Body Count: Moral Poverty ... And How to Win America's War A

[admin]

Part 3 of 3

THE VIRTUAL LEGALIZATION OF DRUGS -- OPEN- AIR DRUG MARKETS

Open-air drug markets are the most visible sign of the acceptance of the drug trade in our nation. It is a national disgrace that such markets are tolerated in virtually every major American city. Where they exist, crime, victimization, and addiction flourish. Yet many communities have demonstrated that forcing drug dealers from open spaces makes their lives more difficult and dangerous and hence their activities less frequent.

One such community success story is that of the Miami Coalition. It has helped organize a wide range of local anti-drug activities, not the least of which was pressing Dade County officials to demolish more than 2,000 crack houses. The coalition claims that crime in the area has been reduced by 24 percent and annual drug use has decreased by 40 percent as a result of its efforts. [63]

Another success story is the Safe Streets Campaign in Tacoma, Washington. It has involved 8,000 community members, including 2,000 young people, in its activities (i.e., closing down local drug markets and neighborhood prevention efforts). The campaign, formed in 1989, claims to have closed over 600 drug markets, reduced 911 calls by 23,000, and removed all graffiti from the more than 3,000 blocks it has organized. [64]

And in San Antonio, Texas, San Antonio Fighting Back has created a partnership between the community and the police to fight crime and drugs. Burglaries decreased by 19 percent and auto theft by 23 percent in one year. Resident reports to police of criminal activity increased substantially. Eighty-five crack houses have been closed, and an abandoned nursing home that became a haven for transients, drug users, and criminals on the run was demolished. A special effort for young people called Mentors Fighting Back claims to have substantially reduced criminal behavior, improved student attendance by 25 percent, and improved student grades by 30 percent. [65]

Throughout the nation thousands of neighborhoods and communities have organized themselves to confront street crime, drug dealing, and drug use. They range in sophistication from little more than neighborhood watch efforts to large programs including prevention activities in homes, schools, and workplaces and treatment and rehabilitation services. There is even a national organization, Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, located in Alexandria, Virginia, that serves as a clearinghouse for information and technical assistance. One of their recent publications, "Procedures for Establishing a Community-Based Curfew Intervention Program Through Religious Organizations," is a how-to manual prepared in collaboration with the American Bar Association. Community coalitions are important because they provide a means of enlisting local energies under local leadership and they produce results.

Many communities have demonstrated that creating a law enforcement presence and maintaining it in response to relocation efforts by drug dealers is doable -- but only if closing drug markets is made a priority. In the next year, mayors, city councils, and police chiefs should pledge to close all open-air drug markets in their communities. Citizens should demand such a pledge and make clear that they will insist that these officials keep it. We need to stop claiming that the crime and drug problem in our communities is someone else's responsibility. Decisive action can be taken by local officials and community members now.

THE ADDICTED AND THE RECORD OF THE DRUG TREATMENT SYSTEM


FIGURE 4-13. ESTIMATED NUMBER DF HEAVY AND CASUAL USERS OF COCAINE AND HEROIN, 1988-1993
Source: ONDCP and Abt Associates.

The most obvious casualties of the fad of drug use in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s are today's drug addicts. Figure 4-13 reveals that while the drop in casual cocaine use in particular has been rapid -- and thus the source of potential new addicts has been curtailed -- the heavy, addicted cocaine and heroin user populations remained roughly the same size. [66]

Heavy cocaine and heroin users also tend to use a variety of other drugs (marijuana, heroin, sedatives, and others) and alcohol. [67] Both heavy cocaine and heroin users are predominantly male, unmarried (most never married), and most commit crimes and are frequently involved in the criminal justice system. They commit crimes -- including selling drugs -- as a means of income to purchase drugs. But heavy cocaine users in particular also commit crimes as a result of "the effects of the drug itself (they become disinhibited and commit crimes), or because of a life-style choice (they participate in both drug use and criminal activity)." [68]

In one of the more intensive studies of heroin addicts, the Clinton administration's Office of National Drug Control Policy reported: "More users initiated heroin use in 1968, 1969, and 1970 than in any other years .... Twenty-five years after the last heroin epidemic, we are still suffering its effects." This study also reported that "public assistance is a major -- and perhaps the single largest -- source of income for heroin users." [69]

FEEDING WASTE AND MISMANAGEMENT IN THE DRUG TREATMENT BUREAUCRACY


FIGURE 4-14. FEDERAL DRUG TREATMENT SPENDING AND NUMBER OF PERSONS TREATED, 1988-1994
Source: National Drug Control Strategy, 1994.

The Clinton administration began by calling for a reorientation of national drug control efforts focusing on treating hard-core addicts. Some very fine drug treatment programs have proven their usefulness,  [70] but the government treatment bureaucracy is manifestly ineffective. The Clinton administration's claim that it will improve the drug problem by increasing treatment slots for hard-core addicts is contradicted by the facts found in the recent record of treatment funding and the number of persons served. [71] As shown in Figure 4-14, although federal drug treatment spending almost tripled between 1988 and 1994, the number of treatment slots remained virtually unchanged and the estimated number of persons treated declined -- from 1,557,000 in 1989 to 1,412,000 in 1994. [72]

Nonetheless, existing treatment capacity, measured in terms of persons served per year, is equivalent to more than half the total estimated number of cocaine and heroin addicts (see Figure 4-15). [73] So it is important to ask: bureaucratic waste and inefficiencies within the treatment system aside, why hasn't the system reduced the number of addicts?

Most addicts have been through treatment more than once. The fact is that drug addicts like using drugs (even though most of them also dislike some aspects and consequences of their drug use). They sometimes admit themselves to treatment programs, not to stop using drugs, but to regain greater control over their drug use. But the overwhelming majority of the addicts entering treatment with the goal of ending their use are coerced to do so by the courts, family members, or an employer. [74]


FIGURE 4-15. ESTIMATED HEAVY COCAINE AND HEROIN USERS AND ESTIMATED NUMBER OF PERSONS RECEIVING DRUG TREATMENT NATIONALLY, 1989-1993
Source: ONDCP.

A substantial number of addicts have been through many treatment programs. Some of those programs are simply not effective, but there are insufficient structures monitoring performance to force them out of business. Sometimes addicts and programs are not matched properly. [75] When the cocaine epidemic started, many heroin treatment slots were unfilled, but not enough slots for those needing treatment were tailored for cocaine addiction. Government can, and should, act to increase accountability (insist that programs receiving federal funds demonstrate they are effective) and increase service capacity in target areas, but the federal government is a very blunt and rather slow instrument for getting this done. The federally funded portion of the treatment system is estimated to be less than half the total national spending on drug treatment, and federal measures for accountability and targeting must attempt to reach through multiple layers of bureaucracy -- in the federal government, and in state and local governments.

In addition, more and more of the addict population seems to be a fixed, aging cohort, with a long history of addiction from early adulthood -- so-called hard-core addicts. Many of them are addicted to a variety of drugs and suffer from a range of pathologies, including severe mental disorders. The best treatment programs can still offer some hope of recovery, but it is also likely that for a substantial percentage of the most severely addicted there may be no effective treatment today, particularly if drugs remain widely available.

A long-term study of heroin addicts, published in 1993, highlights this problem in stark terms. Five hundred eighty-one narcotics addicts (most of them heroin addicts) were studied at intervals over 24 years. The group originally entered treatment through a criminal justice program, the California Civil Addict Program, between 1962 and 1964. A 1985-86 follow-up study of this group found that only 25 percent of them tested free of opiates, 6.9 percent were in a program of methadone maintenance (receiving the drug methadone to block the high resulting from heroin use and thus remove the strongest reason for such use), and 27.7 percent (of the group now in their late forties) had died -- and the mortality rate was accelerating. The researchers warn: "The results suggest that the eventual cessation of narcotics use is a very slow process, unlikely to occur for some addicts, especially if they have not ceased use by their late 30's." [76]

Another study of heroin addicts released in November 1994 found:

Only 15 percent of the heroin users in the study (23 of 150) had never participated in substance abuse treatment. Of the 85 percent who had received treatment, one-third (42 of 127) were currently enrolled in a treatment program ....

Among users with treatment experience, the median number of times enrolled in treatment was five. However, more than a fourth reported having been in treatment on more than ten occasions. One user reported 67 treatment experiences. [77]

On August 9, 1993, Clinton administration Drug Policy Director Lee Brown released a research paper, "Characteristics of Heavy Cocaine Users." That study contained a similar, sobering conclusion regarding the success rates of treatment programs for cocaine addicts:

While many users benefit from treatment, compulsive use is most frequently a chronic condition. The Treatment Outcome Prospectives Study (TOPS) showed that for every 10 clients who used cocaine regularly during the year prior to treatment, six clients had returned to heavy use one year after treatment, and eight clients had relapsed into heavy use within three to five years after treatment. These statistics do not accurately reflect the success of treatment outcomes. (The TOPS study is the most recent large-scale study of treatment outcomes. Many smaller scale treatment studies show results with better long-term outcomes.) Nevertheless, the TOPS data suggest that treated cocaine users are more likely than not to return to drug use. [78]

Those who assert that treatment is the answer, and those who advocate legalizing drugs and retrieving those who become addicted by expanding drug treatment, never confront the fact that today a significant portion of those who are addicted to cocaine and heroin will die of that addiction if treatment alone is the principal vehicle society employs to save them.

The 1994 crime bill contained large sums for drug courts. These provisions were highlighted by spokesmen who announced that they were being "smart and tough." The model, and essentially the justification, for this funding was the Miami Drug Court and Attorney General Janet Reno's personal involvement with it as a prosecutor. But in August, as the crime bill fight was near its peak, the Miami Herald published a lengthy report raising serious questions about the effectiveness of the program. [79] In particular, the program established to divert first- and second-time drug offenders into treatment instead of prison was being used by robbers and burglars to serve as little as 45 days. And in December the Herald reported that the chief judge overseeing the Miami Drug Court ordered an audit of the entire program, expressing alarm that it "had no mechanism to measure whether it was succeeding." [80] A central flaw in the rush to embrace drug courts as a major answer to addiction and crime is that a very large number of addicted offenders today are long-term, hard-core addicts who are poorly suited for diversion programs. Drug courts, properly run, hold promise for treating young addicts in the early stages of addiction. But young addicts in the early stages of addiction are not the primary addiction problem. Moreover, drug courts generally depend on the same probation, parole, and pretrial supervision system that is now unable to prevent a third of all violent crime from being committed by individuals under its "custody." These institutions are not a promising source of the close supervision and imposition of sanctions for resorting to drug use or withdrawing from treatment required for drug courts to be effective.

In 1994, two groups of studies were released that purport to demonstrate the effectiveness of drug treatment and its superior cost-effectiveness to all other categories of drug enforcement and supply control. One, funded by the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, received attention for its conclusion that treatment "averages [a] $7 return for every dollar invested." But it included both alcohol and drug addiction and was thus too broad to be enlightening in regard to the cost-effectiveness of treating cocaine, and particularly crack, addiction -- the most destructive addiction threat today. Moreover, the study relied on two sample groups with only a 50 percent and 46 percent response rate. Despite efforts to impute outcomes for nonrespondents from respondents, it is probable that the nonrespondents constitute very high -- with the precise level unmeasured -- treatment failures. [81] In addition, none of the sympathetic news reports noted that such benefits-to-society-for-every-dollar-invested studies for expenditures on prisons and jails have produced estimates as high as 17 to 1. [82]

A second widely reported study was funded in part by the White House drug office, and conducted by the RAND Corporation. It was entitled "Controlling Cocaine," and concluded that "treatment is seven times more cost effective in reducing cocaine consumption than the best supply control program." [83] Most of the press reports on the release of this study failed to mention that even Clinton administration drug office officials participating in the release distanced themselves from the reliability of the methods RAND used to measure the effectiveness of supply control programs. [84] And to our knowledge none of the press reports explained what the study actually found in regard to the effectiveness of programs treating cocaine addicts.

In reviewing all forms of cocaine treatment, RAND reported that 20 percent of addicts continue using drugs while in treatment and only 13.2 percent of the cocaine addicts treated reduce their drug use below weekly or more frequent use (what RAND defined as "heavy use") during the year following their treatment. Overall, RAND reported, only "6 percent of heavy users leave heavy use each year [i.e., to something less than heavy use, not to be equated with no use]. About two-thirds of that outflow is apparently due to existing treatment programs ... [and] one-third of the total annual outflow from heavy use is estimated to be due to unassisted desistance from heavy use." [85]

In other words, overall, the cocaine treatment system was only 4 percent effective in reducing heavy use and only 2 percent more effective in reducing heavy use than no treatment at all. And if effectiveness were measured in terms of the percentage of addicts who stopped using cocaine altogether and for good, the results would have been much worse.

While support for treatment programs should continue, the harsh reality of cocaine and crack addiction is that most addicts -- and most of them are hard-core, long-term addicts today -- are likely to die from the effects of their addiction sometime in their forties, if not earlier. This is yet one more compelling reason why preventing casual drug use by young people -- the first step on the path to addiction -- is so important.

As long as the drug problem is discussed in terms of treatment versus enforcement or supply versus demand, it will remain fundamentally misguided. These positions are at odds with both reality and common sense. An effective drug policy should begin with this assumption: as long as young people and those who receive treatment reside in communities where the supply of dangerous, addictive drugs remains plentiful -- i.e., where there is de facto legalization -- prevention and particularly treatment efforts will be severely undercut and, for purposes of national policy, not very effective.

THE ILLEGAL DRUG TRADE, SUPPLY REDUCTION, AND ADDICTION

What is increasingly an addict-driven trade today is still dominated by cocaine, as can be seen in Figure 4-16.86 Roughly three-fifths of the total spent on illegal drugs is spent on cocaine -- and for the most part, that means crack.


FIGURE 4-16. ESTIMATED U.S. EXPENDITURES ON ILLICIT DRUGS, 1988-1993
Source: ONDCP and Abt Associates.


FIGURE 4-17. TOTAL COCA CULTIVATION, 1986-1994
Source: INCSR.

As can be seen in Figure 4-17, working with cocaine source countries (Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia) on reducing coca87 crops stopped the increase in cultivation that occurred during the 1980s, but did not substantially reduce the crop size.88 Eradication of the plants from which illegal drugs are extracted was a principal emphasis of U.S. anti-drug policy in the 1980s. It produced disappointing results, however. Since 1987, eradication efforts in cocaine source countries have produced less than a 10 percent reduction in estimated potential cocaine production, and it only came close to 10 percent in one year -- 1992 (see Figure 4-18).

Much more encouragingly, interdiction of cocaine within the source countries and in transit from them to the United States has substantially reduced the amount of cocaine available to American markets. What could arrive, based on what could be produced, minus what was seized, declined between 1989 and 1992 (see Figure 4-19). [89] Seizures within South America increased dramatically, and U.S. assistance, particularly military detection and tracking assistance, supported interdiction throughout the hemisphere.

In 1992, half or more of potential cocaine production was seized (see Figure 4-20). Not only did interdiction stop almost twice as much cocaine as that actually consumed, supply reduction efforts actually seem to have contributed to a reduction in cocaine emergency room cases and a reduction in the population of cocaine addicts.


FIGURE 4-18. POTENTIAL COCAINE PRODUCTION, 1987 -1994
Source INCSR and ONDCP.


FIGURE 4-19. ESTIMATED COCAINE AVAILABLE TO THE U.S. MARKET, 1987-1994
Source: INCSR and ONDCP.


FIGURE 4-20. ESTIMATED COCAINE DISTRIBUTION, 1992
Source: INCSR, EPIC, and ONDCP

The Colombian government's broad and intense attack on the cocaine cartel produced a substantial disruption in the cocaine supply to the United States from the very end of 1989 into 1991, although there are no exact measures of the magnitude of that disruption (and the previous estimates of potential production cannot fully capture it). Nonetheless, there are important indicators of significant disruption with beneficial consequences, particularly for heavy cocaine users.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's data on cocaine prices throughout the nation reveal (see Figure 4-21) that in gram amounts -- the accepted retail quantity -- the downward trend in prices and upward trend in purity through early 1989 abruptly reversed.  [90] The magnitude of this change in availability is perhaps best represented by using a standardized price, that is, by calculating the cost of a 100 percent pure gram of cocaine at each point of measurement. [91] And this reduction in the availability of cocaine -- driving the price up and the purity down -- coincided with a 27 percent reduction in cocaine emergency room cases between 1989 and 1990, as can be seen in Figure 4-22. [92]


FIGURE 4-21. RETAIL COCAINE PRICE AND PURITY IN THE U.S., 1988-1992
Source: STRIDE and Abt Associates.

Medical examiner reports of deaths related to cocaine use during this period also declined. Analysis has found cocaine price increases, purity reductions, and declines in cocaine emergency room cases, deaths, and cocaine use among arrestees for all the more than 20 largest U.S. cities for which the data are available. [93] Further, this cocaine supply reduction also coincides with the estimated decline in number of heavy cocaine users previously cited. [94]

What conclusions can we draw based on the limited available data? The reduction in cocaine availability seems beyond question, and that it was a causal factor in the decline in cocaine use, particularly heavy use, is the most obvious and reasonable conclusion in light of the data. But this cannot be proven with the precision that might be demanded in circumstances where the available data were more extensive.


FIGURE 4-22. COCAINE EMERGENCY ROOM CASES AND STANDARDIZED COCAINE PRICE, 1981-1993
Source: DAWN and Abt Associates.

