MCJ 6530, Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy 1 Course Learning Outcomes for Unit VIII Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to: 1. Evaluate various types of public policy ideologies. 1.1 Explain the controversies surrounding the death penalty. 2. Compare and contrast internal and external influences on criminal justice public policy. 3. Assess the role of criminal justice public policy. 4. Evaluate the impact of public opinion on criminal justice policies over the past 50 years. 4.1 Evaluate public opinion on criminal justice laws. Course/Unit Learning Outcomes Learning Activity 1.1 Unit Lesson Chapter 9 Final Exam 2 Final Exam 3 Final Exam 4.1 Unit Lesson Chapter 9 Final Exam Reading Assignment Chapter 9: The Death Penalty Unit Lesson Introduction First, thank you for your patience during the last seven units. Public policy related to criminal justice is a difficult and often nerve-racking subject. The thing that makes policymaking in this arena so difficult is the delicate balance that the stakeholders must navigate. It is a fact that the debate regarding whether to punish, to treat and rehabilitate, or to demonstrate retribution has plagued the United States for over 200 years. Gau (2019) states “One truism that should have emerged plainly in previous chapters is that purely punishment- and control-based approaches do not reduce recidivism, prevent crime, or enhance public peace” (p. 242). The criminal justice system is based in social control through law, and the police are the duly-appointed representatives sworn to carry out that function. There are two questions that we must revisit. Initially, do we have too many laws that prohibit behavior in the United States, and secondly, as has been asked before in this course, do we incarcerate too many people for non-violent offenses? The answer to both questions is yes. Therefore, what do we do to amend criminal codes across the United States, and how do we deter crime? UNIT VIII STUDY GUIDE Community-Based Crime Control MCJ 6530, Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy 2 UNIT x STUDY GUIDE Title Community-Based Crime Control Strategies Community-based initiatives begin and end with the involvement of those who live and work in a specific geographic area. Bursik and Grasmick (as cited in Gau, 2019) stated, “Ultimately, the goal is social control. Social control is the attempt to protect the area from threats that may undermine its regulatory ability” (p. 245). To be successful, community-based strategies must begin with the family and the immediate circle of associates in the neighborhood; this is a private method of control espoused by Hunter (as cited in Gau, 2019). Once the private method of control is demonstrated to be effective, control expands to a larger area (parochial) that involves similar cooperation from the business community, commun.

1. MCJ 6530, Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy 1
Course Learning Outcomes for Unit VIII
Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
1. Evaluate various types of public policy ideologies.
1.1 Explain the controversies surrounding the death penalty.
2. Compare and contrast internal and external influences on
criminal justice public policy.
3. Assess the role of criminal justice public policy.
4. Evaluate the impact of public opinion on criminal justice
policies over the past 50 years.
4.1 Evaluate public opinion on criminal justice laws.
Course/Unit
Learning Outcomes
Learning Activity

2. 1.1
Unit Lesson
Chapter 9
Final Exam
2 Final Exam
3 Final Exam
4.1
Unit Lesson
Chapter 9
Final Exam
Reading Assignment
Chapter 9: The Death Penalty
Unit Lesson
Introduction
First, thank you for your patience during the last seven units.
Public policy related to criminal justice is a
difficult and often nerve-racking subject. The thing that makes
policymaking in this arena so difficult is the
delicate balance that the stakeholders must navigate. It is a fact
that the debate regarding whether to punish,
to treat and rehabilitate, or to demonstrate retribution has
plagued the United States for over 200 years. Gau
(2019) states “One truism that should have emerged plainly in
previous chapters is that purely punishment-
and control-based approaches do not reduce recidivism, prevent

3. crime, or enhance public peace” (p. 242).
The criminal justice system is based in social control through
law, and the police are the duly-appointed
representatives sworn to carry out that function. There are two
questions that we must revisit. Initially, do we
have too many laws that prohibit behavior in the United States,
and secondly, as has been asked before in
this course, do we incarcerate too many people for non-violent
offenses? The answer to both questions is
yes. Therefore, what do we do to amend criminal codes across
the United States, and how do we deter
crime?
UNIT VIII STUDY GUIDE
Community-Based Crime Control
MCJ 6530, Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy 2
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
Community-Based Crime Control Strategies
Community-based initiatives begin and end with the
involvement of those who live and work in a specific
geographic area. Bursik and Grasmick (as cited in Gau, 2019)

