有效监督制度的稀缺与补救——对社区居民警务议事会制度的分析

社会监督具有突出的随机性、灵活性和广泛性的特点,但在通常情况下,社会监督的力量是分散的,没有形成合力,并且也没有通畅的渠道来表达,因而不能形成直接而有效的监督。实行警务议事会制度以后,群众的监督力量被充分凝聚起来,各种监督信息也被充分汇集,从而形成了对被监督者全面而有效的监督。这种临时的制度安排,是我国转型期内有效监督制度稀缺的补救,同时也是建立我国长效监督机制的基础。     

CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES

From a conflict resolution perspective, it is clear why the child support guidelines are not going to reduce the adequacy and compliance gaps in child support payment conflicts between parents. As it stands, the conflict over equally sharing child support is destructive rather than positive. The guidelines do not reframe the conflict for the parents, enabling them to believe the interests of children are more important than their own interests to win the child support battle. To transform conflict from destructive to positive, the elements of conflict–expression of the conflict, scarce resources and rewards, and interdependency–must be transformed. It is argued that the guidelines do not transform the conflict but facilitate it. Courts and attorneys are also significant players in the child support conflict.     

High performance liquid chromatographic determination of alcohols with reference to body distribution of methanol

A method has been developed on reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography for simultaneous determination of methyl, ethyl and isopropyl alcohols under refractive index detection using pure water as the mobile phase. A good separation has been achieved between these alcohols. Detector response was linear with a detection limit of 5 mg/100 ml. Recovery studies were performed by adding known amounts of methyl and ethyl alcohols to blood, lung and liver within the range 80–90%. The reproducibility of the results was always >90%. The quantitative distribution of methyl alcohol in postmortem body tissues and fluids has been reported in three cases of poisoning.     

浅析社会因素对印度与巴基斯坦和解的意义

1947年分治以后,印巴两国已经为了克什米尔等问题交恶数十年,和解似乎总是遥遥无期,尽管目前两国领导人多次做出和解的善意举动和行为,但是关键时刻出现的阻碍和解进程的意外事件发生总是让两国出现的和解再度幻灭。究其原因在于两国之间社会层面因素成为和解的主要阻碍。本文试图从社会层面入手分析国家与社会之间的张力带给和解进程的含义,着重提出社会层面问题上解决两国和解问题上的政策建议。     

A CROSS‐NATIONAL TEST OF BONGER'S THEORY OF CRIMINALITY AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS*

Using international data for 100 countries, we test two hypotheses derived from Bonger's Marxian theory of crime. The analyses support the hypothesis that the degree of capitalism significantly predicts homicide rates, but they fail to confirm that the de‐moralization of the population (loss of moral feelings for others) mediates the relationship between capitalism and homicide. Although capitalism is not the best predictor among those considered, overall, the results underline the importance of Bonger's ideas because both capitalism and corruption (our indicator of de‐moralization) show reasonably strong relationships with homicide rates and compete with other variables commonly used as predictors of international homicide rates. The results confirm the usefulness of attempting to subject Marxian ideas to positivist, quantitative tests, with an eye to integrating Marxian theories with other mainstream theories, such as institutional anomie theory.     

一部高等学校管理学研究的力作—-评柳菊兴教授的《大学的追求》

前不久,柳菊兴教授的新著《大学的追求》由华中师范大学出版社出版。这是作者在大学的领导和教学岗位上苦苦探索、孜孜追求的又一思想结晶,也是作者推出的一部高等学校管理学研究的力作。我们作为这部书的责任编辑和第一读者,读了该书之后,感触颇多。柳菊兴的《大学的追求》,确有很多值得称道的地方。在我看来,此书最值得称道的有以下三点:一是立意高新。“路漫漫其修远兮,吾将上下而求索”,这是屈原的一种追求;“人生自古谁无死,留取丹心照汗青”,这是文天祥的一种追求;“我自横刀向天笑,去留肝胆两昆仑”,这是谭嗣同的一种追求。那么,柳菊…     

DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the interpretation of mixtures

The DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics (ISFG) was convened at the 21st congress of the International Society for Forensic Genetics held between 13 and 17 September in the Azores, Portugal. The purpose of the group was to agree on guidelines to encourage best practice that can be universally applied to assist with mixture interpretation. In addition the commission was tasked to provide guidance on low copy number (LCN) reporting. Our discussions have highlighted a significant need for continuing education and research into this area. We have attempted to present a consensus from experts but to be practical we do not claim to have conveyed a clear vision in every respect in this difficult subject. For this reason, we propose to allow a period of time for feedback and reflection by the scientific community. Then the DNA commission will meet again to consider further recommendations.     

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.