Second, while nonaddictive users consume a much smaller quantity of cocaine than heavy or addicted users, an almost 80 percent drop in nonaddictive users between 1985 and 1992 certainly reduced demand in a significant, if limited, extent (which is not measurable by existing surveys and analyses). In order to increase cocaine retail prices and reduce purity, supply-reduction efforts would have to cut supply beyond the amount that would have satisfied the reduced demand. So the actual supply disruption may be even greater than the change in the price and purity data. [95]

Finally, such analysis must consider whether cocaine traffickers may have manipulated supply to increase profits or for some other purpose. In fact, in smaller transactions and at the wholesale level in particular areas, law enforcement investigators have reported efforts by particular groups to influence prices by withholding supply, but these have been limited in both scope and duration. There is no evidence of either large-scale efforts to manipulate availability or the ability to do so.

If measured strictly by results, our national prevention efforts produced impressive achievements -- dramatic declines in casual cocaine use in particular -- and, contrary to conventional opinion, interdiction and cocaine source-country programs seem to have been a crucial factor in the reductions in heavy or addictive cocaine use.

Why didn't the reduction in cocaine supply continue throughout 1991 and beyond? The movement of U.S. military resources to the Persian Gulf for Desert Shield and then Desert Storm, beginning in the summer of 1991, reduced interdiction coverage, particularly in regard to some of the most powerful airborne and surface naval systems. Those resources were never returned and interdiction resources were slashed even further.

We believe the supply of drugs -- measured in their retail price and purity (which can be stated as their standardized price as cited above)  -- bears a direct relationship to the number of people who will enter emergency rooms with drug-related emergencies, not only for cocaine, but for heroin and marijuana as well, as can be seen in Figures 4-23 and 4-24. [96] In short, greater supply at lower cost means greater demand. It is the economics of mass, discount marketing.


FIGURE 4-23. HEROIN EMERGENCY ROOM CASES AND STANDARDIZED HEROIN PRICE, 1981-1993
Source: DAWN and Abt Associates.


FIGURE 4-24. MARIJUANA/HASHISH EMERGENCY ROOM CASES AND AVERAGE MARIJUANA PRICE, 1988-1993
Source: DAWN and Abt Associates

PRIORITIES FOR EFFECTIVE ACTION

TEACH THE YOUNG THAT DRUG USE IS WRONG

Preventing young people from using drugs is central to all effective anti-drug efforts. After all, young people who do not use drugs in their teens are unlikely to ever do so as adults. But each generation must be taught that illegal drug use is wrong. And this lesson must be taught by the community of adults. Specifically, children learn about drugs by what the adults around them say and do. Parents teach by precept and example. The same is true of schools and the communities. If drug use and sale is not aggressively opposed and prevented, children learn it is acceptable, despite what some adults may occasionally tell them. It will always fall to parents to provide that education in the home and to ensure that schools and their communities are teaching this lesson effectively. This task is easier, of course, if national leaders set the right example and speak in support of parents. But parents, churches, schools, youth organizations, and communities have always been, and will always remain, the first -- and most important -- line of defense.

PUT OPEN-AIR DRUG MARKETS OUT OF BUSINESS

Open-air drug markets feed addiction and are a visible sign of the toleration of the drug trade in our nation. Aggressive street-level policing can force drug dealers from open spaces and make their lives more difficult and dangerous -- and hence their activities less frequent. Many communities have demonstrated that creating a law enforcement presence and maintaining it in response to relocation efforts by drug dealers is doable -- but only if closing drug markets is made a priority. Decisive action can and should be taken by local officials and community members immediately.

SANCTION FOREIGN NATIONS THAT ARE THE SOURCE OF DRUGS

The federal government can also do what no parent or local community can: diminish the flow of drugs reaching local communities.

The United States regularly threatens and initiates trade sanctions to protect business interests -- to protect copyrights and force foreign nations to open their markets to American goods, for example. We believe there are more compelling reasons to use trade sanctions to protect American young people from drugs. Those who properly support the goal of free trade ought to recognize that their goal cannot be defended if free trade means accepting the drug trade.

America needs once again to forge an anti-drug partnership with Colombia and other Latin American nations. [97] Otherwise the cartels' grip on Colombia will not only tighten, but the leaders of the drug trade will grow stronger in many nations of South America and in Mexico. The cartels are moving rapidly toward the goal of ending all threat of serious enforcement action against their operations in this hemisphere, outside the United States. And Americans will face a virtually unrestricted flow of cocaine, heroin, and marijuana -- at lower and lower prices and higher and higher purities.

Only the threat and, if necessary, the imposition of trade sanctions will mobilize the legitimate interests in the Latin American nations to force their governments to attack drug trafficking seriously.

MAKE INTERDICTING DRUGS A TOP NATIONAL SECURITY PRIORITY

It is time to put the U.S. military in charge of stopping the flow of illegal drugs from abroad. Law enforcement agencies currently responsible for drug interdiction should be placed under the overall command and control of the military. We realize that some in the military will object to this nontraditional mission and its cost. And some inside and outside the military will object to what they will call the "militarization" of the drug war. Those are legitimate concerns. But the fact is, no law enforcement organization will ever have the intelligence-gathering resources, radar, tracking, and apprehension capabilities for the interdiction task that the military already possesses. Those military capabilities should be dedicated in a much larger, more sustained, and integrated manner to the interdiction mission -- with the military in charge of that mission outside our borders. The national security capabilities of a superpower give the United States overwhelming superiority over even the richest and most ruthless drug lords. Yet this superiority remains substantially unused. The drug trade -- in the magnitude that it exists today -- can only operate if the federal government fails to apply the national security resources to cripple it.

DESTROY THE MAJOR DRUG-TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS OPERATING WITHIN THE UNITED STATES

The drug trade inside the United States relies on sophisticated senior management. Despite periodic law enforcement successes, federal domestic enforcement agencies have produced no disruption of major trafficking operations and no sustained reductions in availability. This needs to change.

Right now federal drug enforcement lacks sufficient accountability. This could change by requiring the attorney general to prepare a report every six months identifying all major drug-trafficking organizations known to be operating in the United States [98] and a plan to deploy federal enforcement personnel to dismantle them. Congress can even impose such a policy by making funds for federal drug enforcement agencies contingent on effectively implementing it.

Most Americans' opinions about the drug problem conform remarkably to the best available research. Americans have remained steadfast in their opposition to drugs despite the arguments advanced by legalization advocates. But that steadfast conviction must be conveyed more forcefully -- particularly to today's young people. To put it another way: the issue is less about public opinion (which is strongly against drug use) than the intensity of that opinion and how well (or poorly) it translates throughout society. The majority of the American public rightly believes that drugs are a cause of moral poverty, often destroying the strongest human bonds of love and affection -- among parents and children, husbands and wives -- in their wake. The majority of the public is right, too, in its conviction that drugs feed and intensify violent crime. The key here as elsewhere, of course, is to act on that conviction. We know what needs to be done -- at the level of the federal and state governments, within communities, in our schools, and in individual lives. A successful and serious anti-drug effort will require once again taking up the proven, purposeful, and successful steps we have taken in the past.

[admin]

Part 1 of 2

5. ABOUT MORAL POVERTY: SOME THINGS WE NEED TO DO

In 1967, the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice issued The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. The first page of the report began with these disturbing words: "There is much crime in America, more than ever is reported, far more than ever is solved, far too much for the health of the Nation." [1]

The commission used crime statistics on robbery to illustrate the point: "Consider the crime of robbery, which, since it involves both stealing and violence or the threat of it, is an especially hurtful and frightening one. In 1965 in America there were 118,916 robberies known to the police" -- in other words, 6 reported robberies for every 10,000 Americans. [2]

Now consider that in 1994 in America there were 1,299,000 robberies, some 719,000 of them known to the police -- in other words, 27.5 reported robberies for every 10,000 Americans (and 4.6 times the 1965 rate). [3]

Even before the 1967 report, a 1962 White House Conference on Narcotics and Drug Abuse was convened because "drug traffic and abuse were growing and critical national concerns," and "the informed public was becoming increasingly aware of the social and economic damage of illicit drug taking." [4] A three-sentence entry on "cocaine" stated in part: "This drug is included as a narcotic under Federal and other laws but, unlike the opiates, it is a powerful stimulant and does not create tolerance or physical dependence .... At present it is not the major drug of abuse that it once was." [5]

By the late 1980s, one did not need to be "informed" to know that drug abuse was doing tremendous damage to Americans, and that cocaine in the form of crack was stimulating a major violent crime wave.

In one of the most widely cited passages of the report, the commission declared that "warring on poverty, inadequate housing, and unemployment is warring on crime." [6] To this day, the report is remembered by many for its emphasis on government anti-poverty programs, racial injustice, and more across-the-board spending on the justice system and other activities. "Money is needed for everything," according to the commission. [7]

But on the same page as the commission declared that the war on crime should be fought as a war on economic poverty, it also declared that the "activities of almost every kind of social institution with which children come in contact -- schools, churches, social-service agencies, youth organizations -- are predicated on the assumption that children acquire their fundamental attitudes toward life, their moral standards, in their homes." And then this: "Offering opportunities is not the same thing as providing moral standards." [8]

We couldn't agree more emphatically.

In 1969, another presidential commission issued Violent Crime: The Challenge to Our Cities. The report warned that "increasingly powerful social forces are generating rising levels of violent crime which, unless checked, threaten to turn our cities into defensive, fearful societies." [9] One edition of the report reprinted a ten-point plan for urban renewal developed by Professor Daniel Patrick Moynihan -- then a Harvard professor and counselor to President Richard Nixon. [10]

These reports are instructive if for no other reason than that they place our current crime situation in historical context and clearly reveal two things: one is that the nation has gotten much more dangerous in the past thirty years. The other is that we have become in many ways inured to the trauma.

What is so striking today is not simply the increased number of violent crimes, but the nature of those crimes. It is no longer "just" murders that we see but murders with a prologue, murders accompanied by acts of unspeakable cruelty and inhumanity.

In the 1980s the inner-city problem with drugs and crime became the urban nightmare about which the 1969 commission had warned. In 1989, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote about the horrifying ills of the inner-city underclass. [11] And in 1993, Senator Moynihan wrote about "defining deviancy down," by which he meant that we now passively tolerate levels of social disorder -- out-of-wedlock births, drug abuse, child abuse, crime, and public disorder -- that but a generation ago would have been unthinkable. [12] And in the process we are losing a once-reliable sense of civic and moral outrage.

Listen to this story from former New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly:

A number of years ago there began to appear, in the windows of automobiles parked on the streets of American cities, signs which read: "No radio." Rather than express outrage or even annoyance at the possibility of a car break-in, people tried to communicate with the potential thief in conciliatory terms. The translation of "no radio" is: "Please break into someone else's car, there's nothing in mine." These "no radio" signs are flags of urban surrender. They are hand-written capitulations. Instead of "no radio," we need new signs that say "no surrender." [13]

As we have argued throughout this book, moral and not economic poverty is the real "root cause" of the nation's drug and crime problem. As a polity, we are astonishingly close to the point where it takes juvenile super-predators to shock and outrage us -- and just barely, at that. We are therefore in danger of succumbing to the drug and crime culture, and of defining down even homicidal behavior.

We should bring to the task of alleviating moral poverty the same passion that an earlier generation trained on alleviating economic poverty. But we need to learn from the failures of that earlier effort, too. And so we need to conjoin passion with prudence, wisdom, and realism. We should commit ourselves to a redistribution of sorts -- not of wealth but of basic standards and a vivid sense of civic and personal responsibility. To be successful, our approach to making progress against drugs and crime must focus on the nature of the problem itself -- namely, on matters cultural. Revolving-door justice and anemic anti-drug activities are the symptoms that must be treated. But moral poverty is the root cause that must finally be addressed.

At this point, our views are clear enough: combatting moral poverty must include a full-scale, concentrated, intense effort at combatting drugs and crime. But the effort cannot be limited merely to the efforts of the criminal justice system; it must be prosecuted through any number of institutions -- families, churches, schools, and the mass media, among others.

***

So where have we been since we introduced this book with a trumpet call to arms -- or, rather, the sound of chimes at midnight? We have demonstrated that violent crime in America is by far the worst in the industrialized world; violent crime is a problem of massive proportion; recent drops in violent crime rates, while encouraging and important, constitute only a small decrease from record high figures; the crime problem (for demographic reasons) is likely to get worse before it gets significantly better; there is a new young breed of super-predators who have been raised in practically perfect criminogenic environments, who are already destroying lives and, as their ranks thicken and unless radical changes are made, may soon terrorize our nation; while there are a variety of sources that are (more or less) contributing causes to crime, all roads lead back to moral poverty; revolving door justice is real but can be corrected; drugs are a particularly insidious threat given what crack does to sunder the bonds of human and familial ties; alcohol plays a much more prominent role in contributing to violent crime and moral poverty than most people realize; and what can be done to reduce violent crimes and the use of drugs.

Here we want to reissue a warning made at the beginning of this book: unchecked freedom can often unintentionally turn into its opposite. Unless we combine self-regulation with freedom, and unless we soon restore order to our communities and make advancements against spreading social anarchy, we will see an increase in state coercion. And then we will be only a short step away from achieving a quasi-police state. As the old saying goes, we can pay now or we can pay later.

***

We would like to conclude Body Count by attempting to put crime, drugs, and moral poverty in their larger cultural context. We want to leave you with a sense of where we think we are, socially and morally, as a nation, as well as with a sense of some of the things we think need to be done.

Body Count has discussed how moral poverty contributes to violent crime. But what are the factors that have contributed to moral poverty? In what ways are they manifested? And what are some of the things we can do in government and beyond government to reverse the trend?

Social pathologies have become a seemingly permanent feature of late-twentieth-century America. We have experienced an astonishing degree of social regression. Consider: at the midpoint of this century, America was the preeminent military power in the world. And at the close of this American century, the United States is still the undisputed military leader. But morally it has been on a very steep slide.

How steep? Between 1960 and 1990 we made a tremendous financial investment in an attempt to alleviate various social ills. Social spending by all levels of government increased (in constant dollars) by more than fivefold. But during the same 30-year period there was not only an enormous increase in violent crime but also a huge increase in the rates of out-of-wedlock births, the percentage of children living in single-parent homes, the teenage suicide rate, and the divorce rate. During this period we witnessed the worst decline in the history of American education. In short, we have experienced an unparalleled degree of economic prosperity and an unprecedented degree of social regression.

Widespread moral poverty is the inevitable result of the enfeebled condition -- in some places in our society, the near-complete collapse -- of our character-forming institutions. In a free society, families, schools, and churches have primary responsibility for shaping the moral sensibilities of the young. The influence of these institutions is determinative; when they no longer provide moral instruction or lose their moral authority, there is very little that other auxiliaries -- particularly the federal government -- can do.

Among those three institutions, the family is preeminent; it is, as Michael Novak once said, the original and best department of health, education, and welfare. But the family today is an agency in disrepair. Writes David Popenoe:

This period [the 1960s through the 1990s] has witnessed an unprecedented decline of the family as a social institution. Families have lost functions, social power, and authority over their members. They have grown smaller in size, less stable, and shorter in life span .... Moreover, there has been a weakening of child-centeredness in American society and culture. Familism as a cultural value has diminished. [14]

Now, in the mid-1990s, more than 30 percent of all births and more than 70 percent of all black births are out of wedlock. [15] By the turn of the century, according to reliable projections, 40 percent of all American births and 80 percent of all minority births will be out of wedlock.  [16] Each night in America, four out of 10 children go to sleep without fathers who live in their homes, and upward of 60 percent will spend some major part of their childhood without fathers. [17] This is "the most socially consequential family trend of our generation" (in the words of David Blankenhorn of the Institute for American Values),  [18] and it has seismic social implications. Senator Moynihan warned 30 years ago that a society which allows a large number of young men to grow up without fathers in their lives asks for and almost always gets chaos. We have come to the point in America where we are asking prisons to do for many young boys what fathers used to do.

WHAT WENT WRONG

What accounts for America's social and moral regression? What is the intellectual soil from which moral poverty has grown? One explanation has to do with a marked shift in the public's attitudes. According to Professor Wilson, "The powers exercised by the institutions of social control have been constrained, and people, especially young people, have embraced an ethos that values self-expression over self-control." [19]

The pollster Daniel Yankelovich finds that we Americans now clearly place less value on what we owe others as a matter of moral obligation; less value on sacrifice as a moral good, on social conformity, respectability, and observing the rules; less value on correctness and restraint in matters of physical pleasure and sexuality; and correspondingly greater value on things like self-expression, individualism, self-realization, and personal choice. [20]

If the self, in the late Allan Bloom's withering assessment, has become "the modern substitute for the soul," [21] we are also living in an era in which it has become unfashionable to make judgments on a whole range of behaviors and attitudes. This unwillingness to judge has resulted in unilateral moral disarmament, as dangerous in the cultural realm as its counterpart is on the battlefield. With the removal of social sanctions in the name of "tolerance" and "open-mindedness," and the devaluing of the idea of personal responsibility, is it any wonder, for instance, that in a recent survey, 70 percent of young people between the ages of 18 and 34 said that people who generate a baby out of wedlock should not be subject to moral reproach of any sort? [22]

A number of pernicious, destructive ideas made their way into the mainstream of American life. It became unfashionable to make value judgments. Moral relativism became the de facto and defining doctrine of modern American life. We witnessed an expansive notion of "rights" and an attenuated sense of personal responsibility. "If it feels good, do it," "Do your own thing," and "You only go around once in life, so you have to grab all you can" became the words to live by. These seemingly innocuous phrases masked a destructive underlying philosophy. This is not merely an abstract academic debate we are talking about. In many parts of urban America, we are seeing a cruel social experiment being played out, namely, what happens when the trend-setting ideas of the influential rich and upper class -- in this case, the celebration of unfettered freedom mixed with moral relativism -- eventually spread to the rest of society. It turns out that the social damage -- the body count -- is not evenly dispensed. It is not even close. The underclass suffer disproportionately. An analogy helps make the point: when the rich and famous in Beverly Hills get hooked on drugs, they check into the Betty Ford Clinic. Fine. But when the poor and not-so-famous in Watts get hooked on drugs, there is no Betty Ford Clinic for them. Instead, many of them walk and sleep in the streets. They prey on the innocent. And eventually they, too, die on the streets.

