CJ 406

Fall 2006

Some questions to think about for the second midterm.

DATE: 11/28/06

LET ME BE CLEAR:

• these questions are intended to be a complement to the questions already posted for each week's readings. You ***DO*** want to have answered those specific weekly questions to be sure you have a strong grasp on the material.
• The purpose of these added questions is to give you some additional thoughts about how you could think about integrating the different materials.
• SOME of these questions may appear on the second midterm, or NONE of them may appear.
• Because it is close to the end of the semester, and because we all need a laugh, some of these questions here are tongue in cheek. They are for the purposes of amusement only. But they may have pedagogic value nonetheless.
• These questions will be added to!

GENERAL

1. Hawkins discusses how regulators work to achieve compliance. Explain how the specific strategies pursued by regulators, and the forces affecting them, lead you to believe that shaming rituals could profitably be used to increase compliance. Focus on one specific industry if you wish.
2. Explain how some of the ways that regulators do their work, and the ways they think about appropriate punishments, as described by Hawkins, exemplify points made by Schlegel about the functions of punishment, and the best way to structure different punishments.
3. Drawing on BOTH Hirschi and Gottfredson and Laub and Sampson, and, preferably, equally from both, are there different types of offenders? You can argue yes or no to this, but whichever way you argue, use BOTH books to argue in the same direction.
4. Given the different industries Hawkins talks about, for which one is adverse publicity followed by reintegrative shaming likely to be an effective punishment? You can just contrast the construction and chemical industries if you like.
5. Explain how Laub and Sampson's findings about desistance are pretty completely predictable by extending Hirshi's social bonding theory forward in time (substitute work or army for school; substitute marriage for parents).

    

6. On November 26^th, 2004, the Athos I tanker, while docking, spilled up to 473,000 gallons of oil into the Delaware River after an underwater obstruction ripped two holes in its bottom. This is the worst spill in the history of the Delaware River and will affect not only 70  miles of shoreline, but the entire estuary and all wildlife associated with it for two or more decades. (Spotila, J.R. (December 7, 2004.) “Oil spill preventable.” Philadelphia Inquirer). Cleanup costs will run into the millions, but only some of that will be paid by the tanker’s owners. 

 Under a federal law passed in 1990 after the Exxon Valdez disaster that had fouled Alaska the previous year, tankers that carry oil and their insurers are responsible for damage, whether or not they caused it, said Brian O'Neill of Minneapolis, lead lawyer for groups suing Exxon Mobil Corp. in the Valdez legal fight, which has dragged on for 15 years. But provisions of the law make it likely that much of the Athos cost may ultimately be paid by a U.S. fund financed by a surcharge on every barrel of imported oil. If no one is found to have purposely or negligently caused the Athos I spill, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 limits Athos I's liability to about $45 million, based on the ship's size. If expenses go higher, they may be paid by the federal Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, which is financed by the oil-import surcharge. (DiStefano, J. N. (December 8, 2004). “Who will pay for cleanup of spill?” Philadelphia Inquirer.)

 At this time it appeared there was no negligence involved on the part of the tug operators, ship operators, or those responsible for scanning the bottom of the channel. Current law allows ships which do NOT have double hulls to unoad oil into ports. How would Hawkins explain this punishment structure which limits liability to 45 million? Schlegel?

7. What similarities do you see between Hawkins and Garland describe current responses to the breaking of laws? Can you give an example? Please be clear about the type of lawbreaking you are addressing. Address the same type of lawbreaking for all three authors or, if you are talking about different types of lawbreaking for different authors, be sure to specify what type is relevant to which author.   Be sure to give an equitable amount of attention to all three authors.

8. Summarize how Braithwaite and Schlegel would critique how we punish and sentence today in our criminal justice system

 SPECIFIC

1. If Motorhead’s song “Bad Religion” is really about hate crimes in the form of cross burnings, do you think Braithwaite’s idea of reintegrative shaming could help with these types of offenses? Say yes or no and explain why. Be specific. Be sure to define reintegrative shaming. If you want to see the full lyrics, go to:

 http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/motorhead/bad_religion.html

 If you want to hear the song, you are on your own.

2. Specify the types of crimes to which reintegrative shaming can be most effectively applied IN THE UNITED STATES. Explain you answer. NOTE: do not give a laundry list here. Pick a type, and explain. You also may pick NO type. Explain that answer as well.
3. How can the idea of reintegrative shaming be applied to cheating in undergraduate university classes? Be specific. Don’t forget the two steps.
4. It seems lots of folks are lamenting the demise of truant officers. Based on C of D what would Hirschi say about a proposal to dramatically increase funding for truant officers? Be sure to cross reference specific concept(s) from Hirschi and at least one specific finding. What would Anderson say? Again, be sure to reference specific concepts and at least one specific finding.
5. Are there any specific findings from Hirschi that have anything to say about whether it is wise for a school district to mandate a minimum number of hours of homework each night for 11^th graders? Be careful in your answer, and be sure to reference a specific finding from C of D. Also, explain the relevant processes of Hirschi’s model which you tap. What would Anderson say about this proposal? Explan the process. What would Laub and Sampson say? Explain the process
6.  
7. What do we know about desistance? Reference specific finding(s) from Laub and Sampson.
8. What do Sampson and Laub say about the idea of different “types” of criminal career trajectories?
9. Current sentencing guidelines are much stricter for crack cocaine distribution than they are for powdered cocaine distribution. How would Garland explain this?
10. According to Garland, what factors are responsible for the extraordinary rise in prison populations in this country in the last thirty years?
11.  According to Hawkins, in what way is obtaining compliance a good goal? In what ways is it a bad goal?
12. According to Hawkins, in what ways is the relationship between a police officer and a drunk driver he/she pulls over, different from the relationship between a health and safety inspector who finds a drunk shift supervisor in a gunpowder factory?