The onset of adult offending: A neglected dimension of the criminal career

The conventional wisdom in criminology is that adult onset of offending is a rare event. Closer examination of the extant literature that use official records, however, reveals that an average of 50 percent of adult offenders initiate offending at age eighteen or older. Although criminological research has investigated late onset offending in adolescence, there is little research on adult onset offending and the correlates of adult offending. Using police contact and interview data from the 1942 and 1949 birth cohort data from Racine, WI, this study investigated the correlates of crime for adult onset and persistent offenders. The results show that employment is the only correlate to affect the probability of adult offending differently for previously delinquent and nondelinquent offenders. This article concludes by highlighting the neglect of research on adult offenders, specifically the large percentage of adult onset offenders, and calling for more research on this topic.     

Politics Lost, Politics Transformed, Politics Colonised? Theories of the Impact of Mass Media

In recent years, there has been a substantial increase in the literature on the relationship between politics and mass media, mainly in discrete topic areas such as the impact of mass media on electoral behaviour, the emergence of new forms of political communication, or media political economy. At the same time, this diverse literature has often focused on a single general issue, typically characterised in terms of the 'transformation' of politics. Despite this common theme, there has been relatively little attempt to connect and compare the different approaches. Looking at the theoretical differences in the new literature on politics and mass media reveals three perspectives – pluralist, constructivist, and structuralist. These approaches have too often tacitly co-existed, instead of more competitively striving to advance knowledge in the three main topic areas above.     

An Australian Empire Patriot and the Great War: Professor Sir Archibald T. Strong (1876–1930)

Archibald T. Strong, born in Melbourne, was the son of an Australian scholar who went to an academic post at Liverpool. The younger Strong received his secondary and tertiary education in England. There, he became proficient in modern European languages and literature. He initially planned a career in the law, but for health reasons returned to Australia to the Department of English at the University of Melbourne. Prior to the First World War, Strong became prominent in Melbourne literary circles and also a prolific commentator on world affairs. As an early member of the Round Table group in Australia, Strong assessed Imperial Germany as posing an existential threat to the British Empire and hence to Australia's security. The nation's future, he believed, lay in unwavering defence of the Empire. Strong evinced a distinct impatience with fellow citizens, especially on the socialist left, who failed, in his view, to understand the realities of Australia's position in the world and what was at stake in the Great War.     

The sentencing reform act of 1984: A bold approach to the unwarranted sentencing disparity problem

Conclusion In 1984, after years of study and thorough debate, a bipartisan majority of the Congress enacted perhaps the most far-reaching reform of the federal criminal justice system in the history of the United States. The Sentencing Reform Act and the federal sentencing guidelines are now beginning to produce data indicating that the objectives of avoiding unwarranted disparity and invidious discrimination are being achieved.After an uncertain beginning, the guidelines are gaining acceptance by courts and criminal justice practitioners. As one appellate court observed in admonishing lower courts that the guidelines must be respected:We have embarked on a new course. Only time will tell whether the use of the guidelines will result in an improvement over the old system. But unless we follow the spirit and written directions of the guidelines, we will never know if they have been given a fair test. They at least deserve that.Indeed, the bold new approach to sentencing that is being followed today in federal courthouses throughout the United States deserves an opportunity to succeed, given its many beneficial features and the lofty goals toward which the reforms are directed. While ample work remains for the United States Sentencing Commission to monitor and improve the guidelines, indications at this still early date are that the experiment is succeeding.An earlier version of this paper was presented at the fifth conference of the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, Parliament House, Edinburgh, Scotland, August 5–9, 1990. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the United States Sentencing Commission.B.A., Davidson College 1964; J.D., University of South Carolina School of Law 1967.B.A., Ohio State University 1974; M.S., Arizona State University 1980; M.A., University of California, Santa Barbara, 1983.B.S., Clemson University 1971; M.S., Clemson University 1975; J.D., University of South Carolina School of Law 1978.     

Symposium comment: On the new politics of public policy

The process is not the problem, the problem is the problem. Rudolph Penner (1984). …We argue the superiority of the outcome from the process, not of the process from the outcome. The constancy of the economist's objection to this conclusion when applied to governmental rather than market decisions simply often reflects the fact that, while some economists are not disturbed that consumer preferences lead to allocation policies other than best respond to their own tastes, when political preferences lead to governmental policies not consistent with his informed and considered preferences, they are tempted to attribute irrationality to government.