O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

SAMPLEbibliography

38 visualizações

Publicada em

  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

SAMPLEbibliography

  1. 1. Note: THIS IS A SAMPLE of my Data Base Primary Sources Tutt Library Online Data Base Title: Alternatives to incarceration [electronic resource] : a smart approach to breaking the cycle of drug use and crime Pub info: [Washington, D.C.] : Office of national Drug Control Policy, Executive Office of the President, [2011] Location: WWW Gov Docs Call 3: PREX 26.2:IN 2 Author: United States. Office of National Drug Control Policy Criminal Justice Brief: Office of National Drug Control Policy: Executive Office of the President” www.WhiteHouseDrugPolicy.gov “Alternatives to Incarceration: A smart approach to breaking the cycle of drug use and crime” à August 2011 This is a significant source of the government’s recognition of and solutions to re- incarceration. This brief focuses primarily on the relationship between drug use and re- incarceration or recidivism and how the government can change the ‘loop’ of recidivism that many substance abusers are put in. This source is thorough as the brief first recognizes the strong relationship between drug use and recidivism by providing statistical evidence. The brief then goes into government solutions. Indeed, the brief covers a number of new probation strategies already in action in various states and hypotheticals. The brief highlights one prominent and effective new criminal justice “smart” system in Hawaii called HOPE and provides statistical evidence and graphs to support the “smart” system’s success. It is significant to note, however, the date of this brief, for ‘new’ systems may no longer be ‘new’. The brief also goes over the benefits of a drug court, serving as a reminder to the government itself that although they have been around for the last 20 years, the government should continue to use drug courts as an alternative to incarcerating users of illegal drugs and re-incarceration. This brief is helpful for it recognizes and covers the economic statuses of the new alternatives, existing alternatives like drug courts, and incarceration. Title: The Case for More Incarceration Pub Info: [Washington, D.C.] : U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Policy and Communications, Office of Policy Development, 1992 Location: WWW Gov Docs Call #: J 1.2:IN 2x Author: United States. Department of Justice. Office of Policy Development, issuing body. The Department of Justice’s “The Case for More Incarceration” This government document, written by the Attorney General William P. Barr, is a case for more incarceration in the United States. Barr’s case is significant for
  2. 2. contemporaries because Barr is essentially arguing for what most contemporaries consider to be the problem with prisons and incarceration in the United States today, the year 2015. Barr presents solutions that are argued against in 2015 such as creating stricter and longer probation periods, if they must be on probating and not in prison, keeping prisoners in prison for their original allotted time and therefore creating stricter regulations around prisoners getting parole, and locking more criminals up in new prisons that will not have over crowding issues. Although Barr’s arguments are outdated, his case is organized, thorough, and presents statistical evidence for inquiries into fluctuating yearly incarceration rates. Amongst his persuasion, he presents in his case examples of states decreasing the amount of incarceration and their outcomes. His case allows the researcher to get insight into past motivations for the government to build more prisons and incarcerate more ‘criminals’. Barr does not explore solutions to crime and drug abuse other than more prisons, and he uses presumptuous language like, “the simple fact is that the best way to stop crime is to put criminals in prison” and presumptuous ultimatums like “more prisons or more crime”. Indeed, his main argument is that prisons work and that “prisons don’t commit crimes; criminals do”. Title: An Overview of the Colorado Adult Criminal Justice System Location: Special Collections Author: Colorado Legislative Council Date: February 1996 This report consists of 16 chapters reviewing the Colorado Adult Criminal Justice System, beginning with the Adult Offender System Overview moving to Sentencing Placement of Convicted Felons and ending with Analysis of Truth in Sentencing Alternatives. Each chapter provides statistical evidence followed with graphs and analysis. All data is taken up to the year 1995. Title: Oversight of the federal death penalty [electronic resource] : hearing before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Tenth Congress, first session, June 27, 2007 Author: Unites States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on the Constitution Pub info: Washington : U.S. G.P.P., 2009 Location: WWW GOv Docs , Call # Y 4.J 89/2:S.HRG.110-743 Status: On-Line This document is an oversight hearing on the Federal Death Penalty. This hearing took place in 2007; the last oversight hearing on the federal death penalty before this hearing was in 2001. Since this hearing, the most recent revisions to the federal death penalty protocols were in 2011 (fact check!). The Chairman of this hearing, Hon. Russell D. Feingold and Senator from the state of Wisconsin, questions the secrecy of the Department of Justice’s newly released federal death penalty. This hearing and Chairman Feingold strive for transparency in the protocols and review process of the federal death penalty. Chairman Feingold believes that the “trust has been shaken” between Congress and the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, and he is therefore coming from
  3. 3. a position of skepticism towards the moral weight of the federal death penalty review process. Chairman Feingold has a witness panel consisting of 8 men that are related to the criminal justice system. Chairman Feingold asks questions to these 8 men and they answer and give their appeal in detail. This hearing also includes pre-hearing questions that Chairman Feingold asked to the Department of Justice.

×