The Dynamics of Party Preference Change in Britain, 1991–1996

The paper examines individual-level data from the first six waves of the British Household Panel Survey, 1991–96. The analysis shows that changes in party support in this period were significantly affected by two sets of factors that have traditionally been regarded as important sources of changes in voters' political preferences: ideology and personal economic experiences. Ideological change is demonstrated to have much stronger direct effects on party preference than economic factors. However, both objective economic conditions and subjective economic perceptions are shown to have significant effects on ideological change itself, implying that economic factors also exert important indirect effects on voters' partisan preferences. These individual-level findings provide important corroboration for the results of aggregate-level studies, which have consistently found that economic factors—and in particular economic perceptions—play a major role in determining patterns of partisan support.     

Risk assessment in offenders with mental disorders: relative efficacy of personal demographic, criminal history, and clinical variables

Following the meta-analysis by Bonta, Law, and Hanson, (1998) this study examined the ability of personal demographic, criminal history, and clinical variables to predict reoffending in offenders in the United Kingdom who had mental disorders. The efficacy of each variable in predicting rate of general reoffending and violent reoffending was investigated. Age on admission, number of days hospitalized, and number of previous offenses were the most effective variables in predicting re-offending, with number of previous offenses being the strongest predictor. Clinical diagnosis was not predictive of reoffending when the variance attributable to these other predictors was controlled for. None of the variables were able to discriminate between general offenders and violent offenders indicating that the same variables predict both types of reoffending. The results showed that reconviction in offenders with mental disorders can be predicted using the same criminogenic variables that are predictive in offenders without mental disorders.     

Soldiers as Public Officials: A Moral Justification for Combatant Immunity

How can we make moral sense of the international humanitarian law doctrine of combatant immunity? The doctrine is morally shocking to many: It holds soldiers on both sides of a war immune from criminal prosecution for their otherwise criminal acts of killing, maiming, destroying property, etc., carried out as part of their country's war effort. That is, soldiers who kill as part of an attack benefit from the immunity just as much as those defending their country. Traditionally, just war theorists have tried to provide situation‐specific arguments to show that soldiers on both sides had a good moral justification for their actions. Recently, self‐styled “revisionist just war theorists” have suggested that the doctrine of combatant immunity is just a convention designed to minimize harm. In this article, I suggest that the moral foundation of the doctrine lies in the status of soldiers as public officials in the service of their country. The reason why we hold them immune from prosecution for their war‐making acts is that such acts are properly thought of as acts of a state, rather than as acts of a particular individual. And the reason why states are immune from prosecution for their acts is one of moral standing: No other state has the moral standing to tell another how to carry out the matters that define its jurisdiction. So as long as a country deems (however implausibly) that it must use force to defend itself from aggression, then it may do what is required to defend itself. No other state has the standing to prohibit such acts or to punish those who carry them out. This argument is rooted in an understanding of how individuals may interact as free and equal under law. It does not aim at the perfection of human action, but it does serve to eliminate the worst forms of tyranny.