agencies
http://www.phillyblueprint.com/index.cfm
 Child and Family Resource Centers (1970s):
provided a wide range of services to families
(e.g., day care, tutoring, parenting skills, family
counseling).


Youth unemployment in high-crime communities


The centers enhanced family functioning at very low
cost, and they reduced delinquency by improving parentchild relations and school performance (U.S. General
Accounting Office).
Many of the better job-training programs (1960-1970s)
were successful at reducing crime, improving earnings,
and reducing long-term costs. But: If job training leads
to dead-end jobs, illegal opportunities may become even
more attractive to youths.
Long-term community economic and social
development must also be addressed.
Blueprints for Violence Prevention


A comprehensive effort to provide communities
with a set of programs whose effectiveness has
been scientifically demonstrated
The standards for effectiveness include four
criteria:
1. An experimental or quasi-experimental design
with random assignment or matched control
group
2. Evidence of a statistically significant deterrent
effect on delinquency, drug use, and/or
violence
3. Replication in at least one additional site with
demonstrated effects
4. Evidence that the deterrent effect was
sustained for at least 1 year following
treatment
http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/
Conclusions




Violence prevention in the U.S. has a promising
but unpredictable future.
To the degree that interventions can reasonably
balance punishment and prevention and
take a rational approach based upon existing
and emerging knowledge, that promise may yet
be realized.
Much further research on risk factors and
causes contributing to violence is needed, and
more rigorous, valid evaluations of programs
and policies are needed.
In the absence of such information,
untested assumptions and hunches will
continue to drive critical policy decisions.