4. stated, “Ultimately, the goal is social control.
Social control is the attempt to protect the area from threats that
may undermine its regulatory ability” (p. 245).
To be successful, community-based strategies must begin with
the family and the immediate circle of
associates in the neighborhood; this is a private method of
control espoused by Hunter (as cited in Gau,
2019). Once the private method of control is demonstrated to be
effective, control expands to a larger area
(parochial) that involves similar cooperation from the business
community, community associations, and
spiritual leaders. After both of these levels of cooperation have
been established, the third level is
incorporated. Local government and the plethora of services the
government provides support to the private
and parochial entities. One of the areas of local government is
law enforcement, and herein lies one of the
problems. Historically, the relationship between the police and
the community has been strained, especially in
lower socioeconomic areas.
Place-Based Crime Prevention
Gau (2019) relates that policy makers, scholars, and others
became weary of certain criminological theories
as tools to deter and reduce crime and pushed for what they
called place-based crime prevention. The idea
was to isolate the areas where crime was prevalent and to send
resources to those areas to understand why
crime was happening. This was a good first step in deterring
and reducing crime, but it was not enough, and
scholars began working on a revised notion of the traditional
deterrence theory. This led to additional steps
and theories. One of the most successful theories or initiatives
was problem-oriented policing introduced by

5. Herman Goldstein.
Problem-Oriented Policing
Unlike many countries around the world, law enforcement in the
United States is created and derives its
power, authority, and jurisdiction through legislative
enactment—they are civilian in nature even though in the
last two decades there are some militaristic similarities. Law
enforcement is part of the executive branch of
government at the local, state, and federal levels, and they are
responsible for enforcing the law, maintaining
the peace, and serving and protecting citizens.
Arresting alleged offenders is part of serving and protecting
citizens and often means there will be conflict and
debate over the tactics used by the people society has entrusted
with this responsibility. Goldstein (1990)
points out that policing needed to change; it had to improve so
they could be more effective and earn and
keep the respect of citizens. The public depends on the police to
be effective but to also be fair and impartial
in their application of the law. Essentially, police needed to
focus more on the ends rather than the means, the
latter being the focus of police administrators for decades.
For decades, police responded to calls for service and, quite
truthfully, only dealt with the immediate and
obvious problems—microscopic, superficial manifestations of
an unknown, deeply rooted, larger issue or
issues. Many policy makers would point to poverty,
unemployment, poor housing, lack of self-esteem, racism,
and poor education; however, longitudinal research indicates
crime and criminality are caused by the early

6. experiences in one’s life such as family; neighborhood;
temperament; and values, morals, and ethics (Wilson
& Petersilia, 1995).
Gau (2019) states “social disorganization—while a reliable
predictor of crime—does not operate uniformly
across all types of troubled neighborhoods. Some
socioeconomically distressed areas suffer high levels of
disorganization, but others are better described as differentially
organized” (p. 245). The fact remains;
community-based strategies must begin with the family and
their immediate affiliates in their neighborhood in
order to guide, mentor, and deter crime.
Problem-oriented policing (POP) is a strategy that requires
police to identify problems, assess the
microscopic details of that problem, relate similar incidences,
and then formulate a response to the problem.
After the application of the proposed solution, an assessment is
made, followed by adjustments. The heart of
POP is that the response to future problems of a similar nature
be addressed by something other than the
criminal justice system (Goldstein, 1990). For more information
on POP and associated issues including 25
techniques of situational prevention, please visit the Center for
Problem-Oriented Policing.
http://www.popcenter.org/25techniques/
MCJ 6530, Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy 3
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

