RACIAL ANIMOSITY AND INTERRACIAL CRIME*

The primary objective of this study is to determine the effect of a victim's race on the likelihood of him or her being seriously injured during the commission of an interracial crime. We also assess the probability of a homicide occurring during an interracial crime. A multilevel city analysis shows that black offenders are no more apt than white offenders to injure their victims seriously during an interracial robbery or rape. A black offender also does not have a greater proclivity to kill his or her victim during the commission of an interracial crime. Some evidence suggests that white victims are more likely than black victims to suffer serious physical harm during an aggravated assault. Results also reveal that contextual factors related to racial animosity, such as residential segregation, white‐to‐black economic inequality, and black‐to‐white unemployment, fail to have any moderating effect on either the severity of victim injury or the likelihood of a homicide occurring during an interracial crime. Overall, the results generated in this study tend to cast doubt on the validity of racial animosity theory. Our findings also lead us to question the veracity of the oftenmade claim that black‐on‐white crimes are punished more severely because these types of offenses are somehow more heinous in circumstance. At least in regard to serious victim injury and victim death, black‐on‐white crime is no more violent than white‐on‐black crime.     

Business Adaptation to Regulation: What Do We Know and What Do We Need to Know?

There is, predictably, a gap between the normative model and empirical pictures of regulation drawn from many societies. We may get an approximation of the goals of much regulation, but often regulatory policy is not carried out exactly as legislated. Agencies pursue enforcement strategies in light of their priorities and resources. They engage in soft law enforcement and bargain with the targets of regulation. Regulated businesses have many tactics available to blunt or evade regulation. We can fashion plausible normative arguments both for and against these common empirical pictures. To a great extent, however, these normative positions rest on unexamined empirical assumptions. Future research might profitably focus on the roles played by those individuals who act for business associations and cope with regulation. Attention should be paid particularly to the roles played by business lawyers in such coping. James Gould Cozzens' novel , Guard of Honor, suggests how lawyers comply narrowly, evade, cover up and otherwise divert the impact of regulation, all in the service of what they see as the greater good. Cozzens' story suggests important empirical and normative questions for future consideration.     

Private Versus Public Placements A study of recidivism among adjudicated juvenile offenders

The shift from public to private placements for juveniles offenders has become much more pronounced over the last several decades. Using longitudinal data drawn from a medium-sized Midwestern county, we examine whether private residential placements are more effective than public training schools in reducing recidivism levels. We define recidivism in terms of level of reoffending, seriousness of reoffending, and time to failure. We control for a variety of demographic and legal factors to reduce the possibility of spurious findings. Results show that private placements are no more effective than commitments to state-operated institutions in reducing recidivism levels. Additionally, the cost associated with committing juveniles to private facilities is substantially higher. We conclude by considering how our study informs current debate about the privatization of juvenile corrections.