Sierra Acai Company
Sierra Acai Company
Open 7 Days a Week
MonaVie Independent Distributor
Distributor Training
Shop Online
Enroll Now
Buy Wholesale and maintain an Active status for 2 months and we will refund your $39 Distributor Fee
Friends
Buy Wholesale and maintain an Active status for 2 months and we will refund your $39 Distributor Fee
16-September-2008 16:15:12 - Zero tolerance For other uses, see Zero tolerance disambiguation. The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. May 2008 Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. Criminology and Penology Schools Chicago School · Classical School Conflict Criminology Environmental Criminology Feminist School · Frankfurt School Integrative Criminology Italian School · Left Realism Marxist Criminology Neo-Classical School Positivist School Postmodernist School Right Realism Criminal justice portal See also Wikibooks:Social Deviance This box: view talk Zero tolerance is the concept of compelling persons in positions of authority, who might otherwise exercise their discretion in making subjective judgments regarding the severity of a given offense, to impose a pre-determined punishment regardless of individual culpability or extenuating circumstances.citation needed Zero tolerance policies are studied in criminology and are common in formal and informal policing systems around the world.citation needed The policies also appear in informal situations where there may be sexual harassment or Internet misuse in educational and workplace environments.citation needed Contents 1 History and etymology 2 Theoretical considerations 3 Areas of application 3.1 Zero tolerance and narcotics 3.2 Law enforcement in the United States 4 Criticism 5 See also 6 Notes 7 References 8 External links History and etymology The concept of Zero Tolerance 199412 originates in the 'broken window' theory of crime 1982, of which inherits the same underlying assumptions,345 and which in turn was inspired by the Safe and Clean Neighborhoods Act, approved in New Jersey in 1973.65 In 1982, conservatives James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, formulated their theory in the article Broken Windows,6 published in The Atlantic Monthly. The Atlantic Monthly was not a scientific journal of criminology, which would have applied peer review, but instead a cultural weekly of large circulation. The title of the article comes from the following example: Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it's unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside. Or consider a sidewalk. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of trash from take-out restaurants there or breaking into cars. According to scholars, zero tolerance is the concept of giving carte blanche to the police for the inflexible repression of minor offences, homeless people and the disorders associated with them.347 A well known criticism to this approach is that it redefines social problems in terms of security, 8 it considers the poor as criminals, and it reduces crimes to only street crimes, those committed by lower social classes, excluding white-collar crimes.9 On the historical examples of the application of zero tolerance kind of policies, all the scientific studies conclude that it didn't play a leading role in the reduction of crimes, a role which is instead claimed by its advocates.9 In New York, the decline of crimes rate started well before Rudolf Giuliani came to power, in 1993, and none of the decreasing processes had particular inflection under him.109 In the same period of time, the decrease in crime was the same in the other major US cities, even those with an opposite security policy; finally, in the years 1984-7 New York already experienced a policy similar to Giuliani's one, but it faced a crime increase instead.9 Two of the best American specialists, Edward Maguire, an Administration of Justice Professor at George Mason University, and John Eck from the University of Cincinnati, rigorously evaluated all the scientific work designed to test the efficiency of the police in the fight against crime. They concluded that neither the number of policemen engaged in the battle, or internal changes and organizational culture of law enforcement agencies such as the introduction of community policing have by themselves impact on the evolution of offenses.911 The crime decrease was due not the work of the police and judiciary, but to economic and demographic factors. The main ones were an unprecedented economic growth with jobs for millions of young people, and a shift from the use of crack towards other drugs.129 Since the original 1973 program had a positive impact on the citizens, who were left with the false impression it had improved their safety, the program has been described as a public relation policy instead of a safety one.5 Theoretical considerations This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. December 2007 The conceptual rationale for zero tolerance emerges from a reaction against classical utilitarianism. Jeremy Bentham had argued that penalties should be graduated so that the degree of pain threatened by the penal system would act as a deterrent by matching or exceeding the gain that might be derived from the proposed crime. At the time, capital punishment was a normative penalty. This had arisen because legislators were frustrated that less severe penalties did not seem to deter criminal behavior. Penalties were therefore raised incrementally until even relatively minor thefts were punishable by death. Bentham argued that a combination of additional resources to improve policing and a scaled reduction in penalties would achieve better results. In modern times, sentencing has become politicized as the Neo-Classical School and Right Realism have argued for a reduction in the discretion allowed to courts to adopt a just deserts approach. Rather, the judges should be constrained to impose more severe penalties in a more mechanical system which pays less regard to the question of individualized justice. The intention is to use the sentence imposed on every convicted person as a warning to others see Rational Choice Theory. The news media