Recent Public Opinion in the United States Toward Punishment and Corrections

1993 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHRISTOPHER A. INNES

This article reviews recent public opinion data concerning punishment and corrections, yielding a number of apparently contradictory viewpoints. Rather than being irrational or unrealistic, these patterns of responses, it is argued here, can be deciphered only by assuming that the public holds a complex, generalized system of beliefs about punishment and corrections. This system of beliefs, however, is organized around broader symbols and images, not a set of mutually exclusive and logically consistent policy options. The public appears to have an abstract commitment to justice, wants the criminal justice system to work properly, and is frustrated that it does not appear to do so. Although the public is decidedly punitive toward criminals, they are more lenient toward inmates because they are no longer seen as an immediate threat. Rehabilitative efforts, so long as they are conducted within prisons, receive strong support. But the public is more wary of programs that carry greater risks because of a perceived conflict with the higher priority goal of public safety. This view is speculative; no single survey or study has explored all these issues together. It is, however, consistent with the details of various public opinion surveys, and it also lends support to those current correctional practices that seek to integrate programs for inmates with the more general concerns of correctional management. There are, therefore, several ways that correctional administrators can present their mission in a manner that is sensitive to the concerns of the public and that avoids language or terms that may be misinterpreted.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 575-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. Donovan

Academics have traditionally associated capital punishment most closely with authoritarian regimes. They have assumed an incompatibility between the death penalty and the presumably humane values of modern liberal democracy. However, recent scholarship on the United States by David Garland has suggested that a considerable degree of direct democratic control over a justice system actually tends to favor the retention and application of the death penalty. The reason why the United States has retained capital punishment after it has been abolished in other Western nations is not because public opinion is more supportive of the death penalty in America than in Europe or in Canada. Rather, it is because popular control over the justice system is greater in the United States than in other countries and this strengthens the influence of America's retentionist majority. However, the experience of the United States in this regard has not been unique. The same link between democratic control and retention of the death penalty can be seen in the history of the effort to abolish capital punishment in France. In 1908, a bill in the Chamber of Deputies (the lower house of the French Parliament) to abolish capital punishment was defeated, in large part because of strong opposition from the public. In 1981, majority public opinion in France still favored retention of the death penalty, but in that year, the nation's Parliament defied popular sentiment and outlawed the ultimate punishment. Historians have so far provided little insight into why abolition succeeded in 1981 when it failed in 1908. The explanation for the different outcome appears to have been the greater degree of influence public opinion exerted over the nation's justice system at the turn of the twentieth century than at its end.


Author(s):  
Przemysław Potocki

The article is based on an analysis of certain aspects of how the public opinion of selected nations in years 2001–2016 perceived the American foreign policy and the images of two Presidents of the United States (George W. Bush, Barack Obama). In order to achieve these research goals some polling indicators were constructed. They are linked with empirical assessments related to the foreign policy of the U.S. and the political activity of two Presidents of the United States of America which are constructed by nations in three segments of the world system. Results of the analysis confirmed the research hypotheses. The position of a given nation in the structure of the world system influenced the dynamics of perception and the directions of empirical assessments (positive/negative) of that nation’s public opinion about the USA.


Author(s):  
Pierre Rosanvallon

This chapter turns to the increasingly active role of constitutional courts. These courts have established themselves—not without reservations and challenges—as an essential vector of the push for greater reflexivity. For a long time the United States, India, and the German Federal Republic stood out as exceptions because of their traditional emphasis on judicial review. Now, however, constitutional courts of one sort or another are at the heart of democratic government everywhere. Indeed, some scholars go so far as to discern a veritable “resurrection” of constitutional thought. It is noteworthy that these new constitutional courts on the whole receive strong support from the public, as numerous comparative surveys have shown, and they count among the most legitimate of democratic institutions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (3) ◽  
pp. 856-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL TOMZ ◽  
JESSICA L. P. WEEKS

Foreign electoral intervention is an increasingly important tool for influencing politics in other countries, yet we know little about when citizens would tolerate or condemn foreign efforts to sway elections. In this article, we use experiments to study American public reactions to revelations of foreign electoral intervention. We find that even modest forms of intervention polarize the public along partisan lines. Americans are more likely to condemn foreign involvement, lose faith in democracy, and seek retaliation when a foreign power sides with the opposition, than when a foreign power aids their own party. At the same time, Americans reject military responses to electoral attacks on the United States, even when their own political party is targeted. Our findings suggest that electoral interference can divide and weaken an adversary without provoking the level of public demand for retaliation typically triggered by conventional military attacks.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-448
Author(s):  
Cláudio Júnior Damin

