Reference no: EM133260712
The Background:
Beginning in the early 1960s and peaking in the 1990s, the United States experienced a dramatic increase in all types of crime. In response, many states, including Oregon, passed so-called "tough-on-crime" laws that sought to deter or prevent crime though harsh punishment. Such legislation reflected public fears of crime as well as attitudes and beliefs about those who commit crime.
Oregon's Response to Rising Crime:
In 1988, voters passed Ballot Measure 4, which prohibited probation sentences and sentence reduction for certain repeat offenders.
In 1989, Oregon reformed its sentencing system by adopting sentencing guidelines and doing away with parole altogether. The sentencing guidelines were designed to ensure greater consistency in how offenders for similar crimes were sentenced across the state and to ensure that punishments were appropriate to the crime. After they were instituted, the guidelines had two effects: 1) increased rates of imprisonment and lengths of stay for convictions of violent crimes and drug crimes other than simple possession; 2) decreased rates and sentence lengths for property crimes.
In 1994, the voters of Oregon passed Ballot Measure 11, which mandated prison sentences, minimum lengths of stay, and prohibited early release for specific crimes of sex and violence. In addition, the ballot measure required that all juveniles 15 or older be prosecuted as adults.
Response Paper Instructions
Read the 1994 ballot initiative including the arguments raised for and against Measure 11.
Look at these charts depicting the violent and property crime rates in Oregon.
Look at the table and chart depicting incarceration trends in Oregon.
Explain the passage of Measure 11 in the context of the classical criminology and the neo-classical deterrence theories presented in chapter 2.
How specifically did advocates think Measure 11 would reduce crime?
The text describes the resurgence of deterrence theories in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. Is it more likely that lawmakers and members of the public were influenced by these criminological theories or that the criminologists who developed these theories were influenced by rising crime rates? Explain.
How would you vote if similar legislation were proposed today? Why?