give maximum coverage to crime and the policies for its control see moral panic, and victimology has been included in the general political pressure for law enforcement agencies and the courts to take a firmer line. In parallel, criminologists and government advisers such as James Q. Wilson see quality of life and Fixing Broken Windows claim that by changing the physical environment and reducing opportunities to offend, there can be crime prevention through environmental design as a part of Environmental Criminology. An alternative set of strategies is offered by Left Realism. Areas of application The term is also used in the context of driving under the influence of alcohol, referring to a lower illegal blood alcohol content for drivers under the age of 21.citation needed In the U.S., the legal limit in all states is now .08%, but for drivers under 21 the prohibited level in most states is .01% or .02%. Zero tolerance and narcotics This article or section contains weasel words, vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or information. Such statements should be clarified or removed. Globe icon This article or section deals primarily with the aspects, examples, or perspectives of the subject in Sweden and does not represent a worldwide view of the subject. See also: War on drugs and Drug policy of Sweden Sweden is with its aim for a drug-free society a prominent example when it comes to implementing zero tolerance on drug use. A study have shown the police's actions against street-level drug crimes to have a preventative effect on overall drug use.13 UNODC recognized this in a special report hailing Sweden's drug policy in 2007.1415 Life-time prevalence and regular drug use among students and among the general population are considerably lower than in the rest of Europe and lower than in United States. However, this does not reflect itself in the amount of so called problem drug users where Sweden is closer to average level in EU. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction EMCDDA noted in its 2001 report in a chapter on problem drug use - in the report defined as injecting drug use and/or long-duration/regular use of opiates, cocaine and/or amphetamines - that countries with more liberal drug policies such as the Netherlands and those with a more restrictive approach such as Sweden have not very different prevalence rates, the impact of national drug policies more liberal versus more restrictive approaches on the prevalence of drug use and especially problem drug use remains unclear..1617 Law enforcement in the United States The terminology is most commonly used to describe the allocation of additional resources to combat identified crimes in particular geographical locations or for particular purposes. Hence, extra police patrols are deployed in known hot spots where prostitution and drug dealing are problems for local residents, specialized police units monitor the behavior of repeat offenders on the streets, and on-scene arrests in incidents of domestic violence are all claimed to be effective in reducing crime. According to Sherman 1997, those that do not work include: neighborhood watch programs organized with police; arrests of juveniles for minor offenses; arrests of unemployed suspects for domestic assault; increased arrests or raids on drug market locations; storefront police offices in high crime locations; and police newsletters with local crime information. Those that appear promising, defined by the authors as programs for which the level of certainty is too low to make firm conclusions, but for which based on the limited evidence there is some reason to expect some successful reduction in crime, include: proactive drunk driving arrests with breath testing may reduce accident deaths; Community policing with meetings to set priorities may reduce perceptions of crime; police showing greater respect to arrested offenders may reduce repeat offending; polite field interrogations of suspicious persons may reduce street crime; making arrest warrants to domestic violence suspects who leave the scene before police arrive may reduce domestic violence; higher number of police officers in cities may reduce crime; and gang monitoring by community workers and probation and police officers may reduce gang violence. Note that friendly or cordial policing appears to be effective at reducing recidivism risks for some serious crimes. Criticism It has been suggested that some of the information in this article's Criticism or Controversy sections be merged into other sections to achieve a more neutral presentation. Discuss Zero tolerance policing violates the Law Enforcement Code of Conduct passed by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, which says in part: The fundamental duties of a police officer include serving the community, safeguarding lives and property, protecting the innocent, keeping the peace and ensuring the rights of all to liberty, equality and justice cited in Robinson, 2002. This code requires that police behave in a courteous and fair manner, that they treat all citizens in a respectable and decent manner, and that they never use unnecessary force. As Robinson 2002: 206 explains: Zero tolerance policing runs counter to community policing and logical crime prevention efforts. To whatever degree street sweeps are viewed by citizens as brutal, suspect, militaristic, or the biased efforts of 'outsiders,' citizens will be discouraged from taking active roles in community building activities and crime prevention initiatives in conjunction with the police. Perhaps this is why the communities that most need neighborhood watch programs are least likely to be populated by residents who take active roles in them. It has been argued that zero tolerance policing will fail because its practice is alleged to destroy several important requisites for successful community policing: namely police accountability, openness to the public, and community cooperation Cox and Wade 1998: 106. Opponents of Zero Tolerance believe that such a policy neglects investigation on a case-by-case basis and may lead to unreasonably harsh penalties for crimes that may not warrant such penalties