O artigo aborda a relação existente entre guerra e opinião pública nos Estados Unidos. O artigo foca na análise do caso da Guerra do Iraque iniciada em março de 2003 durante os mandatos de George W. Bush. Esse conflito insere-se no contexto dos ataques terroristas de 11 de setembro de 2001, sendo parte constitutiva da chamada “guerra global contra o terrorismo”. A primeira hipótese de trabalho é a de que inicialmente e reproduzindo padrões históricos anteriores, a guerra foi amplamente aprovada pela população norte-americana, processo que se prolongou por alguns meses e influenciou decisivamente para a reeleição do presidente republicano em 2004. Como segunda hipótese assevera-se que, passado algum tempo, o humor da opinião pública sofreu uma inflexão, diminuindo a aprovação popular à guerra e tendo como importante desdobramento a derrota dos republicanos na eleição de 2008, com o conflito ainda em curso. Espera-se mostrar, portanto, como a Guerra do Iraque pode ser dividida em duas fases distintas, sendo a primeira de bônus para o governo de George W. Bush e seus correligionários republicanos e a outra de ônus a partir do crescimento do número de baixas militares norte-americanas e da crise de credibilidade do governo no que concerne às perspectivas de vitória definitiva no conflito.Abstract: The article discusses the relationship between war and public opinion in the United States. The article focuses on the analysis of the case of the Iraq War that began in March 2003 during the administration of George W. Bush. This conflict is within the context of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, being a constituent part of the "Global War on Terrorism." The first hypothesis is that initially and reproducing previous historical standards, the war was widely approved by the American population, a process that was prolonged for a few months and influenced decisively to the re-election of Republican president in 2004. As a second hypothesis asserts that, after some time, the mood of public opinion has undergone a shift, reducing the public approval of the war and with the important effect the defeat of the Republicans in the 2008 election. It is expected, therefore, to show how the Iraq War can be divided into two distinct phases, with the first bonus for the George W. Bush and his fellow Republicans and other liens being from the growing number of U.S. military casualties and the crisis of credibility of the government with regard to the prospects of ultimate victory in the conflict.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-62
Author(s):  
Desmond Osaretin Oriakhogba ◽  
Gloria Kanwulia Adeola-Adedipe

Conducted as a desk research, this paper examines the interface between copyright and succession laws, the notion of testamentary freedom, its limitations and justification for its restriction. The paper draws on this examination to discuss the freedom of authors to dispose their copyright under testate and intestate arrangements, and posthumously control the use of their works under the Nigerian Copyright Act. Following this discussion, the paper identifies and examines the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act that can limit the capacity of authors to posthumously control the use of their works in Nigeria. The paper contends that authors’ liberty to transfer their copyright by testamentary disposition or operation of law, and control the use of their works posthumously, without public interest friendly limitations, can create an imbalance within the copyright system. This paper addresses the issues of whether public interest objectives may be achieved through the limitation in the extant Copyright Act, especially given the propensity for copyright misuse by authors in death, as well as during their lifetime, and what policy options may align the public interest with authors’ posthumous control of copyright. In resolving these questions, the paper draws on instances of copyright misuse in the United States of America (USA) and South Africa and situates them within the Nigerian context to shed light on the issues discussed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 921-938 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Boyle

Purpose This exploratory study was the first to obtain quantitative and qualitative data on both personal perceptions and perceived public opinion about stuttering in order to identify topics to include in anti-stigma programs for stuttering. Method Three-hundred ten adults in the United States completed a web survey that assessed knowledge about stuttering and attitudes toward people who stutter (PWS) with questions addressing personal perceptions (direct questions) and perceived public opinion (indirect questions). Results Many participants reported favorable personal perceptions of PWS regarding their intelligence, competence, and potential for success. However, most participants did not personally believe PWS were confident, and most believed they were shy. Perceived public opinion was more unfavorable as a majority agreed that the public is uncomfortable talking with PWS and that the public would recommend PWS avoid jobs requiring high speech demands and avoid talking to large audiences. A minority of participants agreed PWS are perceived publicly as capable or mentally healthy. Conclusions The survey demonstrated misunderstandings and negative perceptions of PWS, especially when measured with perceived public opinion. Results can increase our understanding of content areas that should be included in anti-stigma programs for stuttering and highlight different methods for analyzing public perceptions of stuttering.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document