16 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Currie's Wisdom is Being Ignored, December 8, 1999
Elliott Currie doesn't seem to understand that you aren't supposed to approach the issue of crime by actually thinking about it and looking at the evidence. These days crime policy is increasingly monotone--a one-note cry of "get tough." When crime fails to vanish like the "get tough" proponents claim it will, the cry simply becomes "get tougher." So we get the death penalty for more and more crimes, "three-strikes" laws to give life sentences for all sorts of offenses, huge numbers of people imprisoned solely for posession of drugs, and states like California spending more on their prison system than on their impoverished colleges and universities.
Anyone who reads Elliott Curries book will find that these policies do not have a leg to stand on intellectually. Currie begins by reviewing what he calls our "prison experiment." For some 30 years we have taken the "get tough" approach, over which time we have increased the prison population by a factor of about six. Over this time, the level of crime has changed little, as Currie amply demonstrates.
Currie then goes on to demolish what he calls "prison myths," a whole set of factoids about crime and the justice system that are put out by right-wing ideologues like John DiIulio, Charles Murray and Morgan Reynolds, and spread by pundits and politicians like William Bennett, Phil Gramm, and Newt Gingrich. To give one example, Currie shows how Reynolds concocts his claim that robbers serve an average prison sentence of 23 days (the actual figure is over 4 years). What Reynolds does is divide the time served by convicted robbers by the total number of roberies in a year. Reynolds ignores simple facts: over half of all robberies are not reported to police, many that are reported are not solved, and many robbers commit more than one crime. The result is a meaningless statistic. While Currie is too well-mannered to say it, it is obvious why Reynolds and his like manipulate the data the way they do--they are intentionally deceiving people.
If Currie had done no more than debunk the "get tough" approach, his book would be worthy of five stars for that alone. But the second half of his book is even more revealing. Currie has made a comprehensive review of solid research on all kinds of social policy. What he reveals is dramatic--we know what kinds of policies will reduce crime.
Currie describes a whole set of policies that have been shown, with hard evidence, to be effective. A few examples will convey the type of policies that are needed:
-"Home visiting" programs that provide support for low-income parents with infants and young children in the form of regular visits from nurses. Such programs are proven to be effective in reducing child abuse and neglect, which are long-term causes of crime.
-Intensive mentoring programs for juveniles with criminal records, which involve having caseworkers or therapists meet several times weekly with the juveniles for an extended period. Juveniles in such programs had much lower rearrest rates than other juveniles with similar records
-Effective drug treatment programs for the 50-60 percent of inmates with drug problems. Again, inmates who complete such programs are far less likely to commit future crimes. The need is to make such programs available to all inmates who need them, not just a handful.
Currie also demonstrates conclusively that poverty and income inequality are major contributors to crime, and that an effective attach on poverty will significantly contribute to reducing crime.
The evidence Currie cites is so overwhelming that it raises the question of why policies like those he advocates are not in place. The conclusion I am forced to is that politicians like Bennett and "get tough" proponents like DiIulio and Reynolds do not really want to solve the crime problem. They want to keep people scared to get their political support.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Prison myths, May 24, 2001
This review is from: Crime and Punishment in America (Paperback)
Crime, like any other social issue, is a topic people have very strong opinions on. But also like any other social issue, most people don't have much basis for their opinions other than beliefs and values steeped in misunderstanding. Elliott Currie writes with the view that we must redefine our view of the criminal justice system, their purpose, and how our nation struggles with violence. The design of it all, he argues, is out of whack. Locking large numbers of people into cells and then releasing them without having addressed the underlying reasons why they got there in the first place is no solution. Currie brings in much statistical data, which can make the first two chapters slow, but it is necessary. You can't take social "science" seriously without such data. He ends on a more philosophical note, but in between, he creates a well structured critique of America's crime situation.
First, he wonders about prisons. Are we soft on crime? Does prison work? And do prisons pay back in prevented crimes what they cost? Then he suggests that there are alternatives to incarceration alone, and discusses methods of prevention. He also discusses crime as a social phenomenon, and economic factors that create favorable settings for crime. And finally, he suggests that our view of the justice system itself must be revised, that decreasing violence should be a priority above punishment.
Having sat in on Elliott Currie's "Crime and Criminal Justice" class at UC Berkeley, I found myself wanting a little more from the book. His class was more extensive and covered other issues like gun control, the death penalty, how to get and interpret data on crime, etc. But this is not a textbook on crime. It is Currie's plea that we all take responsibility for the lives of many who are young and live marginal existences, who suffer abuses and desperate conditions. We provide them with the social service of incarceration and hope to be rid of their disagreeable behavior. Is this what we really want? Even if your views on crime are more conservative than Currie's, he provides an argument that is intellectual and passionate, and you may at least wonder if he has a point.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Currie debunks the myths behind the criminal justice system, May 18, 1999
This review is from: Crime and Punishment in America (Paperback)
"Crime and Punishment in America" provides excellent examples of how common sense and rational science have been sacrificed in criminal justice policymaking in favor of politically favorable actions. Currie explores why "lock 'em up and throw away the key", while a very politically fashionable approach to crime, will only serve to exacerbate the crime crisis. Currie also provides excellent answers to conservative critics like James Q. Wilson and John J. DiIulio who seem to be grossly misinterpreting the data we have about crime.
As a former criminal justice student of Currie's myself, I must say that, along with his lectures at Berkeley, his detailed analysis in this book went a long way in changing my personal views about the crime problem in America.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
