He said thanks, when it was over, as Ana discreetly spat into the grass. He describes these explanations and then critiques them. While both Pfaff and Alexander attack how prosecutors use the existing system, Pfaff tends to delimit his critiques to plausible theories rather than taking his specific concerns and tracking them through the existent system. The law could regulate the weather better than medical care. I have one major critique which is that while Pfaff does not deny the importance of racial bias in criminal justice, he spends few pages on it, and has no suggestions for reform that specifically address it. Perhaps it too gives rise to deeper inquiries and better art.
Digging Deeper Than Private Prisons Pfaff also breaks with conventional wisdom on private prisons, arguing that the role they play in mass incarceration is ultimately minor. This is supported by the fact that drug arrests went up with violent crime. That sounds radical, but it shouldn't be. Conversely, we need to give him the budget to maintain statistics, of which there are currently none. Finally, Pfaff turns to the elephant in the room: violent crime, and how we deal with it.
The law forces physicians to stop treatments for drug abuse, and the drug users go back to the street with a worse epidemic of deaths by overdosing. He drops any and all sense of bureaucratic entropy from their positions within system, sometimes to the detriment of his own arguments. Still, he seems overly optimistic about the odds of a different argument. Pfaff makes a compelling argument that meaningful criminal justice reform and meaningful decarceration will require a closer look at prosecutorial practices, the political influence of public sector correctional interests, and the fraught politics of locking up violent offenders. Without explaining why, he seems to take for granted the necessity of prison as a primary tool in criminal justice.
Locked In is a revelatory investigation into the root causes of mass incarceration by one of the most exciting scholars in the country. This book is not without critics there is a Michigan law review response that attacks his data , but it's compelling even if the data is flawed. A groundbreaking examination of the U. So what makes for the madness of American incarceration? That is not to say he lacks a strong view, but he does not allow it to blind him. Instead, Pfaff urges us to look at other factors, including a major shift in prosecutor behavior that occurred in the mid-1990s, when prosecutors began bringing felony charges against arrestees about twice as often as they had before. The other was that artists, very often, do not consciously choose their subjects. Skulls Unlimited turned him down.
It has been pointed out, for example, that the great majority of gun crimes in America have nothing to do with schoolroom or movie-house massacres or the like. This is a tough political sell, as he acknowledges. But it is worth a try. His analysis of the data is that nonviolent offenses, particularly drug offenses, represent only a relatively small amount of crimes. He also faces politicians who want the budgets that come from prison populations and unions who want to protect prison jobs. A defendant, forced to choose between a thirty-year sentence if convicted of using a gun in a crime and pleading to a lesser drug offense, is bound to cop to the latter.
Ana squeezed a dropper of her antibiotic into one eye and then the other, then shut her eyes tight. The actual furlough program was a huge success in terms of its goals — 99. He typed another note to her. When the waitress left, Rowan stabbed a finger at her retreating back. Indeed, it seems as if he was very happy to lie low and carry on working hard in the trenches, until he felt the discourse was at risk of being hijacked by a narrative he does not disagree with at all, but considers dangerously incomplete and a risk to the more comprehensive approach he finds necessary. This limitation to Pfaff's work is likely just a reflection of his reluctance to rely on what he calls conjecture when outlining his New Narrative.
He is both a law professor and has a PhD in economics, and I found the book to be extremely well-researched. Pfaff seemed to have some contrarian views, but in the interview he came across as a clear thinker with an interesting perspective. Pfaff notes that these outsized punishments are given to a very small part of the actual prison population. How did we get to this point? In order to reduce the prison population, then, we are going to have to tackle how we handle violent crime. Michelle Alexander sold her story extremely effectively to the public, but in order to do so by necessity the complexities of the criminal justice system were somewhat flattened. The proposal is that we need to strike while the iron is hot. The funding, about three million dollars, came largely from Foster Friess, the political philanthropist.
What is needed is to rein in prosecutorial power, a strong and sclerotic public sector political block, and reduce prison admissions in the first place. We have bipartisan consensus on crime reform and we need to do it now, but we have to make sure that the measures we adopt are going to fix the problem. A new, still unfinished painting hung on the left wall: Donald Trump, standing on a bright-yellow escalator, glowering balefully as he descends to the lobby of Trump Tower to announce his candidacy for President. We have more prisoners than any other nation and the highest incarceration rate in the world. When Pfaff argues against what he is describing as orthodox views of the causes of mass incarceration, is he correctly characterizing those views? This program would, of course, be fatally vulnerable to a single Willie Horton: one recidivist would overwhelm, in the public mind, a thousand non-offenders. A sense of indignation and a good cause lead first to moral urgency, and then soon afterward to repetition, whereby the reformers become captive to their own rhetoric, usually at a cost to their cause.
But Pfaff provides eye-opening data that challenges this core assumption. Arden, née Florence Nightingale Graham, was a farm girl from provincial Canada. Like many political journalists, Carlson periodically accepted offers to go on television and opine. Since most prosecutors are elected, they might seem responsive to democratic discipline. She had put it in the Berlin show, where it caused no controversy. Prisons do deter, but policing does so a whole hell of a lot more.