in reality. Another criticism of zero tolerance policies is that it makes no room for lack of judgement. For example, a crime enforced under zero tolerance rules may not make any excuses for someone who committed the crime under physical duress or insanity, and may simply ask the question Did this person commit this crime: Yes or no? Proponents might argue this is exactly the point; if the person commits the crime then they should receive their punishment. See also Blue-collar crime Bob Kiley Community policing Crime mapping Ray Mallon Tolerance Notes ^ Kelling, G.L., Julian, M. and Miller, S., 1994 Managing 'Squeegeeing': a problem solving exercise, New York: NYPD. ^ Dennis and Erdos 2005, p. 231 say that the 1994 report by Kelling et al, was possibly the first to use the term 'no tolerance'-soon to become 'zero tolerance' ^ a b Wacquant, Loïc 1999 ^ a b Marshall 1999, p.2 ^ a b c Tonello 2007 ^ a b Wilson and Kelling 1982 ^ anti-social behaviours associated with the homeless as in Kelling's own terminology ^ Wacquant, Loïc 1999: une comparaison méthodique montrerait tout de suite que la prétendue « montée inexorable » des « violences urbaines » est avant tout une thématique politico-médiatique visant à faciliter la redéfinition des problèmes sociaux en termes de sécurité, eng: A comparison would show immediately that the so-called inexorable rise of the urban violence is first and foremost a political-media theme aimed at facilitating the redefinition of social problems in terms of security ^ a b c d e f Wacquant, Loïc 2002 ^ Fagan et al 1998 ^ Eck and Maguire 2000 ^ Bowling 1999 ^ Knutsson, Johannes 2000, Swedish drug markets and drug policy, in Natarajan, Mangai Hough, Mike, Illegal Drug Markets, Crime Prevention Studies Criminal Justice Press 11: 179-201, ISBN: 1-881798-25-9, http://www.popcenter.org/library/crimeprevention/volume_11/08-Knutsson.pdf ^ Sweden's drug control policies model for other States - UN official ^ UNODC: Sweden's successful drug policy, 2007 ^ 2001 Annual report on the state of the drugs problem in the European Union online by EMCDDA ^ Gouverneur, Cedric 2002 The European market - The heroin route from Afghanistan to Europe References Bowling, B. 1999 The rise and fall of New York murder: zero tolerance or crack's decline? vol. 39, no. 4 1999: 531-554. Cox, S. J. Wade. 1998. The Criminal Justice Network: An Introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill. Dennis, Norman; Erdos, George 2005 Cultures and Crimes, cap. 13 Dealing with Diversity: Libertarianism and Multiculturalism pp.169-183 ISBN 1-903 386-38-1 Eck, John E.; Maguire, Edward R. 2000 Have Changes in Policing Reduced Violent Crime?, pp. 207-265 in The Crime Drop in America, ed by Alfred Blumstein and Joel Wallman. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000. Fagan, Jeffrey; Franklin Zimring et June Kim, Declining Homicide in New York City : A Tale of Two Trends, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 88-4, été 1998, pp. 1277-1324. Marshall, Jayne 1999 Zero Tolerance Policing. South Australia Office of Crime, Issue 9 March 1999. Robinson, M. 2002. Justice Blind? Ideals and Realities of American Criminal Justice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Sherman, L., D.; Gottfredson, D; MacKenzie, J; Eck, P; Reuter Bushway, S. 1997. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising. 1 Snider, Laureen. 2004 Zero Tolerance Reversed: Constituting the Non-Culpable Subject in Walkerton in What is a Crime? Defining Criminal Conduct in Contemporary Canadian Society. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, and Montreal: Laval University Press French translation, 2004: 155-84. Tonello, Fabrizio 2007 Così negli Usa è fallita la Tolleranza zero eng.: So Zero Tolerance failed in the US published by il manifesto 31 August 2007, p.5 2 3 4 Italian Wacquant, Loïc 1999 Penal 'common sense' comes to Europe - US exports zero tolerance 5 April 1999 Le Monde Diplomatique. original french version, ita version Wacquant, Loïc November 1999 Prisons of Poverty Wacquant, Loïc 2002 Sur quelques contes sécuritaires venus d'Amérique - Les impasses d'un modèle répressif French May 2002 Le Monde Diplomatique. ita version Wilson, James Q.; Kelling, George L.. Broken Windows: The police and neighborhood safety. The Atlantic Monthly, March 1982. Retrieved on 2007-09-03. 6 External links Zero tolerance policing: a select bibliography. University of Toronto, Criminology Information Service, 2004. Retrieved from http://en..org/wiki/Zero_tolerance Categories: Sweden-centric | section | Criminology | Criminal lawHidden categories: NPOV disputes from May 2008 | All NPOV disputes | All articles with statements | Articles with statements since December 2007 | Articles needing additional references from December 2007 | Articles with weasel words | Articles with limited geographic scope Views Article Discussion this page History Personal tools Log in / create account Navigation Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Search Go Search Interaction Community portal Recent changes Contact Donate to Help Toolbox What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link Cite this page Languages Deutsch Français Italiano Nederlands Português Suomi Svenska 中文 This page was last modified on 16 August 2008, at 17:13
39 Reasons to Drink Acai Juice Every Day
What is MonaVie - Watch the 8-minute video
Discovering MonaVie Video
The Power of You Video
Effects of MonaVie Active on Antioxidant Capacity in Humans
Log into your Wholesale MonaVie Account
So many of us do not eat a balanced diet, get enough sleep, have too much stress, or are impacted with toxins and pollutants. Drinking 2 ounces of MonaVie twice a day will help your body detoxify as well as build your immune system. Its the smartest thing you can do for yourself, so start today. Buying MonaVie through our company guarantees you support 7 days a week and, if you would like to share MonaVie with your family and friends we will guide you from start to finish.
1. Click on Enroll Now (30 - 55% off retail price)
2. Pay $39 for your Wholesale ID number.
3. NO minimum order required.
4. MonaVie is delivered to your door in 3 to 5 days.