In addition, a whole series of misguided social policies were championed. As we have already demonstrated, in the area of criminal justice, an anti-incarceration outlook took hold that said, in effect, society's response to criminal behavior should be rehabilitation, not punishment. In education, schools replaced moral education with "values clarification" -- perhaps the single most harmful idea to take hold in America in the last three decades. Standards were abandoned, and homework forgotten. As the number of out-of-wedlock births hit critical mass, the opprobrium disappeared. It has now reached the point where, as reported by scholar Maggie Gallagher, almost one-third of the 70 girls in Indiana's Tipton High School's senior class are either pregnant or already unwed mothers. Tipton County, Indiana, is "not the kind of place most of us imagine when we think about the problem of illegitimacy," according to Ms. Gallagher. "It is white and rural, churchgoing Norman Rockwell country." [23]

These facts, and others detailed in this book, are ample evidence of substantial social regression. But there are other signs of decay, particularly of the cultural variety -- ones that do not so easily lend themselves to quantitative analyses. Much of "gangsta" rap music celebrates the abuse and torture of women. Advertisements on television and on street corner billboards are increasingly erotic, even perverse. Many of our most successful and critically acclaimed movies celebrate brutality, casual cruelty, and twisted sex. And television shows make a virtue of promiscuity, adultery, homosexuality, and gratuitous acts of violence.

In a society where traditional institutions are in a state of decline, mass culture often fills the gaps. Where traditional institutions fear to or do not enter, other cultural forces rush in. As the hand of family, church, and school loosens, the grip of popular culture grows stronger. It is our opinion that, overall, television has become an increasingly dominant and destructive force on our social landscape. This is not to say that television has done no good, or that there are no quality shows on the air, or that television is responsible for most of our social ills. But taken in its totality -- both in terms of broadcast content as well as things endemic to the medium -- television is doing a good deal of damage. There is now a solid body of evidence which indicates that television increases rates of aggression and violence among children. Television viewing crowds out time that can be better spent on, say, homework (teenagers watch television an average of 23 hours per week, [24] which is a good deal more time per week than they spend on homework). [25] And there is increasing evidence that television is responsible for undermining America's civic culture by fostering increased levels of pessimism, passivity, and atomization.

Our social crisis is most often discussed with reference to, and focus on, the problems of the underclass. It is true enough that our modern-day "tangle of pathologies" is densely concentrated in urban centers and inner cities. That is where the fire burns hottest, where moral poverty is most pronounced, where the pathologies are most obvious, most intense, most intractable. Indeed, these subjects have been much of the focus of Body Count.

But there is trouble in River City, on Main Street, and in the Hamptons, too. And while the problems there are somewhat different in nature (e.g., prolific divorce remains more widespread than illegitimacy), they pose no less a threat to the nation's long-term prospects. A free society depends ultimately on the beliefs, behavior, and standards of the average citizen. What makes our situation today different from previous periods in American history -- and fundamentally more serious -- is the "de-moralization" of much of middle- and upper-middle-class life. The ballast that was once there isn't there any longer.

We moderns are reluctant to admit that much of what has gone wrong has not been done to us, that we have done it to ourselves. It is self-delusion to think that the American people have been unwittingly and reluctantly drawn into a culture of permissiveness.

Boston University president John Silber has spoken about a phenomenon he called the "invitation to mutual corruption." In a familiar usage: "I won't judge you if you won't judge me." Many of us moderns are hesitant to impose upon ourselves a common moral code because we want our own exemptions. "If it feels good, do it" has a wider appeal on all of us than we like to admit. The consequences are not good. Large segments of America are characterized by moral confusion, indolence, indifference, and distraction.

There is some legitimate good and encouraging news on the cultural scene. There are exciting and consequential cultural reclamation movements like Promise Keepers, the National Fatherhood Initiative, and Best Friends. There is fresh interest in moral education, and a new intensity of child nurture in some quarters (as indicated by things like the boom in home schooling). Some would say there is a spiritual ferment in the air. We are seeing community leaders -- Reverend Eugene Rivers in Boston and Charles Ballard in Cleveland, for example -- take an active and constructive role in helping restore neighborhoods to civic health. And a seismic shift has recently taken place in our public discourse. A set of issues once thought beyond the purview of politics is now driving much of the public debate as more and more Americans worry that the social wheels are coming off. The rising body count, the daily atrocity stories, the mounting social science evidence, the horrifying signs of urban decay all around us have seared a deep impression upon the public imagination. The common citizenry knows that great chunks of America are in the midst of serious moral decline.

Indifference and denial are being replaced by an awakened recognition. What we are seeing, we think, are social antibodies reacting against a 30-year cultural virus. But awakened recognition is merely the first step toward healing. An analogy helps to make the broader point. The recognition of a drug problem is the first step toward an addict's recovery. But much more is required. The addict still needs to act. This requires a willingness to change and to persevere.

Specifically, then, what needs to be done? One thing we need to do is to set higher expectations, to instill in our children worthy aspirations, and to eschew cynicism. We need to point to individuals who possess qualities of human excellence that are worth imitating and striving for. But for a variety of reasons, many people today seem contemptuous of the very notion of heroes or moral excellence. This kind of corrosive cynicism is dangerous. It puts children's ideals, aspirations, and notions of self-worth in jeopardy. Children need to know what deserves to be emulated, loved, and nurtured. We must publicly admire that which warrants admiration -- and much does.

Through political leadership, cultural icons, and other influential voices, in every area society needs to affirm once again the message that having a child is the most important thing a person will do in life. This act entails certain obligations. There is no substitute for parental and moral guidance. Parenthood must once again be understood as including the following: logging lots of time, doing chores and errands together, playing together, reading together, and patiently explaining the way the world works and the way people ought to live. Children need to be taught by example and precept; they need specific reference points. But above all, they need the discipline and love of a caring adult. And please note the word "adult. " A recent study compared two groups of Americans: those who finished high school, got married, and reached age 20 before having their first child, and those who didn't. Of the children in the latter group, 79 percent live in poverty; in the former, the rate was 8 percent. [26] Eight percent. Surely we can rededicate our efforts to get more people to satisfy those three conditions.

Cornell psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner once said,"In order to develop, a child needs the enduring, irrational involvement of one or more adults in care and joint activity with the child. " When someone asked him to explain what he meant by "irrational involvement," he said, "Somebody has got to be crazy about that kid!" [27]

We also need to fight back. As Flannery O'Connor put it, "You have to push as hard as the age that pushes against you. " [28] The main problem that afflicts America today is not that we are in a state of complete moral decadence. We are not. What is most striking to us is the paucity of resistance against so much violent crime and destitution. Have we so defined deviancy down that we are getting used to decadence? Whatever the case, in America today there is too much reticence, too much indifference, too little civic and moral outrage. This is what the novelist Walker Percy most worried about. When asked what concerned him most about the future of America, he answered:

Probably the fear of seeing America, with all its great strength and beauty and freedom . . . gradually subside into decay through default and be defeated, not by the Communist movement . . . but from within by weariness, boredom, cynicism, greed and in the end helplessness before its great problems. [29]

One arena in which we can fight back -- though by no means the only or even the most effective one -- is in the area of government policy. There are a number of actions government can take that would amount to constructive and far-reaching reforms. However, we would stipulate a general point that should guide any discussion of public policy solutions. We borrow from an old principle of medicine: primum non nocere -- first, do no harm. In many cases, the best thing government can do is stop doing what makes the problem worse. With that in mind, government does have a role to play in improving our social condition. The likelihood that any governmental action -- regulation, legislation, or executive act -- will have a salutary impact on the causes of our explosion in violent crime is proportional to the care given to its effect on moral poverty. We believe legislators need to ask these related questions before writing and passing legislation: "Will this law replenish or drain our stock of moral capital? Will it increase or decrease the chance that a responsible adult will communicate right and wrong to a child?"

These questions should be applied on a wide range of issues. In welfare, for example, we should not advocate policies that virtually guarantee high rates of illegitimacy (i.e., subsidizing women to have children out of wedlock) while at the same time cut benefits to those welfare recipients who do an honest day's work. Neither should we penalize couples who marry (through the "marriage penalty" in the tax code) or make marriage one of society's easiest contracts to nullify (through "no-fault" divorce). In education we should advocate policies which allow parents to send their children to schools that affirm and reinforce their deeply held beliefs.

Since we have no desire to close on a tedious list of public policy reforms, let us consider in some detail but a single example of the sort of federal initiative that fits the model we are talking about: adoption. We choose this issue because it is one that, if legislated intelligently and carefully, can help to strengthen the ties between children and adults. Needless barriers to adoption should be eliminated. Only 50,000 children are adopted each year in the United States; [30] at any given time, 1 million to 2 million homes are waiting to adopt. Unfortunately, in addition to the prohibitively high cost of private adoption (the National Council of Adoption estimates that the average cost of domestic adoption is $20,000), [31] many couples are automatically excluded from consideration due to race, financial background, age, disability, or home size. Studies show that there is no adverse effect on black children when they are adopted by white families, demolishing the racially polarizing arguments made by groups like the National Association of Black Social Workers. [32] Other couples are scared away by lax confidentiality laws, nonbinding adoptions, and the expanded rights of the biological father to reclaim legal custody.

Availability of adoption is also severely limited. Unwed mothers are often denied information about adoption in prenatal counseling; others decide to abort their pregnancy for economic reasons. Indeed, it may be partly for this reason that abortion has increasingly become a problem of juveniles: of the 1 million teenage pregnancies each year, about 400,000 now end in abortion. Finally, with the stigma of illegitimacy all but gone in this country, for many young, unwed pregnant women, single motherhood has become a more attractive option than giving up a child for adoption.

The greatest hope lies in reforms that prohibit the use of race and/or ethnicity as a qualification for would-be foster or adoptive parents (in practice this has affected whites seeking to adopt nonwhite babies); expedite adoption procedures for infants and children who have been abandoned by their parents and are living in limbo in hospitals, group homes, and/or foster care; terminate parental rights and thus make a child available for adoption if by the age of six months -- in the case of infants born with positive toxicology -- maternal drug use has not ceased, or if a child has been severely abused by its parents; enact model legislation that will require courts to consider the best interests of the child first in all cases concerning custody; establish uniform rules making voluntary surrender/adoption irrevocable at any point past 72 hours after birth; restrict payments to biological parents by adoptive parents to necessary expenses related directly to the pregnancy and adoption; and ensure that adoptive families are treated with the same respect as other families, free of the fear of intrusion by the state or other parties after an adoption has been finalized.

We are quite encouraged by the recent passage of the Adoption Promotion and Stability Act of 1996, which aims to penalize state adoption agencies that restrict interracial adoption and provides a $5,000 tax credit for expenses incurred for an adoption. This is relevant because we have argued throughout this book that the problem is that inner-city children are trapped in criminogenic homes, schools, and neighborhoods where high numbers of teenagers and adults are no more likely to nurture, teach, and care for children than they are to expose them to neglect, abuse, and violence. Children cannot be socialized by adults who are themselves unsocialized, or worse, families that exist in name only, schools that do not educate, and neighborhoods in which violent and repeat criminals circulate in and out of jail.

In our view, situations will arise that may warrant the removal of a child from the care of his or her parent(s). To be sure, this should only happen in desperate circumstances and as a last resort. But we cannot ignore the plain fact that there are more and more horrifying cases of abuse, neglect, and parental malfeasance.

While adoption is the best alternative in such circumstances, the concept of orphanages, or group-care homes, should not be dismissed. Such institutions pretty much disappeared from the national scene when government began distributing money in the expectation that poor parents, with federal assistance, would do a better job of raising their children. But in far too many cases that expectation has been resoundingly refuted by experience.

When parents cannot care for their children's basic material, psychological, medical, and moral needs, it is time to look to other institutions. The orphanage -- call it a boarding school without tuition -- may then be in their best interest. And please, spare us the Oliver Twist demagoguery. Can anyone seriously argue that some boys would be worse off living in Boys Town than in, say, the Cabrini Green housing project in Chicago, considered by its residents a virtual war zone?

Larry King was intimately involved with Boys Town. The institution came up repeatedly during the Legislature's Franklin investigation, and even earlier.

Foster Care Review Board Executive Director Carol Stitt's July 1988 plea to Attorney General Robert Spire, for an investigation of child abuse, included that youth care worker Kirstin Hallberg "told me about three youth at Boys Town who all reported inappropriate activities with Larry King of Omaha." On March 29, 1989, her colleague Burrell Williams told investigator Jerry Lowe, "that on several occasions in the past he had heard of kids transported from Boys Town and the north Omaha Girls' Club to functions allegedly linked to King."

Boys Town youth care worker Julie Walters, when she interviewed the Patterson Webb girls in 1986, reported her findings about Larry King and Boys Town youth, to the orphanage's executive director, Father Val Peter. According to an FBI and Nebraska State Patrol interview with the girls' foster mother, Kathleen Sorenson, "Walters related Nelly's statements to Father Val Peter. ... Val Peter then stated that Boys' Town would conduct its own discreet investigation into Nelly's statements." Peter apparently did nothing, as Carol Stitt informed the legislature's Executive Board on December 19, 1988: "It has been brought to my attention that no such investigation ever took place."

The FBI/NSP brief on Sorenson's interview said:

Sorenson stated that an unspecified time in the summer of 1988, Julie Walters spoke to two prominent black males and one black female at Boys' Town confirming Nelly Webb's statements about Larry King. Sorenson could not recall the names of these individuals. The individuals were either employees or associates of Boys' Town. These individuals told Walters not to ask questions about King "because it could be dangerous."

King was highly visible on the Boys Town campus, because of his distinctive yellow Tojan car. On March 27, 1989, Jerry Lowe interviewed Julie Walters by phone:

Julie indicated that she subsequently had a conversation with Val Peter regarding the yellow Tojan including discussions that several Boys' Town teachers, including those as having the last names Barksdale, Wilson, and Gary, had been seen driving the automobile. Julie indicated that when she brought the matter of the Tojan up to Father Peter, that he had initially denied any knowledge of the automobile, however, later on indicated that it was his belief that Omaha people couldn't accept black male teachers at Boys' Town and blamed the information regarding the Boys' Town black male teachers driving the Tojan, on racism.

At least one reported driver of the Tojan, John Barksdale, was closely associated with Larry King. Barksdale worked at the credit union, as well as at Boys Town, and had been tapped by King to head up a planned nationwide expansion, known as Franklin, U.S.A.

In January 1988, Father Peter summoned Kirstin Hallberg. She submitted her notes on the discussion to Franklin investigator Jerry Lowe:

Father Peter called me (Hallberg) and expressed an interest in Loretta's case and said he felt that Boys' Town could offer her "a safe place to heal." When I commented that she probably wouldn't feel too safe if she saw "the yellow Tojan," he (Peter) said that he heard it had "been around" and then quickly changed the subject.

Under pressure, Peter once again promised an investigation. Julie Walters recalled, in her March 27, 1989 phone conversation with Lowe:

Julie indicated that she later learned that Val Peter had given an individual by the name of Dave Shanahan, who is the Director of Admissions at Boys' Town, the responsibility of conducting, what Julie described, as a staff practice investigation of the Tojan automobile and the accompanying references to Boys' Town personnel riding in it. Julie indicated that she was uncomfortable about Shanahan investigating this as she expressed the personal opinion that she does not trust Shanahan. Julie indicated that Shanahan was a white male in his early forties and a long time employee of Boys' Town and indicated if she had to describe Shanahan she would describe him as being an individual with a good ole boy mentality who was not interested in the truth as much as making sure that nothing of a negative nature involving Boys' Town came out of the investigation.

Walters was right -- honest investigations of Larry King at Boys Town were quashed, as Franklin investigator Karen Ormiston found out when she interviewed former policeman Alan Kupres, on August 14, 1990.

Mr. Kupres indicated that he had worked as a police officer for Boys Town for approximately three years. He stated that he had run the license plates on a vehicle which was registered to Larry King several times, but that his superiors had directed him to "leave it alone."

Alisha Owen, Paul Bonacci, and Nelly and Kimberly Webb all reported that King took boys from Boys Town for his pedophile activities.

Omaha author Steve Bowman, who is preparing a book on the Franklin Credit Union for release in 1992, discovered as he interviewed Boys Town grads, that King's activities there were scarcely anomalous. "You would keep hearing the same thing, over and over again," Bowman said of the graduates, many of whom were homosexually involved with Larry King. "They would invariably say, 'I first discovered my homosexuality during counseling at Boys Town.'"

The homosexual ambiance at the orphanage was featured in a novel, reported on in the August 27, 1989 World-Herald:

An Omaha native said his new novel describing a youth's painful upbringing in a boys' home, including many homosexual encounters, is based on his eight years at Boys Town. Jimmy Cheshire, 44, of Yellow Springs, Ohio, said in an interview that "Home Boy" accurately depicts life as he saw it at Boys Town from 1955 to 1963 when he graduated as class valedictorian. ... Cheshire said homosexuality was "rampant" at Boys Town while he was there. "Everybody I knew was involved in it. After graduation, no one talks about it," he said. "In my opinion, one third of the Boys Town counselors were pedophiles. The only reason they were there was because kids were there. A lot of kids were seduced". ... Cheshire said he did not find any adults at Boys Town who were "reliable." "There were some brutal people, some sick people," he said. "The children turned to each other for support."

Father Val Peter said of Cheshire's book, "Boys Town would never condone any activity like that, nor do we have knowledge of it. I think sex sells, like the National Enquirer."

Boys Town officials deny with equal vehemence, that Larry King was associated with their facility in any way. Evidence from Franklin Credit Union files contradicts them.