7. Title
Broken Windows Theory
The broken windows theory foundation for success is through
the control of disorder, reduction in the fear of
crime (a perception), and strict order maintenance (Wilson &
Kelling as cited in Gau, 2019). Unfortunately,
some deemed the broken windows theory as a broken or
unfulfilled attempt because it was implemented
improperly (Gau & Pratt; Harcourt; and Taylor as cited in Gau,
2019). In fact, Taylor (2001) wrote a wonderful
book called Breaking Away From Broken Windows: Baltimore
Neighborhoods and the Nationwide Fight
Against Crime, Grime, Fear, and Decline. Taylor’s (2001) thesis
is that while some of the elements of broken
windows are a good start, they do not go far enough, and
political leaders, policy makers, business owners,
community leaders, and others must change the economic
fortunes of the lower socioeconomic class in
Baltimore and other similarly situated urban centers.
Third-Party Responsibility
Third-party responsibility is an idea that is long overdue.
Absentee landlords who neglect their properties or
are considered absentee landlords must be held accountable for
the properties they own and manage. It is
not good enough to simply ignore problems in apartment
buildings. Additionally, this idea relies on city zoning
officials, code enforcement officers, and the civil justice system

8. to enforce laws associated with these issues.
Gau (2019) states, “This strategy entails leveraging civil and
regulatory laws against the owners of locations
where trouble recurs” (p. 250), which includes commercial
outlets, such as bars and taverns. This type of
action is usually prompted by citizens and citizen groups,
neighborhood associations, and others. When the
government takes its responsibility seriously and provides the
necessary resources to enforce civil and
regulatory laws, the community is better served. At the same
time, problems may get out of hand because
wealthy people who have influence in city and state government
use their influence to delay or side-step such
actions.
Community Courts
Community courts are modern outgrowths of specialized courts,
and their function is “to provide localized
justice sensitive to community wishes and problems, and to use
arbitration, mediation, and restorative
penalties like victim restitution in lieu of formal prosecution
and punishment” (Alper & Nichols as cited in Gau,
2019, p. 252). These courts serve a few purposes. First, they
serve as a tool to avoid entry into the criminal
justice system. Next, they serve as deterrents in some ways.
Finally, they give confidence to residents who
feel as though their voices are being heard and they have a say
in what happens in their communities (Gau,
2019). However, they do have their detractors who claim that
what the community courts do is widen the net
to include minor offenses and violations.
Restorative Justice

9. Dorne (2008) relates that restorative justice has become
widespread because it is a system of justice that
includes forming relationships between the victim, offender,
community, and government. At the same time,
while restorative justice has been around since approximately
1978, it is claimed to be used sparingly. It is
seen as a holistic approach in some circumstances such as
dealing with juveniles, but it is not going to
replace the criminal or juvenile-justice system. Restorative
justice relies on restitution that can be monetary or
services rendered. Of course, this does not apply in all cases
such as crimes of violence, and there is not a
conclusive definition of restorative justice.
Conclusion
In the United States, there is a tendency to declare war on
everything (war on crime, war on drugs, war on
homelessness, etc.). When war is declared, the people become
the enemy (those who commit crimes), and
this only serves to denigrate the relationship between the people
and the government (especially police). New
ways must be found to deter crime, reduce crime, and reduce the
number of people we incarcerate. This
course has provided you with information on criminal justice
public policy. Hopefully, you are better informed
and the information in this course will help you in your
professional career.

10. MCJ 6530, Critical Analysis of Criminal Justice Public Policy 4
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
References
Dorne, C. K. (2008). Restorative justice in the United States.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gau, J. M. (2019). Criminal justice policy: Origins and
effectiveness. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Goldstein, H. (1990). Problem-oriented policing. New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
Taylor, R. B. (2001). Breaking away from broken windows:
Baltimore neighborhoods and the nationwide fight
against crime, grime, fear, and decline. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.
Wilson, J. Q., & Petersilia, J. (1995). Crime: Twenty-eight
leading experts look at the most pressing problem
of our time. San Francisco, CA: ICS.