Parents and Drugs

This article examines three hypotheses about the relationship between attachment to parents and children's drug use when parents are perceived by their children as having used drugs. Hirschi's hypothesis that attachment to parents inhibits delinquency regardless of parental behavior is rejected in favor of hypotheses that predict variation in that relationship. In contrast to attachment to straight parents, attachment to drug-using parents does not inhibit drug use significantly and there are occasional hints at reversals in the relationships.     

AGE AND RULE-BREAKING IN PRISON A Test of Sociocultural Interpretations

Age differences in rule-breaking have been widely noted and widely explained, but rarely if ever have sociological explanations been subjected to actual test. This study examines such age differences among women in prison and lends support to the notion that age differences are more characteristic of inmates with urban backgrounds than of inmates with rural or small town backgrounds. Moreover, among urban inmates age differences appear to be due to age-related normative orientations and commitments rather than age “itself” or related losses of “energy,”“daring,” or “vigor.” Finally, the study supports recurring arguments that non-constitutional characteristics of inmates can shape normative and behavioral conflict within the prison.     

Seats, Votes, and Gerrymandering: Estimating Representation and Bias in State Legislative Redistricting

The Davis V. Bandemer case focused much attention on the problem of using statistical evidence to demonstrate the existence of political gerrymandering. In this paper, we evaluate the uses and limitations of measures of the seat-votes relationship in the Bandemer case. We outline a statistical method we have developed that can be used to estimate bias and the form of representation in legislative redistricting. We apply this method to Indiana state House and Senate elections for the period 1972 to 1984 and demonstrate a maximum bias of 6.2% toward the Republicans in the House and a 2.8% bias in the Senate.     

ADVERSARIAL AND NONADVERSARIAL JUSTICE: A COMPARISON OF GUILTY PLEAS AND TRIALS*

Despite the frequency of guilty pleas, researchers disagree about the ability of plea bargaining to provide justice. Critics argue that plea bargaining deprives defendants of due process rights and procedural safeguards Proponents argue that guilty pleas save resources for cases that require trial and allow officials flexibility to tailor justice to individual defendants. This article explores these issues by examining the effect of defendant and case characteristics on sentence severity for 3,269 male robbery and burglary defendants who either pled guilty or were tried in six U.S. jurisdictions, three of which had recently attempted to eliminate or greatly reduce plea bargaining and three with few restrictions on plea bargaining. The results confirm some criticisms of plea bargaining, but refute others. More criminally experienced defendants and defendants who pled guilty at the earliest opportunity did not receive sentencing leniency. Moreover, to a large extent, the same variables predict sentence severity for guilty pleas and trials. In contrast, the results show that defendants convicted at trial received more severe sanctions than defendants who pled guilty, controlling for case severity, evidence, and offender characteristics The results also suggest that the jurisdictions which attempted to control plea bargaining through more centralized control of assistance succeeded in tightening the fit between case characteristics and sentences for both cases adjudicated by guilty plea and trial.     

LABELING AND IDENTITY

This article is both a response to criticism of some of the aurhor's work on Abstract the relevance of labeling to adolescent self-conceptions and an attempt to reconcile divergent findings. Through a reanalysis of the data under question, it was found that both official labeling and self-reporred delinquency are related to delinquent self-images but that self-reported delinquency is more closely associated with such images than official labels. In an effort to reconcile divergent findings, there was some indication in the data that the impact of official labeling may vary depending on the extent of involvement in delinquency. The most pressing task regarding this issue is further study of the variable meaning of labels and sanctions in different sociocultural and group contexts.     

CORRELATES OF VIOLENT POLITICAL EXTREMISM IN THE UNITED STATES*

Although research on terrorism has grown rapidly in recent years, few scholars have applied criminological theories to the analysis of individual‐level political extremism. Instead, researchers focused on radicalization have drawn primarily from political science and psychology and have overwhelmingly concentrated on violent extremists, leaving little variation in the dependent variable. With the use of a newly available data set, we test whether variables derived from prominent criminological theories are helpful in distinguishing between nonviolent and violent extremists. The results show that variables related to social control (lack of stable employment), social learning (radical peers), psychological perspectives (history of mental illness), and criminal record all have significant effects on participation in violent political extremism and are robust across multiple techniques for imputing missing data. At the same time, other common indicators of social control (e.g., education and marital status) and social learning perspectives (e.g., radical family members) were not significant in the multivariate models. We argue that terrorism research would benefit from including criminology insights and by considering political radicalization as a dynamic, evolving process, much as life‐course criminology treats more common forms of crime.     

The Effects of Term Limits on State Legislatures: A New Survey of the 50 States

Term limits on legislators were adopted in 21 states during the early 1990s. Beginning in 1996, the limits legally barred incumbents from reelection in 11 states, and they will do so in four more by 2010. In 2002, we conducted the only survey of legislators in all 50 states aimed at assessing the impact of term limits on state legislative representation. We found that term limits have virtually no effect on the types of people elected to office—whether measured by a range of demographic characteristics or by ideological predisposition—but they do have measurable impact on certain behaviors and priorities reported by legislators in the survey, and on the balance of power among various institutional actors in the arena of state politics. We characterize the biggest impact on behavior and priorities as a “Burkean shift,” whereby term‐limited legislators become less beholden to the constituents in their geographical districts and more attentive to other concerns. The reform also increases the power of the executive branch (governors and the bureaucracy) over legislative outcomes and weakens the influence of majority party leaders and committee chairs, albeit for different reasons.