Working relations between the credit union and the orphanage were in order as of a December 13, 1979 letter from Franklin employee Joel Rogers, one of King's homosexual lovers, to Boys Town Deputy Director for Development William E. Ramsey: "Mr. King, Mr. Larson, and myself are appreciative of your visit yesterday, and look forward to working with you and the Father Flanagan Boys' Home." The extent of the planned collaboration is not known, but at one point Franklin was paid $15,000 to do a study on the relocation of people who lost their houses because of an expansion of Boys Town.

Boys Town boys could get jobs at Franklin. King hired Brandt Thomas*, a 1984 graduate, to work at the credit union, according to a July 5, 1983 report from Doyle and Carol Gillespie, Boys Town family teachers. They also noted that "Brandt has moved in with his employer, Mr. King." Thomas was still under care of the school, and his change of residence was sanctioned by the highest official at Boys Town, then-Executive Director Father Hupp. His March 26 1983 letter to Brandt's mother, Lila Thomas*, was summarized by legislative Franklin committee researcher Jose J. Soto: "This letter from Father Hupp advises Brandt's mother of steps to take before Brandt moves in with Larry King." Hupp even attended the party King threw for Thomas, after the boy moved in.

Two and a half years later, Nelly Webb was to tell Julie Walters, that King frequently took Thomas around with him to serve as a homosexual prostitute.

By the time Franklin Credit Union met its fate, Boys Town had deposited, or planned to deposit, one million dollars in the credit union!

-- The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska, by John W. DeCamp

[admin]

Part 2 of 2

REMEMBERING GOD

We have spent a good portion of our professional lives thinking about public policies. One of the impressions we have come away with is how little has been done, on the most commonsensical level, to address the problems that confront us and that have escalated in both number and intensity over the past thirty years. And so we believe that thinking concretely about specific, practical reforms offers the hope that, if they are part of a concerted national effort, we might yet begin to alleviate some of the worst manifestations of these ills and even, in time, to reverse course.

And yet, even if we were to enact desired reform in almost every area of social policy, we would still be a long way from having healed the broken families in America. Smart, intelligent public policies can and do make a difference. But political solutions are not, ultimately, the answer to problems that are at root moral and spiritual.

"Manners," wrote Edmund Burke two centuries ago,

are of more importance than laws. Upon them, in a great measure, the laws depend. The law touches us but here and there, and now and then. Manners are what vex or soothe, corrupt or purify, exalt or debase, barbarize or refine us, by a constant, steady, uniform, insensible operation, like that of the air we breathe in. They give their whole form and color to our lives. According to their quality, they aid morals, they supply them, or they totally destroy them. [33]

Can government supply manners and morals if they are wanting? Of course it cannot. What it can supply, through policy and law, is a vivid sense of what we as a society expect of ourselves, what we hold ourselves responsible for, and what we consider ourselves answerable to. There can be little doubt that in this last period of time the message our laws have been sending our young people and their parents has been the profoundly demoralizing one that we expect little, and hold ourselves answerable for still less.

By changing and improving our laws, we might not thereby bring about, but we would certainly help to bring about, a climate that would make it easier rather than harder for all of us to grow more civilized; easier rather than harder for us to keep our commitments to one another; easier rather than harder for us to recapture the idea of personal and civic responsibility. This, in turn, would make it easier rather than harder for us to raise our children in safety to adulthood -- something that at the moment we are not doing very well at all.

In 1991 the number of juveniles in custody increased from earlier years to nearly 58,000. By our estimate, we will probably need to incarcerate at least 150,000 juvenile criminals in the years just ahead. In deference to public safety, we will have little choice but to pursue genuine get-tough law enforcement strategies against the superpredators. But some of these children are now in diapers, and they can be saved. It is really up to us.

Jeremy Bentham once observed that the way to be comfortable is to make others comfortable; the way to make others comfortable is to appear to like them; and the way to appear to like them is to like them in reality. Today there are an awful lot of children who need to be loved in reality. To "love in reality" is above all the responsibility of parents. But one of the grim facts of modern life is that children who are most in need of love, order, and moral instruction are the children whose parents are most often missing in action. So the job now falls to the rest of us -- not necessarily to be surrogate parents, but to begin to play a much more active role in the lives of these children, to create surroundings that make it easier and not harder for children to grow up to be morally responsible adults, and to support the institutions (including religious institutions) that can make the most positive difference in the lives of these kids.

National Guardsmen search homes in Plainfield, New Jersey, for carbines and ammunition stolen from an arms maker.



National Guardsmen search homes in Plainfield, New Jersey, for carbines and ammunition stolen from an arms maker.



The inside of a Plainfield home after National Guardsmen and the state police have finished their search for arms.

-- Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (Kerner Commission Report, 1967)

We face a simple, stark choice. We can continue on our present course, which means another generation of children who will grow up having received virtually no love or sound moral instruction. They will be meaner, and angrier, and more violent than the current generation of super-predators. They will be more radically self-regarding, more radically present-oriented, more unsocialized and more uncivilized, and completely devoid of "empathic impulses" (as scholars of prison rehabilitation phrase it}. In that case we will see, in the years ahead, more prisons, drug treatment centers, juvenile delinquent homes -- and many more grave sites.

The other choice is to heed the wisdom of Aristotle, who believed that the care of the community is the common business of good citizens. The "common business" we now face is the nurture, protection, and moral education of the rapidly increasing number of unattended and neglected young in our midst. It will require of us hard work and sacrifice -- in terms of our time, our comfort, our leisure, our money. But that may well be the cost of citizenship in late-twentieth-century America, as well as the "cost of discipleship" for those of us who share a common religious faith.

A lot is at stake. If we do nothing, we may well be on the way to the ruin of our civilization. If we act responsibly, purposefully, and quickly, we will redeem the true promise of this nation, which Lincoln called an "inestimable jewel" -- indeed, the "last, best hope of man on earth. "

But we want to be very clear on this point: the arena in which our cultural struggle will ultimately be won or lost is within the human heart. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., said that the main remedy to some of the evils of our time is for us to grow more civilized. And so it is. As we approach the end of the last decade of this century, it is worth restating an obvious but often overlooked truth: social regeneration depends on individual citizens living better, more committed, more devoted lives. Not perfect lives, mind you. Just lives that reflect the basic and modest character traits -- self-discipline, civic-mindedness, fidelity to commitments, honesty, responsibility, and perseverance -- that the Founding Fathers understood to be the sheet anchor of a free republic. And to accomplish these things, it would be no small help, as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and others have urged us, to remember God.

It is on that subject -- God -- that we close. We have argued throughout this book for the need to address the moral poverty of our children and of the institutions that serve them. This naturally brings us to the religious dimension of moral poverty -- which we believe to be the most important dimension of all.

There are many arguments one can marshal on behalf of the crucial role religion can play in assuaging and reversing moral poverty. There is, for example, the growing body of scientific evidence from a variety of academic disciplines which indicates that churches can help curtail or cure many severe social pathologies. There is also the argument that is well known to every serious student of American history who is familiar with the writings of the founders -- namely, the compelling civic case for religion (i.e., religion as an aid and friend of the constitutional order, providing society with a moral anchor and taming the baser appetites, passions, and impulses of citizens).

But the reader will recall how we define moral poverty: the poverty of being without loving, capable, responsible adults who teach children right from wrong. In essence, what we are talking about is child abuse, neglect, and abandonment on a mass scale -- an unprecedented severing of the bonds of affection, devotion, and love between adults and children, between parents and child.

How do we restore these bonds? We believe the most obvious answer -- and perhaps the only reliable answer -- is a widespread renewal of religious faith and the strengthening of religious institutions. Many people have ignored or forgotten something that almost everybody once knew: the good requires constant reinforcement and the bad needs only permission. Religion is the best and most reliable means we have to reinforce the good. True religious faith enlarges the human heart; inspires us to revere and honor those things that are worthy objects of our attention; reminds people of their basic responsibilities and commitments; provides society with reliable moral and social guardrails; helps the impulse of compassion take on the name of action; and allows the "eyes of our heart" to see our fellow citizens not merely as distant body count statistics or as enemies or aliens or "other" but as moral and spiritual beings, as children of God.

For that is, in fact, what they are.

6. Sodom Be Gomorrah; Abraham Be Isaac

Then we got to stories like Sodom and Gomorrah. All I remembered about that story is that they were these two sinful cities, like Las Vegas and Reno or something, and God got mad and wiped them out. And Lot's wife looked back when she was told not to and she got turned into a pillar of salt.

But the nuns of my grade school didn't explain to us about what happens right before they flee. Right before they flee, Lot is visited by these two angels, who are masquerading as two men, and they come and stay overnight at his house. And this mob forms outside and they yell, "Send out those two angel-like men to us so we can have sex with them!" And Lot yells "No!" (Which I think is a basic rule of hospitality: don't give up your guests to be raped by the angry mob outside.)



But then, what does he say next? He says, "Why don't you take my daughters and rape and do what you will with them? They're virgins!"

Okay, so Lot is evil, right? How is it that the story we know about him is about his wife getting turned into a pillar of salt? Maybe that was her only way out. Maybe being a big pillar of salt is preferable to being married to Lot!

Anyway, after Lot and his two traumatized daughters flee Sodom and Gomorra, they all go up to a cave in the mountains. And during the night, Lot's two daughters get Lot drunk and then rape him. Do they do this in revenge of what their father did to them? No. The Bible says it's because there aren't any other men around. Even though, the Bible also says that they're not that far from a city named Zoar. So, I guess no men around for maybe a few miles?

And wait a minute, so Lot's two daughters just had to drug and rape somebody? And then I guess if you're their dad and you're the only one there....

Okay, I knew the Bible had nutty stories, but I thought they'd be wedged in amongst an ocean of inspiration and history. But instead, the stories just got darker and even more convoluted.

This Old Testament God makes the grizzliest tests of people's loyalty. Like when he asks Abraham to murder his son, Isaac. As a kid, we were taught to admire it. I caught my breath reading it. We were taught to admire it?

What kind of sadistic test of loyalty is that, to ask someone to kill his or her own child? And isn't the proper answer, "No! I will not kill my child, or any child, even if it means eternal punishment in hell!"?

At the next Bible study class Father Tom reminded us, "That Isaac represents what matters to Abraham most. And that's what God asks us to give up for him."

I said, "But loving and protecting and caring for the welfare of your child is such a deep ethical, loving instinct and act. So, what if what matters to you most is your own loving behavior? Should we be willing to give up our ethics for God?"

And he said, "No! No, it's because your ethics, because your ethics IS your love and faith in God." That confused me a little bit, but I decided to just let that one go. But then, I found out that Abraham is not the only person willing to murder his own child for God. They're all over the place in the Bible.

For example, in the book of Judges, this guy named Jephtheh tells God that if he can win this battle, he will kill the first person who greets him when he comes home as a burnt offering. And who is the first person he sees? His only child, his beloved daughter, who runs up to him playing with tambourines and singing. "Hi daddy... what?"



And does God say, "No, don't kill your only child as a burnt offering to me!" Or even, "Jephtheh, who did you expect to be the first person to greet you when you came home?"

No, it appears the most important point of this story is that Jephtheh allows his beautiful daughter to go off into the woods for two months to mourn her virginity (I kept thinking, "Run! Run!") before she comes back and he kills her... by lighting her on fire.

Even if you leave aside the creepy sacrifice-your-own-offspring stories, the laws of the Old Testament were really hard to take. Leviticus and Deuteronomy are filled with archaic, just hard to imagine laws. Like if a man has sex with an animal, both the man and the animal should be killed. Which I could almost understand for the man, but the animal? Because the animal was a willing participant? Because now the animal's had the taste of human sex and won't be satisfied without it?

Or my personal favorite law in the Bible: in Deuteronomy, it says if you're a woman, married to a man, who gets into a fight with another man, and you try to help him out by grabbing onto the genitals of his opponent, the Bible says you immediately have to have your hand chopped off.

8. The New Testament



But, oh dear. Well, first of all, Jesus was much angrier than I had expected him to be. I mean, I knew Jesus got angry with all those moneychangers in the temple, but I really had no idea that he was so angry so much of the time. And very impatient.

Jesus says that he speaks in parables because the people, they just don't understand anything else. But the parables are often foggy and meaningless. And Jesus is snippy when even the disciples don't get them. He says to them, "If you don't understand this parable, then how can you understand any parable?" And "Are you incapable of understanding?" I kept thinking, "Don't teach in parables then. It's not working! Even your staff doesn't understand them! Why don't you just say what you mean?"

Okay, so, Jesus isn't so patient and I think he picked a very ineffective lesson giving technique, and he's angry most of the time, but that doesn't make him bad. It's just, wow, I really expected someone else.

Some of the parables are not just foggy, but to me, they're really sort of offensive. Like, in Luke, Jesus helps us understand God's relationship with humans by telling us a story about how God treats people the way people treat their slaves. They beat some more than they beat other ones.

Okay, I know this was a different time and everything, and I really tried to keep that in mind as the Bible refers to slavery all over the place. And not only does it not say it's wrong, I mean, the Bible gives advice about how you're supposed to keep your slaves and how slaves should behave obediently at all times to their masters.

But I don't know, I sort of thought the Son of God would say slavery was wrong. But no, Jesus does not say that. In fact, he uses slavery as an example of how God treats people.

It was really hard to stay on Jesus' side when he started saying really aggressive, just hateful things. Like in Luke, Chapter 19, Jesus says that he is like a King who says, "Anyone who does not recognize me, bring them here and slaughter them before me." Or in John, Chapter 15, where Jesus says, "Anyone who does not believe in me is like a withered branch that will be cast into the fire and burned!" In Matthew he says, "I come not to bring peace, but a sword." In Luke he says, "And if you don't have a sword, sell your clothes and buy one."

Then Jesus just starts acting downright crazy. Like in Matthew, Chapter 21, when this fig tree doesn't have a fig for Jesus to eat, he condemns the fig tree to death. That's right, Jesus condemns a fig tree to death. Not a parable, by the way. Just Jesus pissed off that the fig tree didn't have a fig for him to eat when he wanted one! Not exactly the Prince of Peace who taught us to turn the other cheek....

And then, there's family. I have to say, that for me, the most deeply upsetting thing about Jesus, is his family values. Which is amazing when you think how there's so many groups out there who say they base their family values on the Bible.

I mean he seems to have no real close ties to his parents. He puts his mother off cruelly, over and over again. At the wedding feast he says to her, "Woman, what have I to do with you?" And once, while he was speaking to a crowd, Mary waited patiently off to the side to talk to him, and Jesus said to the disciples, "Send her away, you are my family now."

Matthew, Mark and Luke all tell this exact same story, but Mark actually tells us why Mary was there to see Jesus. He says, Mary came to see Jesus to restrain him, because the people were saying, "He's gone out of his mind." I kept thinking, "Yes! Let's go get Jesus and get him some help!"

Anyway, Jesus discourages any contact his converts have with their own families. As we know, he himself does not marry or have children and he explicitly tells his followers not to have families as well, and if they do, they should just abandon them.

Now, mostly Jesus says this because he believed the End Of All Time was imminent. Jesus said over and over again that the people who were alive when he was alive would not die naturally, but see the End Of Times. He tells us this in Mathew, Mark and Luke.

So, okay, Jesus tells us not to have families because he (mistakenly) believed that the End Of All Time was imminent, but then he tells us not to take care of the families that we do have already. In Luke, Chapter 14, Jesus says, "Anyone who comes to me and does not hate father and mother, brothers and sisters, wife and children cannot be my disciple."

I mean, isn't that what cults do? Get you to reject your family in order to inculcate you?

So, that's the New Testament family values for you. The supposed big improvement over the Old Testament family values, which seemed to me to be mostly about incest and mass slaughter and protecting your own specific genetic line at all costs.

9. St. Paul & The Book Of Revelation



After the Gospels, there's a bunch of letters written by the early Christians, the most important of which were written by St. Paul. Now, the Bible's view of women is dreadful in general, and I know this was a different time and everything. But St. Paul? Man, he really gets right to the point.

St. Paul writes, "Man is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or have any authority over a man; she must be silent. If there is anything a woman desires to know, let her ask her husband at home. For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. And it was not the man who was deceived, it was the woman who was deceived and became the sinner."

The Bible. The Bible. The Good Book! The Good News!

I was so disillusioned by the time I finished the epistles, I just didn't think it could get any worse. But, it did. We were just about to read the last, and most oddball book of the Bible: Revelation.

Now, apparently, Revelation was written by St. John, the same person who wrote a Gospel and some of the epistles. The biblical historian Ken Smith says that "If his epistles can be seen as John on pot, then Revelations is John on acid." It describes the End of Days with a little too much gruesome enthusiasm.

Revelation tells us that in heaven there "is a throne, and the One who sat there had the appearance of a jasper." "Around the throne were four living creatures, and they're covered with eyes, front and back. Day and night they never stop saying, 'Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty who was and is and is to come.'" In heaven, Jesus resembles a dead lamb with seven horns and seven eyes. When the gates of Hell are opened, locusts pour out with human faces, wearing tiny crowns, and they sting people with their tails.

Revelation tells us that only 144,000 people will be saved and go to heaven and that none of them will have, quote, "defiled themselves with women." Which I guess excludes most heterosexual men from heaven and, depending on how you interpret that word "defiled," I would say excludes all women, too.

After we finished the Book of Revelation, the entire Bible Study group sat there, dumbfounded, our Bibles on our laps. Father Tom said, "Revelation's a poem about the end of the world?" I said, "Father Tom, I'm having a really hard time with this book." And he told me to, "pray for faith."'

I left the church thinking, "Is this one big practical joke? Where is my God? The Jesus I know? The one that 1 love and the one who loves me?"

