Contributions of quantitative methods to the study of gender and crime,or bootstrapping our way into the theoretical thicket

Researchers concur on the importance of gender to the study of crime but not on the particular methodological strategy that should be used when studying the gender-crime relationship. This paper examines the actual and potential contributions of quantitative methods for unpacking the gender-crime relationship. Three bodies of literature pertaining to the gender-crime relationship are examined: (i) offending, (ii) victimization, and (iii) criminal justice processing. The findings from this review indicate that while much knowledge about the gender-crime relationship has been uncovered with quantitative data, a commensurate amount of theoretical knowledge does not exist. The author concludes with substantive and methodological suggestions for furthering our understanding of the gendercrime relationship. This paper was prepared for the Plenary Session,Journal of Quantitative Criminology 10-year Anniversary, 1995 Annual Meeting of the american Society of Criminology, Boston, MA.     

Pathways to aggression: A factorial survey of “Routine conflict”

Based on data collected in 1994 from a factorial survey of 2052 respondents, this paper examines how routine conflict may escalate into aggression taking into account social context and characteristics of the victim and offender. Following Luckenbill and Doyle's (1989) suggestion, we developed a series of scenarios to examine the influence of structural position on the emergence of disputes and the legitimation of aggression. The analysis reveals a direct relationship between the intensity of an attack with the emergence of a dispute and the legitimation of aggression. Results indicate that situational aspects of structural position do not extend beyond sex differences. This emphasizes the generalizing effect of male on male confrontation in the legitimation of aggression. The strengths and limitations of scenario-based research for understanding violence in society are discussed. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology, Miami, November 1994.     

汉律中的县道官“断狱”权探析

县、道是汉代地方郡县二级制下平级的基础政区,县道官是县、道的行政司法长官,有广泛的刑事司法权,"断狱"权是县道官刑事司法权的核心部份。县道官"令、长、丞"有"断狱"权,他们对"死罪"、"过失杀"、"戏而杀人"案件有初审权,对非死罪案件有终审权;县道官"断狱"的法律程序包括"传《爰书》"、"讯鞫"、"论当"等部分;县道官"擅移狱"、"鞠狱故纵"、"不直"、"弗穷审"须承担刑事责任。汉代县道官"断狱"权的法律规定呈现出权责分明的总体特点。     

“重重”：世界范围内教育刑主义的反动

面对严重危及社会生存与发展、民众安宁与秩序的一些严重犯罪,"重重"是世界范围内的一种刑事政策选择现实与趋势."重重"绝非一种重刑主义政策,其核心含义与要求是严密法网并严格责任.其基本的理论假定是:既然刑罚的矫治罪犯、回归犯罪人并预防犯罪的目的对有些犯罪与犯罪人难以达到,那么起码有一点能够做到,那就是,让刑罚发挥其能够起到的惩罚犯罪的作用,从而更好地保护社会.