I was driving home, and I was stopped at this red light on Crenshaw and Wilshire, and it was a Sunday, and all these people were walking to church, holding their Bibles. And I wanted to roll down the window and say, "Have you read that book? I mean, really!"

I felt like I was in a horror film and the clue to the insanity was not a secret document, it was a book that everyone was holding, that was on every coffee table, the biggest best seller of all time, in every hotel room in the land, the key to the understandings of the faith!

And yet, if you cared enough to glance inside, you found you'd opened the door to an insane asylum, with a bunch of crazy people dancing around saying, "Yippity, yippity yah!" And now I'd shut that door and how could I pretend that I hadn't opened that door?

My mother said, "Julie, I just ignore what I don't like. Why would you do something like read the Bible cover to cover if you weren't just looking for reasons to get upset? You make your life so much harder than it has to be, honey!"

-- Letting Go of God, by Julia Sweeney

[admin]

APPENDIX: OFFICIAL CRIMINAL HISTORIES OF 40 "LOW-LEVEL" WISCONSIN PRISONERS AND PROBATIONERS

PROFILES OF "LOW-RISK" OFFENDERS SENTENCED TO "INTENSIVE SANCTIONS"

1. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Armed robbery

5 years-Intensive Sanctions

During the crime "the subject . . . entered a dry cleaning store. On duty were two employees . . . . The subject stated 'don't move, I swear don't move' [and] grabbed one of the employees and acting as if he had a gun in a paper sack, pressed it into her side . . . . "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 12

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: None

Adult: Burglary, robbery, unlawful restraint, attempted criminal sexual assault, attempted aggravated criminal sexual assault.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

"The defendant stated he has been on SSI for about one year . . . that he would use up his entire check smoking crack and drinking. "

"Prior convictions are for armed robbery, burglary, robbery, attempted criminal sexual assault . . . . "

"One must question why the judge sentenced such an individual to the DIS [Division of Intensive Sanctions] program. "

2. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary and auto theft 5 years-Intensive Sanctions

While on probation for a 1993 battery to a child, the subject burglarized a woman's home and stole the car of another woman.

[Less than two months after being sentenced to Intensive Sanctions, he escaped from a minimum security prison in Milwaukee. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 2

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Burglary, auto theft, auto theft, auto theft, attempted auto theft, and 1st-degree sexual assault of a child.

Adult: Battery to a child.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

Burglary victim said it "has affected her life a great deal because her privacy was invaded and she had to move because she was so afraid. She said it felt like being raped without being touched. " Auto theft victim said "she has quit going into the area where her van was stolen so she does not visit her friends that live in that area. "

The subject "was constantly running in the streets and involved with the Black Gangster Disciples gang . . . . Even though [he] admitted . . . both offenses . . . he expressed little or no remorse for his actions or empathy for his victims. "

From state's prison intake report:

The subject "has been involved in various probationary terms [and] juvenile placements . . . . He has been seen as assaultive, not cooperative, and manipulative by various staff in those placements. He has also tended to run away from juvenile placements. "

3. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

4 years-Intensive Sanctions

Subject "and several accomplices [burglarized] a Milwaukee residence [and] confiscated several personal items including jewelry . . . . "

[State files show three different escapes from the program in the course of four months during 1993. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 8

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Theft, theft, disorderly conduct (amended from original charge of burglary).

Adult: Receiving stolen property, drug possession, attempted burglary, robbery, burglary.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

"The defendant has been in the criminal justice system on an almost non-stop basis since 1985. During this time [he] had difficulties reporting to his supervising agents as ordered, became involved in further criminal behavior, and refused to cooperate with drug treatment referrals . . . . He was involved in some incidents of domestic violence and a robbery in which the elderly victims were threatened . . . . "

From state's prison intake report:

Subject "fails to learn from his past as he continues to involve himself in criminal-like behavior and drug usage . . . needs to face the consequences of his unacceptable behavior and be held accountable. "

4. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

5 years-Intensive Sanctions

"Subject and two accomplices burglarized [a Milwaukee retail store]. "

[Two months after being sentenced to Intensive Sanctions, escaped from a minimum security prison in Milwaukee. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 6

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: Auto theft and operating an auto without a license.

Adult: Robbery, burglary, possession of cocaine, fleeing, burglary.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

"[H]e is basically unmotivated . . . and has no constructive plan to change his life . . . has demonstrated no motivation in his life and little desire to change. "

Record on community supervision includes violation of robbery probation in 1982, burglary on probation in 1986, and multiple positive drug tests while on parole in 1988. Three months after being discharged from probation in 1990 he was arrested for cocaine possession and fleeing an officer on city streets at speeds of 75-80 mph.

5. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Armed Burglary

5 years-Intensive Sanctions

With two accomplices, "kicked in the front door" of a home to burglarize it and was found by police with "a loaded . 380 semi-automatic pistol. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 1

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Criminal damage to property, drug delivery, auto theft, robbery, theft from person, battery.

Adult: No prior adult record.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

"It is . . . respectfully recommended that [the subject] be sentenced to [prison] . . . . Because of the nature of the crime [armed burglary] the defendant is not appropriate for referral to [Intensive Sanctions]. "

"The defendant drinks excessively [and] doesn't see a problem with drinking eight 16-ounce bottles of beer a day. . . . This attitude alone is a problem that will lead him back into criminal behavior. "

6. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

5 years-Intensive Sanctions

Stole a shovel and bicycle from an open garage and "stated that he wanted money to buy alcohol and drugs. "

[Two separate escapes in 1993 from separate minimum security prisons in Milwaukee. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE  CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 8 investigation: Adult Incarcerations: 4 Juvenile: 9 counts of burglary, burglary and receiving stolen property, drug possession, burglary, burglary, possession of burglary tools.

Adult: Burglary (juvenile, waived to adult court), criminal damage and theft, burglary, battery to a police officer, burglary, entry into locked vehicle, habitual criminality.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence

 "The defendant has a long-standing pattern of being irresponsible and  mismanaging his life. . . . He has been offered help  many times . . . and has  not cooperated or  responded in a satisfactory  manner . . . . He is quick to  blame external factors . . . for his lack of any success.  . . . While he says he can  change . . . this is hard to  believe . . . . All this talk [of change] is motivated by  the fact that it will help to avoid serious consequences . . . . "

"He has a prior record for assaultive behavior. "

"The Department of Corrections does not recommend a sentence to Intensive Sanctions. "

7. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

4 years-Intensive Sanctions

"The subject entered a residence and stole $9, 500 worth of stereo equipment. The subject had been at the residence earlier working as part of a cleaning crew. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 4

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: Theft from auto, entry into a locked vehicle, attempted theft and obstructing an officer, entry into a locked vehicle, auto theft, burglary, 2 counts of auto theft, escape from custody, armed robbery, burglary, auto theft, and receiving stolen property.

Adult: Auto theft, drug delivery, auto theft.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

His "lengthy record of criminal behavior and the fact that treatment needs  can best be met while serving a lengthy period of incarceration would make a sentence to [Intensive Sanctions] inappropriate. " Supervisor concurred.

The subject "first became involved in the correctional system at the age of 11 [and] has established a very lengthy criminal record . . . . He has substantially ignored the orders of the Court and continued to violate his parole on many occasions. "

Subject says he got in trouble because "he hung around with the wrong people" and "recent offenses took place due to his trying to support his drug habit. "

From state's prison intake report:

"He does not yet appear to accept responsibility for his actions. "

8. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Auto theft (3 counts)

5 years-Intensive Sanctions

Convicted in connection with 3 separate auto thefts over a 2-week period. Subject "explained [that] his acquaintances encouraged him to become involved and he earned easy money by stealing cars. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 3

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: No information (raised in Puerto Rico).

Adult: Auto theft and entering a locked vehicle.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

"On 5-1-91 [subject] was placed on probation . . . four months later he became involved in another offense . . . he was released from custody and placed on the Electronic Monitoring Program. On 12-23-91 he was again placed on a two-year probation for entering a locked vehicle while on electronic monitoring. Current offense [3 counts auto theft) occurred while on probation. "

"His previous terms under probation supervision have not benefited him, due to his rejection of supervision, nevertheless another opportunity may be appropriate . . . . "

9. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Auto theft (3 counts), fleeing an officer, resisting arrest, and escape

5 years-Intensive Sanctions

Stole a car from the Northridge Shopping Center parking lot; stole a car and led police on 75 mph chase (wrecked car but escaped apprehension); and used a friend's car without permission, and struck an officer in the face attempting to avoid arrest.

Following initial sentence to Intensive Sanctions, escaped from a minimum security prison in Milwaukee, was apprehended and convicted and recommitted to Intensive Sanctions.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 7

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Burglary, loitering, burglary, shoplifting, burglary, theft, theft, burglary, theft, operating a vehicle without a license, burglary, entering a locked building, receiving stolen property, auto theft.

Adult: Auto theft, auto theft, retail theft, burglary, auto theft.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

The subject's "criminal history is extensive and dates back to the age of 9. . . . [He) is a criminally oriented individual, who has exhibited no respect for the property of others. . . . He denies or minimizes his involvement in the last two [offenses and) expressed no remorse for the victims . . . . "

"His criminal behavior seems to be ingrained and the substance abuse issue allows him to legitimize his behavior . . . . For the past 16 years [he) has done little to improve himself, his lifestyle, or to become a responsible member within the community. [He) seems to maintain the attitude he had as a child, which was to take whatever he wanted. "

10. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Forgery, auto theft, theft 7 years-Intensive Sanctions

The recent offense of theft (a camcorder and sunglasses) from a residence where he was living occurred while subject was "on escape status" from probation for prior conviction of forgery and auto theft.

[Subject has two prior escapes from Intensive Sanctions and has been terminated from Intensive Sanctions and returned to prison. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 7

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: None

Adult: Speeding, concealing stolen property, possession of a switchblade, underage drinking, speeding, speeding, speeding, disorderly conduct, speeding, operating a vehicle after revocation, theft by fraud, disorderly conduct, theft by fraud, operating after revocation.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

Following most recent escape from Intensive Sanctions, confinement in a structured correctional setting is necessary to address the risk concerns of the community. This is evidenced by [his] convictions of 9 new offenses [auto theft, 2 escapes, theft by fraud, etc. ]. . . . "

"To allow [him] to remain within the community would not only enable his continual pattern of noncompliance, it would also encourage other [Intensive Sanctions] inmates to defy the rules . . . and seriously jeopardize the integrity of the [Intensive Sanctions] program. "

11. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary (1 count and 4 read-ins) *

File unclear as to sentence

While on parole, on 9/23/ 93, defendant "broke into a home . . . with two co-defendants . . . . The three men stole 3 clocks, a brass apple, a pair of men's boots, and a leather coat. "

Four other residential burglaries were read-in, but not charged. They occurred over a 5-month period and typically involved stereos, TVs, CD players, and CDs.

* Read-in: charge dismissed but "read-in" for purposes of restitution.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 8

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: None

Adult: Burglary, larceny, possession of controlled substance, armed robbery, obstructing, auto theft, escape.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

While serving a sentence for armed robbery and auto theft, subject "was [paroled] from prison . . . . He reported three times for parole supervision and then absconded" and committed current burglaries.

As an "Alternative to Revocation," the "Department of Corrections is seeking a formal [commitment] to the Division of Intensive Sanctions due to current convictions for burglary. "

In the same report recommending Intensive Sanctions, the state says subject "does not feel directly responsible [for the victims]. " Report also says he "has become very skillful in attempting to manipulate the [criminal justice] system to his advantage. He alluded [sic] prosecution for 4 years on his previous armed robbery . . . and openly admitted to changing jobs so he would not get caught for absconding from parole supervision. "

In addition to burglaries, defendant "has been active in purchasing stolen property [from his accomplices] for 6 months . . . [the accomplices] may have been involved in up to 150 burglaries . . . and obviously this would not be financially rewarding if there was not an individual willing to buy this property. The end result is that there are many terrified members of the community who are experiencing the same difficulties as the 5 victims interviewed for this report. "

From state's prison intake report:

". . . his motivation to truly change . . . is somewhat suspect. The subject is in denial. . . . It is thought the presiding judge will sentence him to" Intensive Sanctions, based on the department's recommendation.

12. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary (2 counts)

8 years

Following probation and parole violations for burglary, subject "was paroled to the Division of Intensive Sanctions" and subsequently escaped from a Milwaukee halfway house and was found to have stolen property from the halfway house and used drugs.

[Has been terminated from Intensive Sanctions and returned to prison. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 7

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: Burglary, burglary, burglary.

Adult: Burglary, burglary.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's Case History Review Summary:

He was paroled to Intensive Sanctions in 1993, despite this narrative submitted from the state to a judge: the subject ". . . has a history of burglary offenses dating to 1982. [He] has a burglary 12/1/82 [and] three months later 3/1/83 a second burglary [and] seven months later a third burglary . . . . [He] was placed on adult probation 3/18/89 [followed by] another burglary conviction within six months . . . at that time [the judge] suggested electronic monitoring . . . however [the subject) was incarcerated for a new burglary . . . therefore electronic monitoring was rejected . . . . After serving a one-year period in jail · . . he was placed at the Bridge Halfway House [but] was terminated from the Bridge . . . after one month and eight days due to his lack of cooperation with the program [and his failure] to comply with the AODA Program at DePaul · . . and withdrew from DePaul without completing the program. "

From state's 1989 presentence investigation:

"The defendant indicated that on the night of the offense he had run into the wrong people . . . . "

"[He] displays criminal thinking and anti-social values which would appear to be a major contributing factor in his adjustment to society. "

". . . first smoked marijuana at age 16 [and] would smoke 1 or 2 joints a day . . . began to use cocaine about one year ago · . . his use increased to $200 worth of cocaine a week . . . once he was no longer employed he began to steal to get money to buy cocaine. "

13. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession of firearm by a felon

4 years

While "on active probation supervision for Possession of Short-Barreled Shotgun . . . the inmate received [an Intensive Sanctions] sentence for Felon in Possession of Firearm . . . after it was discovered during a routine traffic stop that inmate did not have a valid operator's license . . . . When the vehicle was searched a loaded . 22 caliber Derringer [and] ten . 22 caliber live rounds of ammunition" were found.

Discharge and parole "dates adjusted accordingly" to reflect "escape status" for 22 days from Intensive Sanctions.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 2

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: Yes (gang member).

Adult: Possession of short-barreled shotgun.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

Subject "associated fairly regularly with gang members and was in fact a gang member . . . . "

Earned his high school equivalency degree "in the Wisconsin State Prison System. "

Subject "has matured and made positive changes in his life . . . was driving a car with ammunition and a gun due to fear relating to" earlier gang beating.

PROFILES OF IMPRISONED "PROPERTY OFFENDERS"

1. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Theft

9 months (added to prior sentence)

While on parole for burglary, subject was arrested and convicted of theft. His parole was revoked and he received a 9-month extension to his prior sentence of 5 years and 9 months.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 12

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Runaway from correctional facility; original crime not documented.

Adult: Theft, theft, burglary, burglary, escape.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

Subject "is, at times, inclined to function irresponsibly and without regard for consequences . . . . [He] behaves childishly and impulsively . . . . When confronted he denies, makes excuses, and slavishly promises to do better. "

". . . record notes pattern of not reporting [or] absconding while on adult probation. " This includes at least three probation revocations and one parole revocation.

Escaped from minimum security Milwaukee prison four months after intake report identified "little reason to believe he will be a security risk. "

Subject "admit[s] to a period of using cocaine [and] describes a pattern of 'snorting' 1-2 times a week. . . . "

2. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary, criminal damage to property

6. 5 years

Used a pry bar to break into a residence, "kicked and smashed two plate glass windows" to enter an apartment.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 14

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Robbery, robbery.

Adult: Armed robbery, robbery, escape, battery, battery, violation of domestic abuse restraining order.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

Several earlier crimes committed on parole or probation.

Earlier offenses of battery and violating domestic abuse restraining order include following a female "to her bedroom, where he struck her in the mouth, choked her and pushed her to the floor [and] threatened to kill her if she would not continue seeing him. " Seven months later he "punched [her] in the face and choked her, causing swelling to her face and neck. "

Subject drinks a fifth of gin or vodka every day, uses $50 of cocaine every day, and is an occasional marijuana user.

3. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Theft by fraud (2 counts)

20 years

Defrauded employer of more than $500, 000 over a period of several years.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 1

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: None

Adult: No prior adult record.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): No

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

"There is no prior history of criminal activity . . . . She has always maintained a responsible lifestyle except for the offenses which brought her to prison . . . . Potential [Intensive Sanctions] eligibility. "

4. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Arson (3 counts)

6 years

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 3

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Four separate detentions (crimes not specified).

Adult: Arson and negligent handling of burning material.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No (see "Other Background").

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

"Subject has an assaultive history and has stated that during a domestic dispute she had stabbed a boyfriend; however, there were no charges. "

"Subject was placed on probation 6/18/86 for the offense of arson . . . was again placed on probation for negligent handling of burning materials 11/23/93. She was revoked for failure to complete probation rules and for involving herself in current offense. "

5. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Theft

2 years

Defrauded an 82-year-old woman of her Wisconsin Homestead Tax Credits, totaling more than $2, 000, for home repair and landscaping work never performed.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 10

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Burglary, burglary, theft, burglary.

Adult: Criminal damage to property, disorderly conduct, endangering safety by conduct regardless of life, unfair home improvement trade, theft by contractor (2 counts), bail jumping, theft by contractor, theft by contractor, theft by contractor, theft by contractor.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

After conviction and before sentencing, canceled multiple appointments for presentence interview. "On 11/2/94 defendant's girlfriend called stating she had kicked him out because he was back on cocaine. "

State's probation and parole agent "spoke with the victim. She is extremely upset regarding this offense. [She] is 82 years old and lives on a fixed income. The money she paid the defendant to fix up her residence were [sic] her Homestead tax returns. "

The victim "called this agent crying because she was afraid of losing all the money . . . she was very upset and had to go to the hospital . . . for 10 days and therapy for 17 days. She was upset because she thought her children would be angry at her, which they were and did not support her. "

Based on numerous probation and parole violations, "the defendant has not complied with the goals and objectives of the Department of Corrections . . . . [He] does not accept any responsibility for his behavior [and] has no remorse for the current offense. "

"It would appear to this agent the defendant's main concern is one of self-gratification without any regard for those he hurts or misuses . . . . "

6. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Forgery

7 years

Attempted to purchase several hundred dollars of merchandise with a stolen credit card.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 56

Adult Incarcerations: 7

Juvenile: None

Adult: Theft, prostitution, theft, violation of Illinois credit card act, possession of stolen property, criminal trespass, prostitution, theft, prostitution, theft, theft, retail theft, theft, forgery (5 counts), obstructing justice, escape.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

A 40-year-old female with a 22-year record of adult crime.

She "is a professional thief [who] has covered a lot of the United States doing crimes and has served relatively little time . . . . She is presently wanted by Nevada and ll1inois for felony-level offenses . . . . Her life is out of control. "

7. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Retail theft

Sentence unclear

While on parole for felony and misdemeanor retail theft, stole tools from a parked truck.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 15

Adult Incarcerations: 5

Juvenile: Theft, uncontrollable behavior, drug possession, shoplifting, battery, auto theft, "etc. "

Adult: Retail theft, retail theft, retail theft, retail theft, retail theft, retail theft, obstructing, burglary, retail theft, retail theft, theft, attempted theft (habitual), retail theft, "and other arrests [retail thefts, drug possession, credit card violations]. "

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

The juvenile and adult record summarized in the previous column characterizes the subject as "low-risk. "

8. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Theft (repeater)

3 years

While on probation for theft, subject "robbed an elderly priest of $74 . . . subject shoved [the priest] against a kitchen chair and onto the floor. "

[The robbery charge and related revocation proceedings were pending at the time of this study, with subject still showing on state records as a current property offender. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 17

Adult Incarcerations: 5

Juvenile: None

Adult: Forgery, forgery, burglary, theft, attempted theft, auto theft, burglary.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes (based on pending charge).

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

Regarding pending robbery charge, the priest victim of the "theft" was attacked at 12:15 A. M. "and laid [sic] there in great back and leg pain until approximately 5 A. M. when he managed to get to a telephone . . . . The victim continues to be in pain and is in a wheelchair unable to walk for more than a few steps. "

"Subject admitted he had been consuming alcohol and smoking cocaine prior to the offense. "

Prior to pending robbery, subject's history of 16 arrests and 4 incarcerations was described as making him "low-risk. "

9. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

3. 75 years

After having been paroled in early 1994, subject was arrested and parole was later revoked for stealing and then forging a payroll check from a temporary help agency.

Nine months were added to prior 3-year sentence.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 10

Adult Incarcerations: 4

Juvenile: None

Adult: Burglary, burglary, battery. "In addition to these convictions, the subject has been arrested on other occasions on charges of burglary, second degree sexual assault, false imprisonment, and battery. The disposition of these charges is unknown. "

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

Prior to current parole violation, subject was deemed a "low-risk" offender by the state. Previously, subject was paroled in 1989 for burglary, convicted 18 months later for theft, and "violated his probation on or about 7/28/93 when he entered [an establishment] in the city of Milwaukee and while pointing a gun at an employee did take money belonging" to the business.

From the state's 1995 parole revocation report:

Subject "is a career criminal and continues to pursue illegal behavior regardless of the known consequences . . . . His continuous disregard for the laws of the community needs to be addressed. "

Notwithstanding the above, "A packet has been submitted to the Division of Intensive Sanctions for review. "

10. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Forgery

3 years

Subject "impersonated a security company employee and talked to an 81-year-old burglary victim about putting bars on the windows and other safety equipment . . . . The subject went to [the victim's] restroom and took blank checks and credit cards from the victim's purse in the bedroom next to the bathroom. "

Subsequent investigation determined that the suspect recently committed a burglary at the victim's home to scare her and make her more receptive to security equipment fraud. A burglary charge was dismissed but read-in for purposes of restitution.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 3

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Aggravated assault, theft.

Adult: Theft, retail theft. Also two other arrests for theft, "but neither have a disposition listed," and "municipal tickets for disorderly conduct and resisting" that were "permanently stayed. "

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): No

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

The 81-year-old burglary and forgery victim "has been extremely nervous about anyone coming to the house. She won't answer the door unless she knows who is coming, and when 1 went to visit her 1 had to call right before I got there . . . . The victim has been highly traumatized by the events and it has affected her lifestyle and her physical health. "

". . . I believe the defendant's involvement in the crime is more extensive than she admits to. It was an especially brazen crime involving a vulnerable victim. " The defendant "has stolen from at least one other elderly victim. "

11. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary, escape

Current sentence unclear

In 1979 subject and an accomplice burglarized a Milwaukee home while the owner was asleep.

[Subject received a 6-year sentence and escaped after 2 years. He was located in Texas and reincarcerated four years later, in 1984. )

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 10

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Threat of bodily harm, uncontrollable, criminal damage to property, theft, drinking, endangering health, morale, and welfare, disorderly conduct, runaway, truancy, auto theft, burglary, disorderly conduct, drinking, sexual misconduct, truancy, runaway, obstructing an officer, delinquency.

Adult: Sexual intercourse without consent, disorderly conduct, failure to support wife and child, disorderly conduct, strong-arm robbery, forgery, theft, hindering.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's 1979 presentence investigation:

The subject "has been on both parole and probation supervision. He has not once completed any term successfully . . . . He has not reported to his agents as directed, has failed to keep his agents truthfully informed of his whereabouts and activities, has failed to remit court-ordered financial obligations and continued his involvement in criminal activity. "

12. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

4 years

Subject "broke into a bar in the City of Milwaukee" and was arrested as he was attempting to leave with stolen merchandise.

Received 4-year probation sentence.

[Pending at the time of this study in 1995 were several charges for offenses while on probation. See next two columns. ]

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 4

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Strong-arm robbery.

Adult: Carrying a concealed weapon and shoplifting. Also pending is battery and retail theft. See "Other Background. "

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

At time of this study, pending "violations prompting probation revocation proceedings began when the subject committed a substantial battery to an individual by hitting him several times to the head causing massive swelling to the eyes and forehead . . . . Subject failed to report to Batterers Anonymous [and] absconded from supervision [and] was arrested for retail theft [and] failed to complete . . . the Salvation Army Adult Rehabilitation Program. "

While awaiting revocation proceedings at Milwaukee County's House of Correction, "the subject was observed by an officer striking with his hands and feet another inmate . . . resulting in injuries severe enough that the inmate required [outside] medical attention . . . . "

Identified as "low-risk" before current offense.

13. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

8 years

While on probation for retail theft, committed a burglary involving the stealing of women's undergarments for sexual stimulation.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 25

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: None

Adult: Criminal trespass, burglary, auto theft, theft, battery, theft, disorderly conduct, obstructing an officer, burglary, shoplifting, failure to support a child, burglary, burglary, burglary, battery, battery, burglary, retail theft, drug possession, criminal trespass, retail theft, possession of drugs and burglar tools, burglary.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

Beginning "in 1975 [subject] was in need of specialized treatment under the Sex Crimes Law. . . . In 1979 he was released from the Winnebago Mental Health Institution even though he continued to demonstrate many of the adjustment problems that originally brought him to the institution. "

Victim of a recent burglary of women's undergarments encountered the subject, who fled, when she returned to her residence. She "still feels intruded upon, thinks about it on a daily basis and checks out each floor of her home completely on her return. She has a difficult time being at home alone and is now easily frightened . . . . "

14. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Auto theft

2 years

While on probation for robbery, a police officer followed an auto that had been reported stolen and it "accelerated to a high rate of speed . . . the officer pursued the auto at a high rate of speed [until] the fleeing auto collided with a pile of debris . . . the driver fled on foot and was apprehended. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 2

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: Recklessly endangering safety.

Adult: Robbery and theft.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

"In July 1989 (the subject! and two other individuals beat a female victim, took her money and her car . . . . He was convicted of robbery and received a withheld sentence and was placed on 10 years probation [consecutive] to a prison term for theft. "

From state's presentence investigation:

The 1989 robbery "involved pulling an elderly woman into [her] van and stealing her money . . . he and his accomplices beat her up and threw her out of the moving van. "

Despite this and other "assaultive offenses" cited in the report, the report said he "is eligible for the Division of Intensive Sanctions" but not recommended for the program.

15. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Burglary

7 years

Details of 1994 burglary not available in file.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 3

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Robbery, runaway, runaway, theft, shoplifting, theft, runaway, possession of burglary tools.

Adult: Burglary, escape, burglary.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's 1987 presentence investigation:

At the time of first adult burglary conviction and lengthy juvenile crime record, "he does not seem to understand the seriousness either of his offense history, current offense, or his consistent failure to capitalize on treatment opportunities offered . . . he has become quite adept at manipulation . . . . Burglarizing for [him] is a way of making a living. "

PROFILES OF IMPRISONED "DRUG OFFENDERS"

1. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD *

2. 3 years

While on probation for a 1993 drug-dealing conviction, arrested and convicted for a new charge of possession with intent to deliver cocaine base.

* WITD: with intent to deliver.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 2

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Battery, auto theft.

Adult: No prior adult record.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

At the time of his first conviction for drug dealing, subject "indicated he thought [selling drugs) was easy, quick money . . . . He takes full responsibility and does show some . remorse. He indicated this was the first time he had sold drugs and I wonder if he is not minimizing the situation. This is his first offense as an adult but the defendant has served two probationary periods as a juvenile. "

In connection with his first arrest, "the defendant stated to police officers that this was the first time he had ever sold any drugs and that he needed some quick money to buy a car. "

2. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD while armed and within 1, 000 feet of a school

13 years

After being paroled in late 1994 for a drug offense, subject was arrested and convicted in January of 1995 for the same type of crime. Revocation of two separate parole cases is pending.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 12

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: Auto theft.

Adult: Burglary, marijuana dealing, numerous domestic violence offenses, criminal damage, bail jumping, probation violations.

Convicted of dealing cocaine within 1, 000 feet of a school. Paroled, then committed current offense.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From the subject's probation/parole agent's report:

"[Subject's) correctional experience has consisted of numerous offenses and negative behavior. He has been involved in the criminal justice system for more than 20 years . . . .

[H]e has been charged with a number of domestic charges in Milwaukee Co. for offenses against" his ex-girlfriend.

From the subject's social worker's report:

In the drug offense for which the subject was paroled in 1994, subject denied he was selling drugs, saying that he was "dropping drugs off at houses and picking up the money for someone else. "

Prior periods of community supervision "did not curtail his negative behavior within the community as he continued to have numerous contacts with the correctional system. "

3. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD

2 years

Offense occurred while on probation for prior dealing of drugs. "According to the Milwaukee Police, the total amount of cocaine found on the subject weighed a total of 0. 13 grams."

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 5

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Burglary, receiving stolen property, burglary.

Adult: Armed robbery, resisting/obstructing an officer, auto theft, endangering safety by conduct regardless of life, drug dealing. Numerous violations for operating a vehicle after revocation.

Retail theft.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

A habitual parole and probation violator: "[Subject] seems to rationalize his behavior and blames his drug usage as being the reason why he has engaged in new criminal behavior . . . . This agent does feel that the defendant seems to like his current lifestyle and has shown little effort to change it. . . . His past behavior has shown a blatant disregard to the community and the Department by engaging in new criminal activity. "

4. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD

5 years

While on probation for 4th-degree sexual assault, subject fled police attempting to question him and was apprehended with baggies containing cocaine and marijuana.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 3

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: None

Adult: 4th-degree sexual assault, possession of marijuana.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

(excluding 4th-degree juvenile sexual assault).

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

"[Subject) stated he got involved with the drug deliveries for the money. It was easy money. "

"[Subject) . . . has had people in his short life who have tried to reach out to [him] in an effort to facilitate a positive change. Unfortunately, each time [the subject] pushed these people away. It appears that [the subject) lacks the maturity and insight needed . . . . "

From state's prison intake report:

The subject "placed too much credit to his family history as a determinant of his present behavior . . . . He stated that he laced his marijuana cigarettes with cocaine approximately two times per week."

5. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD while armed

5 years

Parole violation for similar offense pending. Original offense: while conducting an investigation, the police patted down the subject and "discovered a . 38 caliber gun in his coat pocket. . . . [Officers] also recovered 2 plastic bags . . . containing three bundles of cocaine. " At the parole revocation hearing the judge said, "This is the sixth violation report on the client in seven months of parole supervisions, which includes one month in absconder status. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 3

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Robbery, auto theft (two counts), armed robbery.

Adult: Auto theft,  resisting/obstructing an officer, possession with intent to deliver cocaine while armed.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence  investigation:

"[Subject did nor] express any remorse or emotion for being involved in criminal  activity . . . . [The subject]  had no explanation for failing to follow through  with his probation agents'  referrals for drug treatment . . . . [H]e totally  lacks self-control and he  fails to consider how his  actions could affect his life in the long term . . . . Probation was of minimum significance to him. "

From the state's  revocation decision:

"The one year and four months the client has served had done little to protect the community from the client's criminal acts. "

6. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Delivery of cocaine

1. 8 years

From state's revocation summary:

While on probation for armed robbery, the subject's "negative adjustment to supervision includes Operating a Motor Vehicle Without a Valid Driver's License, missing appointments with his agent, domestic violence, not disclosing his whereabouts and activities, not fulfilling his court ordered obligations, several positive urines for drug usage . . . and the current violation of Delivery of a Controlled Substance where [subject] sold the cocaine . . . to a Police Officer. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 5

Adult Incarcerations: 2

Juvenile: Third-degree sexual assault, theft.

Adult: Burglary, robbery, possession of a controlled substance.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's revocation summary:

"[The subject's] violations clearly show his unwillingness to be supervised . . . he has continually possessed illegal narcotics, had demonstrated assaultive and aggressive behavior toward his girlfriend . . . . "

7. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Drug delivery and possession of firearm by felon

7 years

Police "executed a search warrant at [subject's] Milwaukee apt. , 15 'dime' bags of rock cocaine and a loaded . 44 caliber handgun were found in a closet. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 8

Adult Incarcerations: 3

Juvenile: Theft, auto theft, burglary.

Adult: Burglary, hindering, miscellaneous drug offenses, delivery of a controlled substance, resisting an officer, obstructing an officer, criminal damage, criminal trespass.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

"When evaluated in 1988 reference was made to . . . numerous violations for Disrespect, Fighting, Failure to Follow Orders, and [urinalyses] positive for cocaine . . . . Subject relates he was using cocaine (snorting, smoking, and occasionally injecting) and this was 'out of control' this past summer (1993). He denies he was regularly involved in selling drugs. "

Judged "low-risk" until current firearm offense.

8. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD

10 years

Subject was "approached by officers and fled. During the chase . . . subject threw a plastic baggie from his pocket, a baggie found to contain 39 clear green gem packs of crack cocaine . . . . He maintains his innocence. He denies the drugs were his or that he was involved in dealing drugs at this time. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 15

Adult Incarcerations: 4

Juvenile: None

Adult: 5 retail thefts, burglary, injury by conduct regardless of life, 2 resistings, multiple drug offenses.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence investigation:

"The defendant primarily associates with people who gamble, drink, do drugs, and look for girls . . . . He is a user and seller of drugs and seems to see no problem with this . . . . "

"He minimizes his criminal involvement in past incidences and has an answer for everything . . . . Crime is a way of life for [him] and he seems very reluctant to give it up . . . has been convicted of 13 crimes in as many years. "

From state's social worker's report:

"In simplest terms [subject] states: 'I ain't chemical dependent on drugs whatever . . . . In my mind I don't need treatment. '"

9. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD

2. 5 years (probation) *

"Several officers were conducting surveillance of street drug dealing when subject was observed conducting what appeared to be two drug transactions . . . subject was detained and the search revealed" multiple packets totaling more than 7 grams of marijuana. * Although sentenced to probation, subject was incarcerated at the time of this study with pending charges of auto theft and fleeing an officer in a high-speed chase that ended with a crash into a concrete light pole and a bus stop sign.

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 2

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: 4th-degree sexual assault, theft, retail theft, battery, disorderly conduct, 4th-degree sexual assault.

Adult: Drug trafficking, auto theft, fleeing (pending).

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): Yes

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

Excluding the juvenile crime record resulted in a "low-risk" offense rating. "It is unfortunate that subject was not able to complete his probation. Subject violated his supervision only 15 days after being placed on supervision . . . . Subject did not take seriously the conditions of his supervision and rapidly re-offended . . . . It is hoped that during this period of incarceration [his first] that subject will successfully participate in the recommended programming and assume a pro-social value system and lifestyle once he is released back into the community. "

From state's presentence report:

"While on intensive probation [as a juvenile) for 4th-degree sexual assault . . . [he) reported he had violent and sexual hallucinations. He said he imagines himself raping young women. " His Safe Path Program for Sex Offenders counselor "is afraid of these hallucinations because he may rape someone. "

10. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD

1. 5 years

"The subject was observed backing up a vehicle at a high rate of speed by a local police officer. The subject did not have a valid driver's license and a search was conducted [that] discovered 20 corner cut baggies containing cocaine . . . and 10 additional corner cuts of cocaine . . . . "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 2

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: Reckless driving.

Adult: Driving after revocation (3 counts), felony battery.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): No

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

"At age 13 he began involvement with marijuana and alcohol . . . upon his arrest he continued to use marijuana until the day of sentencing. He identifies his cocaine use as situational and does not want to identify himself as a drug dealer . . . . Based [on other self-reported information] he is viewed as someone who uses cocaine and marijuana on a regular basis and as someone who is selling cocaine to support his drug use. "

11. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Delivery of cocaine within 1, 000 feet of a school; possession WITD within 1, 000 feet of a school; possession of a short-barrel shotgun

13 years

"An undercover officer made a controlled buy at subject's residence . . . asking to purchase cocaine and a transaction occurred · . . for cocaine base. The officer observed the subject leave the premises and a no-knock search was conducted . . . at which time they found a 12-gauge loaded shotgun · . . the subject returned · . . and was apprehended. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 8

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: None

Adult: Possession of controlled substance, possession WITD cocaine, multiple arrests (dispositions unclear in file) for carrying a concealed weapon, possession of a controlled substance and possession WITD, attempted 1st-degree murder, battery-domestic abuse.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): No

Violent Crime(s): Yes

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's prison intake report:

"The offenses include the subject having a loaded 12-gauge shotgun in the residence with the safety off. The potential for violence appears very high. By the subject's own admission he made contact with other drug dealers for the purpose of selling and [these] transactions took place on the grounds of North Division High School."

12. MOST RECENT CRIME AND SENTENCE

Possession WITD within 1, 000 feet of a school

5 years

Police "executed a search warrant [at subject's home] . . . a person was attempting to get out and dropped a baggie [containing 7. 91 grams] of marijuana in paper folds. On the floor of the closet . . . was a bag with 23 smaller bags . . . containing cocaine base. Also in the closet was a sawed-off 12-gauge shotgun and a short-barreled rifle, both of which were loaded. Another loaded gun was found under the mattress. This was a . 357 magnum revolver . . . . A . 38 revolver was found under the mattress . . . . In the living room police found a scale, ziplock bags, two pagers and a 6mm Browning pistol. "

ADULT AND JUVENILE CRIMINAL RECORD

Adult Arrests: 1

Adult Incarcerations: 1

Juvenile: None (arrests but no disposition for robbery and resisting! obstructing an officer).

Adult: No prior adult record.

Parole or Probation

Violation(s): No

Violent Crime(s): No

OTHER BACKGROUND

From state's presentence report:

Referring to the circumstances of the arrest and crime scene, "the defendant admitted he lived there [and] denied any knowledge [of the weapons] and said he did not sell drugs. He said he had been on his way to play basketball at North Division High School, which was within 1, 000 feet. "

"He was able to live in that residence because his grandfather owned the house . . . . From the beginning he said different friends of his hung around and that they had drugs and eventually he realized they were selling drugs from his place. "

"Because of the amount of drugs involved and the number of weapons, this certainly must be viewed as a serious offense. "

[admin]

NOTES

CHAPTER 2: THE ROOT CAUSE OF CRIME: MORAL POVERTY

1. Criminal Victimization 1994 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 1996), p. 2.

2. Highlights from 20 Years of Surveying Crime Victims (Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 1993), p. 6; Criminal Victimization 1993 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, May 1995), p. 2; and Crime in the United States (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1994), p. 58.

3. Mark A. Cohen et al., Crime in the United States: Victim Costs and Consequences (Research Report, National Institute of Justice, December 1995), p. 29.

4. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1994 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995), p. 2.

5. Douglas J. Besharov, "The Children of Crack: A Status Report," Public Welfare, Winter 1996, p. 33.

6. Murder in America (International Association of Chiefs of Police, May 1995), p. 13.

7. Alfred Blumstein, "Youth Violence, Guns, and the Illicit-Drug Trade," The Journal of Law and Criminology, Fall 1995, pp. 19-20.

8. David G. Walchak, "President's Message," The Police Chief, December 1995, p. 6.

9. Losing Ground Against Drugs: A Report on Increasing Illicit Drug Use and National Drug Policy (Senate Committee on the Judiciary, December 19, 1995); and Facing the Future: The Rise of Teen Drug Abuse and Teen Violence (Senate Committee on the Judiciary, December 1995).

10. James Alan Fox, Trends in Juvenile Violence (Bureau of Justice Statistics, March 1996), p. 2.

11. Ibid.

12. Alfred Blumstein, "Prisons," in James Q. Wilson and Joan R. Petersilia, Crime (Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1995), p. 412.

13. Fox, Trends in Juvenile Violence, p. 2.

14. Young Black Male Victims (Bureau of Justice Statistics, December 1994), p. 1.

15. Ibid. , p. 2.

16. Glenn Loury, "The Impossible Dilemma," The New Republic, January I, 1996, pp. 21-25.

17. Carrie Dowling, USA Today, February 6, 1996, p. 3A.

18. Calculated from Uniform Crime Report-1990 (Pennsylvania State Police, 1991), pp. A2-A4.

19. Don Russell and Bob Warner, "Fairhill: City's Deadliest Turf in '94," Philadelphia Daily News, January 9, 1995, pp. 4-5.

20. Violence in America: Mobilizing a Response (National Academy Press, 1994), p. ix.

21. Peter Anin, "'Superpredators' Arrive," Newsweek, January 22, 1996, p. 57.

22. James Q. Wilson, "Crime and Public Policy," in Wilson and Petersilia, Crime, p. 492.

23. Ibid. , p. 507.

24. Ibid. , p. 493.

25. Debra Dickerson, "Who Shot Johnny?" The New Republic, January 1, 1996, pp. 17-18.

26. Marvin E. Wolfgang et al., Delinquency in a Birth Cohort (University of Chicago Press, 1972); and Marvin E. Wolfgang and Paul E. Tracy, "The 1945 and 1958 Birth Cohorts," unpublished paper, Harvard University, 1982, as cited in James Q. Wilson, Thinking About Crime, rev. ed. (Basic Books, 1983), pp. 223, 279.

27. Professor Marvin E. Wolfgang, interview, May 21, 1996.

28. Marvin E. Wolfgang et al., From Boy to Man, From Delinquency to Crime (University of Chicago Press, 1987); Delbert S. Elliott et al., "Self-Reported Violent Offending: A Descriptive Analysis of Juvenile Offenders and Their Offending Careers," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, December 1986, pp. 502-3.

29. Robert J. Sampson and John H. Laub, Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points Through Life (Harvard University Press, 1993), p. 23.

30. Walchak, "President's Message," p. 6.

31. Ibid.

32. Aristotle, The Ethics.

33. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: A National Report (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, August 1995), p. 58.

34. Ibid. , p. 108; and Weapons Offenses and Offenders (Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 1995), p. 3.

35. Murder in America, p. 11.

36. Ibid. , p. 6.

37. Child Victimizers: Violent Offenders and Their Victims (Bureau of Justice Statistics, March 1996), p. 3.

38. Ibid.

39. Mark S. Fleisher, Beggars and Thieves: Lives of Urban Street Criminals (University of Wisconsin Press, 1995), p. 143.

40. Anne Morrison Piehl et al., "Juvenile Gun Violence in Boston: Gun Markets, Serious Juvenile Offenders and a Use Reduction Strategy," forthcoming, Law and Contemporary Problems.

41. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , and George A. Mitchell, Who Really Goes to Prison in Wisconsin? (Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, April 1996), p. 19.

42. Youth Crime in Florida (Florida Department of Law Enforcement, April 25, 1996), pp. 4-5.

43. Ibid. , p. 6.

44. Juvenile Crime: Outlook for California (Legislative Analyst's Office, May 1995), p. 23.

45. Deborah Coombe and Judy Peet, "Slain Teacher Recorded Her Pleas to Abductor," Star-Ledger, March 20, 1996, pp. 1, 2, 19.

46. Crime and Neighborhoods (Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 1994).

47. Black Community Crusade for Children, Overwhelming Majority of Black Adults Fear for Children's Safety and Future (Children's Defense Fund, May 26, 1994).

48. Michael A. Fletcher, "Study Tracks Blacks' Crime Concerns," Washington Post, April 21, 1996, p. All.

49. U. S. Bureau of the Census, CP-2-1, U. S. Summary: Social and Economic Characteristics.

50. V. O. Key, The Responsible Electorate (Harvard University Press, 1966), p. 8; Benjamin 1. Page and Robert Y. Shapiro, The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in America's Policy Preferences (University of Chicago Press, 1991); John J. Dilulio, Jr. , and Donald E. Stokes, "The Setting: Valence Politics in Modem Elections," in Michael Nelson, ed. , The Elections of 1992 (CQ Press, 1993), chapter 1.

51. Glenn Loury, "The Impossible Dilemma," pp. 23-24.

52. "Tougher Treatment Urged for Juveniles," New York Times, August 2, 1994, p. A16, citing data from a survey of 250 judges by Penn and Schoen Associates for National Law Journal.

53. Jennifer L. Hochschild, Facing Up to the American Dream: Race, Class, and the Soul of the Nation (Princeton University Press, 1995), p. 205.

54. Robert I. Lerman, "Building Hope, Skills, and Careers: Creating a Youth Apprenticeship Program," in Irwin Garfinkel et al., eds. , Social Policies for Children (Brookings Institution, 1995), p. 159.

55. Mark A. Cohen, "The Monetary Value of Saving a High-Risk Youth," Urban Institute-National Institute of Justice, November 1995.

56. Wilson, Thinking About Crime, p. 6.

57. Ibid. , p. 13.

58. Ibid. , p. 20, emphasis in original.

59. Ryder, as quoted in ibid.

60. Wilson, Thinking About Crime, p. 24.

61. James Q. Wilson and Richard J. Herrnstein, Crime and Human Nature (Simon & Schuster, 1985).

62. Ibid. , pp. 508-9.

63. James Q. Wilson, "In Loco Parentis: Helping Children When Families Fail Them," Brookings Review, Fall 1993, p. 14.

64. David Rubinstein, "Don't Blame Crime on Joblessness," Wall Street Journal, November 13, 1992.

65. Alan L. Keyes, Masters of the Dream (William Morrow, 1995), pp. 12, 13, 15.

66. National Research Council, Losing Generations: Adolescents in High-Risk Settings (National Academy Press, 1993), p. 164.

67. Stephen P. Klein et al., Predicting Criminal Justice Outcomes: What Matters? (RAND, 1991).

68. Correctional Populations in the United States, 1990 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1992), and National Corrections Reporting Program, 1988 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1992).

69. Sentencing in the Federal Courts: Does Race Matter? The Transition to Sentencing Guidelines, 1986-90, Summary (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1993).

70. Patrick A. Langan, "No Racism in the Justice System," Public Interest, Fall 1994, p. 51.

71. Stanley Rothman and Stephan Powers, "Execution by Quota?" Public Interest, Summer 1994, pp. 3-17.

72. Alfred Blumstein, "On the Racial Disproportionality of United States Prison Populations," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol. 73 (1982); Patrick A. Langan, "Racism on Trial: New Evidence to Explain the Racial Composition of Prisons in the United States," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol. 76 (Fall 1985); Prison Admissions and Releases, 1983 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1986).

73. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , "My Black Crime Problem, and Ours," City Journal, Spring 1996, p. 25.

74. Neil Alan Weiner and Marvin E. Wolfgang, "The Extent and Character of Violent Crime in America, 1969 to 1982," in Neil Alan Weiner et al., eds. , Violence (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990), p. 32.

75. Ibid.

76. Dilulio, "My Black Crime Problem, and Ours," p. 26.

77. Ibid. , p. 16.

78. Katia Hetter, "A Pittsburgh Court Battles the Tide," U. S. News & World Report, March 25, 1996, p. 37.

79. Prisoners in 1994 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, August 1995), p. 8.

80. Gerald G. Gaes, "Prison Crowding Research Examined," The Prison Journal, September 1994, pp. 329-63.

81. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , "Prisons That Work: Management Is the Key," Federal Prisons Journal, Summer 1990, pp. 7-15, and "Principled Agents: The Cultural Bases of Behavior in a Federal Bureaucracy," Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, July 1994, pp. 277-318.

82. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995), p. 14.

83. Ibid. , pp. 560-70.

84. Robert Bidinotto, "Must Prisons Be Resorts?" Reader's Digest, November 1994, pp. 65-71.

85. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , No Escape: The Future of American Corrections (Basic Books, 1991), pp. 110-23; Charles H. Logan and Gerald G. Gaes, "Meta-Analysis and the Rehabilitation of Prisoners," Justice Quarterly, June 1993, pp. 245-63.

86. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , and Anne Morrison Piehl, Results of the New Jersey Prisoner Self-Report Survey (New Jersey Sentencing Policy Study Commission, 1993).

87. Neal Shover, Great Pretenders: Pursuits and Careers of Persistent Thieves (Westview, 1996), pp. 178-79.

88. Ibid. , p. 179.

89. This section is drawn largely from John J. Dilulio, Jr. , "Retrieve the Death Penalty from Symbolism," The American Enterprise, May/June 1995, pp. 40-41.

90. James W. Marquart et al., The Rope, the Chain, and the Needle (University of Texas, 1994).

91. This section is drawn largely from John J. Dilulio, Jr. , "Crime," in Henry J. Aaron and Charles L. Schultze, eds. , Setting Domestic Priorities (Brookings Institution, 1992), p. 143.

92. Department of Justice, Attorney General's Task Force on Violent Crime: Final Report (Washington, 1981), p. ix.

93. Wilson, Thinking About Crime, p. 262.

94. Gary Kleck, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America (Aldine de Gruyter, 1991); Gary Kleck and E. Britt Patterson, "The Impact of Gun Control and Gun Ownership Levels on Violence Rates," Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1993, pp. 249-87.

95. Philip J. Cook and Mark H. Moore, "Gun Control," in Wilson and Petersilia, eds. , Crime, pp. 290-91.

96. Robert James Bidinotto, "Subverting Justice," in Robert James Bidinotto, ed. , Criminal Justice? (The Foundation for Economic Education, 1994), p. 67.

97. Paul G. Cassell, "Miranda's Social Costs: An Empirical Assessment," Northwestern University Law Review, Winter 1996, pp. 483-84; Paul G. Cassell and Bret S. Hayman, "Police Interrogation in the I 990s: An Empirical Study of the Effects of Miranda," UCLA Law Review, February 1996, pp. 839-931.

98. Cassell and Hayman, "Police Interrogation," p. 840.

99. Wilson, Thinking About Crime, p. 260.

100. Matthew Reilly, "In Prison for Life, These Inmates Try Scaring Kids Away from Joining Them," Star-Ledger, March 26, 1996, p. 17.

101. Joseph Tierney and Jean Baldwin Grossman with Nancy L. Resch, Making a Difference: An Impact Study of Big Brothers/Big Sisters (Public/Private Ventures, November 1995).

102. Aristotle, The Ethics.

103. Isabel Wilkerson, "2 Boys, a Debt, a Gun, a Victim: The Face of Violence," New York Times, May 16, 1994, p. A1.

104. Robert J. Sampson and John H. Laub, Crime in the Making (Harvard University Press, 1993), pp. 95-96.

105. Daniel S. Nagin et al., "Adolescent Mothers and the Criminal Justice System," unpublished paper, Carnegie Mellon University, December 15, 1995, pp. 28, 30.

106. Carolyn Smith et al., "Resilient Youth: Identifying Factors That Prevent High- Risk Youth from Engaging in Delinquency and Drug Use," Current Perspectives on Aging and the Life Cycle, 1995, p. 221.

107. Cycle of Violence (National Institute of Justice, 1992).

108. Mark S. Fleisher, Beggars and Thieves, pp. 262-63.

109. Fox Butterfield, All God's Children: The Bosket Family and the American Tradition of Violence (Knopf, 1995), esp. pp. 327-28.

110. This section is drawn largely from John J. Dilulio, Jr. , "Saving the Children: Crime and Social Policy," in Irwin Garfinkel et al., eds. , Social Policies for Children (Brookings Institution, 1996).

111. National Research Council, Losing Generations, p. 5.

112. Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Update (1992), p. 7; and Ellen Schall, "Principles for Juvenile Detention," in Francis X. Hartmann, ed. , From Children to Citizens, vol. 2: The Role of Juvenile Court (Springer Verlag, 1987), p. 350.

113. Survey of State Prison Inmates (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1991), pp. 9, 10.

114. Tracy L. Snell, "Women in Prison," BJS Special Report (March 1994), pp. 1, 2.

115. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, A Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders (1993), p. 7.

116. Peter W. Greenwood, "Reforming California's Approach to Delinquent and High-Risk Youth," in James B. Steinberg et al., Urban America: Policy Choices for Los Angeles and the Nation (RAND, 1992), p. 221.

117. David M. Altschuler and Troy L. Armstrong, "Intensive Aftercare for the High- Risk Juvenile Parolee: Issues and Approaches in Reintegration and Community Supervision," in Troy L. Armstrong, ed. , Intensive Interventions with High-Risk Youths: Promising Approaches in Juvenile Probation and Parole (Criminal Justice Press, 1991), p. 48.

118. David Whitman and David Bowermaster, "A Potent Brew: Booze and Crime," U. S. News & World Report, May 31, 1993, pp. 57-59.

119. Jeffrey Fagan, "Intoxication and Aggression," in Michael Tonry and James Q. Wilson, eds. , Crime and Justice Series: Drugs and Crime, vol. 13 (University of Chicago Press, 1990), p. 292.

120. Philip J. Cook and Michael J. Moore, "Violence Reduction Through Restrictions on Alcohol Availability," Alcohol Health and Research World, vol. 17, no. 2, 1993, p. 151.

121. Alan R. Lang and Paulette A. Sibral, "Psychological Perspectives on Alcohol Consumption and Interpersonal Aggression," Criminal Justice and Behavior, vol. 16, no. 3, September 1989, p. 321.

122. Ibid. , p. 301.

123. James A. Inciardi and Arnold S. Trebach, Legalize It?: Debating American Drug Policy (American University Press, 1993), p. 160.

124. Ibid.

125. Steven Jonas, "The U. S. Drug Problem and the U. S. Drug Culture: A Public Health Solution," in James Inciardi, ed. , The Drug Legalization Debate (Sage Publications, 1991), p. 164.

126. Hannah Clayson, "Alcohol Policy and New York City: A Harm-Reduction Strategy," unpublished paper, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University, WWS 402d, May 10, 1994, p. 7, citing data from Tom Harford, "The Incidence of Alcohol and Other Drug Use:' in Ura Jean Oyemade and Dolores Brandon-Moyne, eds. , Ecology of Alcohol and Other Drug Use: Helping Black High-Risk Youth (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1987), pp. 46-47.

127. Seventh Special Report to the Congress on Alcohol and Health (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, January 1990).

128. Wesley G. Skogan, Disorder and Decline: Crime and the Spiral of Decay in American Neighborhoods (University of California Press, 1990), p. 4.

129. Cook and Moore, "Violence Reduction," p. 151.

130. Douglas Murdoch et al., "Alcohol and Crimes of Violence: International Journal of Addictions, vol. 25, September 1990.

131. James J. Collins and Pamela M. Messerschmidt, "Epidemiology of Alcohol- Related Violence," Alcohol Health and Research World, vol. 17, no. 2, 1993, p. 94, reporting data calculated from two 1988 studies and one 1991 study by the U. S. Bureau of Justice Statistics.

132. Prisoners and Alcohol (Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 1983), p. 15.

133. Young Black Male Victims (Bureau of Justice Statistics, December 1994), p. 1.

134. Alfred Blumstein, "Prisons," in James Q. Wilson and Joan Petersilia, eds. , Crime, p. 412.

135. Robert Nash Parker, "Alcohol and Theories of Homicide:' in Freda Adler and William S. Laufer, eds. , Advances in Criminological Theory, vol. 4 (Transaction Publishers, 1993), pp. 113-42.

136. Patricia Ladouceur and Mark Temple, "Substance Use Among Rapists: A Comparison with Other Serious Felons," Crime and Delinquency, vol. 31, no. 2, April 1985, p. 272.

137. Helene Raskin White et al., "Alcohol Use and Aggression Among Youth," Alcohol Health and Research World, vol. 17, no. 2, 1993, pp. 144-50.

138. Seventh Special Report.

139. James J. Collins, "Alcohol and Interpersonal Violence: Less Than Meets the Eye," in Neil Allen Weiner and Marvin E. Wolfgang, eds. , Pathways to Criminal Violence (1989), p. 50.

140. For example, compare Reginald G. Smart, "The Relationship of Availability of Alcoholic Beverages to Per Capita Consumption and Alcoholism Rates," Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 1977, pp. 891-96; and Brian R. Rush et al., "Alcohol Availability, Alcohol Consumption, and Alcohol-Related Damage: The Distribution of Consumption Model," Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 1986, pp. 1-18. The former study indicated that the relationships among availability, consumption, and problems weakened if one controlled for such socioeconomic variables as urban conditions and unemployment rates. But the latter and more sophisticated study incorporated those very factors as direct causes of aggregate alcohol consumption and as co-varieties of retail availability. As common sense would have it, the better model and research showed that availability increased consumption, and consumption increased problems. likewise, see Philip J. Cook and Michael J. Moore, "Drinking and Schooling," Journal of Health Economics, vol. 12, no. 4, 1993, pp. 411-29, which finds that drinking and schooling do not mix (e. g. , other things being equal, drinking in high school reduces the average number of years of schooling completed following high school).

141. Cook and Moore, "Violence Reduction. "

142. Ibid.

143. Frank J. Chaloupka, "Effects of Price on Alcohol-Related Problems," Alcohol Health and Research World, vol. 17, no. 1, 1993, pp. 46-53.

144. Mark Temple and Patricia Ladouceur, "The Alcohol-Crime Relationship as an Age-Specific Phenomenon: A Longitudinal Study," Contemporary Drug Problems, 1986, pp. 89-116.

145. Chaloupka, "Effects of Price," p. 49.

146. Ibid.

147. Ibid. , p. 52.

148. Henrick J. Harwood et al., Social and Economic Costs of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (Research Triangle Institute, 1985).

149. For reports on estimates of the costs of violent crime, see Anne Morrison Piehl and John J. Dilulio, Jr. , "Does Prison Pay? Revisited," Brookings Review, vol. 13, Winter 1995.

150. Paul J. Gruenwald et al., "The Relationship of Outlet Densities to Alcohol Consumption: A Time Series Cross-Sectional Analysis," Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, vol. 17, no. I, 1993, p. 38.

151. Ibid.

152. Ibid. , p. 45.

153. Paul J. Gruenwald et al., "Alcohol Availability and the Formal Power and Resources of State Alcohol Beverage Control Agencies," Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, vol. 16, no. 3, May/June 1992, p. 592.

154. Jerome Rabow et al., "Alcohol Availability, Alcohol Beverage Sales and Alcohol-Related Problems," Journal of Studies on Alcohol, vol. 43, no. 7, 1982, pp. 767-801.

155. Gruenwald et al., "Alcohol Availability," pp. 591-97.

156. Ibid. , p. 596.

157. Jerome Rabow et al., "Alcohol Beverage Licensing Practice in California: A Study of a Regulatory Agency," Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, vol. 17, no. 2, 1993, p. 245.

158. Ibid. , p. 244.

159. Robert Nash Parker and L. A. Rebhun, Alcohol and Homicide: A Deadly Combination of Two American Traditions (SUNY Press, forthcoming, 1995), draft p. 60.

160. James Q. Wilson and George Kelling, "Broken Windows: The Police and Neighborhood Safety," Atlantic Monthly, March 1982, pp. 29-38.

161. Skogan, Disorder and Decline, pp. 10-11, summarizing the Wilson-Kelling "broken windows" thesis.

162. Parker and Rebhun, Alcohol and Homicide, draft pp. 60-61.

163. Travis Hirschi, The Causes of Delinquency (University of California Press, 1969); Marvin D. Krohn and James L. Massey, "Social Control and Delinquent Behavior: An Examination of the Elements of the Social Bond," Sociological Quarterly, 1980, pp. 529-43; Anne C. Case and Lawrence F. Katz, "The Company You Keep: The Effects of Family and Neighborhood on Disadvantaged Youths," NBER Working Paper No. 3705 (National Bureau of Economic Research, 1991).

164. Stanley 1. Orenstein and Dominique M. Hanssens, "Alcohol Control Laws and the Consumption of Distilled Spirits and Beer," Journal of Consumer Research, September 1985, p. 208.

165. Case and Katz, "The Company You Keep. "

166. Parker and Rebhun, pp. 55-56.

167. Cook and Moore, "Violence Reduction," p. 155.

168. Parker and Rebhun, p. 133.

169. F. Wittman, Zoning Ordinances, Alcohol Outlets, and Planning: Prospects for Local Control of Alcohol (Medical Research Institute, 1982); and F. Wittman and M. Hilton, "Uses of Planning Ordinances to Regulate Alcohol Outlets in California Cities," in H. D. Holder, ed. , Advances in Substance Abuse: Behavioral and Biological Research 1987, pp. 337-66, as cited in Clayson, "Alcohol Policy and New York City," which argues persuasively in favor of reducing the density of liquor outlets and limiting liquor advertising in New York City.

170. Wittman, Zoning Ordinances, p. 13, as cited in Clayson, "Alcohol Policy and New York City. "

171. As quoted in Clayson, "Alcohol Policy and New York City," p. 21.

172. David Whitman with David Bowermaster, "A Potent Brew: Booze and Crime," U. S. News & World Report, May 31, 1993, pp. 57-59.

173. Ibid.

174. Clayson, "Alcohol Policy and New York City," p. 22.

175. Philip J. Cook and George Tauchon, "The Effects of Minimum Drinking Age Legislation on Youthful Auto Fatalities, 1970-77," Journal of Legal Studies, 1984, pp. 169-90.

176. J. Tom Morgan, Memorandum, Metropolitan District Attorneys, May 16, 1995, summarizing data from the 1995 report of the U. S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect.

177. Mark S. Fleisher, Beggars and Thieves, pp. 103-5.

178. Joe Klein, "The Predator Problem," Newsweek, April 29, 1996, p. 32.

179. Douglas J. Besharov, "Child Abuse Reporting," in Garfinkel et al., eds. , Social Policies for Children, p. 259.

180. Ibid.

CHAPTER 3: RESTRAINING AND PUNISHING STREET CRIMINALS

1. James Rowen, "Before Deadly Spree, 92 Arrests," Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, January 28, 1996, p. 1.

2. Criminal Victimization 1993 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, May 1995), p. 2; Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1993 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994), tables 4. 9 and 5. 73; Felony Sentences in State Courts, 1992 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 1995), tables 1, 2, 4.

3. Ibid.

4. Morgan O. Reynolds, Crime in Texas (National Center for Policy Analysis, February 1991).

5. Ibid. See also Morgan O. Reynolds, Crime and Punishment in Texas: Update, January 1996.

6. James Q. Wilson, "Crime in America: Reply," Commentary, February 1995, p. 20.

7. Calculated from Profile of 1nmates in the United States and in England and Wales, 1991 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 1994), p. 2.

8. Ibid. , pp. 4, 6.

9. Ibid. , pp. 7, 8.

10. Imprisonment in Four Countries (Bureau of Justice Statistics, February 1987), p. 2.

11. The Public Perspective, November/December 1991, pp. 5, 8, reporting data from a Roper Center poll.

12. Americans Behind Bars: The International Use of 1ncarceration, 1992-93 (The Sentencing Project, September 1994), p. 2.

13. Mike Reynolds and Bill Jones, Three Strikes and You're Out: A Promise to Kimber (Quill Driver Books, 1996).

14. Charles H. Logan, "Who Really Goes to Prison?" Federal Prisons Journal, Summer 1991, pp. 57-59; Who Goes to Prison? (National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 1990; Tom Wicker, "The Punitive Society," The New York Times, January 12, 1991, p. 25.

15. Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants, 1990 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 1992), tables 12 and 13.

16. Weapons Offenses and Offenders (Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 1995), p. 4.

17. Prisoners in 1994 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, August 1995), p. 11.

18. Joan R. Petersilia, "Diverting Non-Violent Prisoners to Intermediate Sanctions," California Policy Seminar, unpublished paper, 1995, pp. 9-11.

19. Facts of the "pizza thief" case supplied by the California Department of Corrections, May 26, 1995; Michael E. Fletcher, "Study Tracks Blacks' Crime Concerns," Washington Post, April 21, 1996, p. All. See also Andy Furillo, "Three Strikes: The Verdict's In" (a three-pan series), Sacramento Bee, March 31-April2, 1996, p. A1.

20. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , and George Mitchell, Who Really Goes to Prison in Wisconsin? (Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, 1996).

21. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , and Anne Morrison Piehl, "Does Prison Pay?" Brookings Review, vol. 4, Fall 1991, pp. 28-35; John J. Dilulio, Jr. , and Anne Morrison Piehl, "Does Prison Pay? Revisited," Brookings Review, vol. 13, Winter 1995, pp. 21-25; Steven D. Levitt, "The Effect of Prison Population Size on Crime Rates: Evidence from Prison Crowding Litigation," unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, February 1995; and Thomas B. Marvell and Carlisle E. Moody, "Prison Population Growth and Crime Reduction," Journal of Quantitative Criminology, vol. 10, no. 4, 1994.

22. Prison Sentences and Time Served for Violence (Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 1995), p. 2.

23. George Allen, "The Courage of Our Convictions," Policy Review, Spring 1995, pp. 4- 7. Also see Governor's Commission on Parole Abolition and Sentencing Reform: Final Report (Stare of Virginia, August 1994).

24. Prison Sentences and Time Served for Violence, p. 2.

25. Crime and Sentencing State Enactments (National Conference of State Legislatures, November 1995); and State Sentencing System and "Truth in Sentencing" (National Conference of State Legislatures, April 1995).

26. John J. Dilulio, Jr. , "Crime in America: It's Going to Get Worse," Reader's Digest, August 1995, p. 55.

27. Probation and Parole Violators in State Prison, 1991 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, August 1995).

28. Joan R. Petersilia, "A Crime Control Rationale for Reinvesting in Community Corrections," Spectrum, Summer 1995, p. 19.

29. Weapons Offenses and Offenders (Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 1995), p. 5.

30. Julia Cass, "The Case of 'Mudman' Simon Has Made the Pa. Parole Board Cautious About Who Shall Be Released," Philadelphia Inquirer, December 18, 1995, pp. B1, B3.

31. Jeff Lean et al., "Crime and Punishment," Miami Herald, August 28-September 5, 1994, and December 18, 1994. Also see Final Report of the Dade County Grand Jury (Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida, May 11, 1994).

32. Dave Neese, "Plenty of Crime, Little Punishment in Jersey," The Trenwnian, August 15, 1994, p. 3.

33. For example, see Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1993 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994), table 6. 77.

34. Child Rape Victims, 1992 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 1994), p. 1: "Thirty-six states responded that they did not keep such statistics . . . . " Also see Andre Henderson, "The Scariest Criminal," Governing, August 1995, pp. 35-38.

35. Twenty-nine states do not retain such data on murderers; most other states retain only some such data for selected years. Brookings Institution, Homicide Information Project, phone survey and correspondence, Summer 1995.

36. For example, Anne Morrison Piehl, Probation in Wisconsin (Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, August 1992), p. II: "The Wisconsin Division of Probation and Parole is uncomfortable thinking in terms of summary statistics and, therefore, does not record how many probationers go to prison during the term of their supervision. "

37. Recidivism of Felons on Probation, 1986-1989 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1992), pp. 1, 6; and Prisons and Prisoners in the United States (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1992), p. xvi.

38. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 167.

39. Patrick A. Langan, "Between Prison and Probation: Intermediate Sanctions," Science, May 6, 1994, p. 791.

40. Joan Petersilia and Susan Turner, Intensive Supervision for High-Risk Probationers: Findings from Three California Experiments (RAND, 1990), pp. ix, 98; and Susan Turner and Joan Petersilia, "Focusing on High-Risk Parolees: An Experiment to Reduce Commitments to the Texas Department of Corrections, " Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, vol. 29, February 1992, p. 34. Also see Joan Petersilia and Susan Turner, "Intensive Probation and Parole, " in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, vol. 17 (University of Chicago Press, 1993), pp. 281-335.

41. Joan R. Petersilia, "A Crime Control Rationale for Reinvesting in Community Corrections, " Spectrum, Summer 1995, p. 19.

42. Ibid., p. 1.

43. John J. Dilulio, Jr., No Escape: The Future of American Corrections (Basic Books, 1991), pp. 5, 102.

44. Patsy A. Klaus, "The Costs of Crime to Victims, " BJS Crime Data Brief (February 1994), pp. 1, 2.

45. Ted R. Miller et al., "Victim Costs of Violent Crime and Resulting Injuries, " Health Affairs, vol. 12, Winter 1993, pp. 193-94.

46. Mark A. Cohen et al., Crime in the United States: Victim Costs and Consequences (Research Report, National Institute of Justice, December 1995).

47. Neil D. Rosenberg, "Gunshots Shatter Lives, Cost Millions, " Milwaukee Journal, March 14, 1993, p. 12.

48. David P. Cavanagh and Mark A. R. Kleiman, Cost Benefit Analysis of Prison Cell Construction and Alternative Sanctions (BOTEC Analysis Corp., 1990), p. 26; Dilulio and Piehl, "Does Prison Pay?" p. 34; and Dilulio and Piehl, New Jersey Inmate Survey: Results and Implications (New Jersey Sentencing Policy Study Commission, 1993).

49. Michael K. Block and Steven J. Twist, "Lessons from the Eighties: Incarceration Works, " Commonsense, vol. 1, Spring 1994, p. 78.

50. Alfred Blumstein et al., ed., Criminal Careers and "Career Criminals, " vol. I (National Academy Press, 1986), p. 123.

51. Michael K. Block, Carey Herbert, and Steven J. Twist, "Deterrence: What We Know and What It Means, " working paper, University of Arizona, 1994.

52. Patrick A. Langan, "Between Prison and Probation: Intermediate Sanctions, " Science, vol. 264, May 1994, p. 792.

53. Patrick A. Langan, "America's Soaring Prison Population, " Science, vol. 251, March 1991, p. 1573; Langan, "Between Prison and Probation, " pp. 792-93.

54. For the raw data from the Wisconsin study, see John J. Dilulio, Jr., "Community- Based Policing in Wisconsin: Can It Cut Crime?" Wisconsin Policy Research Institute Report, vol. 6, October 1993. For an analysis of the Wisconsin data, see Dilulio and Piehl, "Does Prison Pay?" pp. 28-35. For the raw data from the New Jersey study and a preliminary analysis of it, see Dilulio and Piehl, New Jersey Inmate Survey.

55. Thomas B. Marvell and Carlisle D. Moody, Jr., "Prison Population Growth and Crime Reduction, " Journal of Quantitative Criminology, vol. 10, no. 4, 1994, p. 136; Steven D. Levitt, "The Effect of Prison Population Size on Crime Rates: Evidence from Prison Overcrowding, " Litigation Working Paper 51 19 (National Bureau of Economic Research, February 1995).

56. Richard Bernstein, "Young Predators Caught in a Chaotic System, " New York Times, March 13, 1996, p. C18.

57. Penelope Lemov, "The Assault on Juvenile Justice, " Governing, December 1994, p.30.

58. Juvenile Justice: Juveniles Processed in Criminal Court and Case Depositions (General Accounting Office, August 1995), pp. 2, 27.

59. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994), p. 531.

60. Ibid., pp. 379-82.

61. We are grateful to Harry L. Shorstein, State Attorney, Fourth Judicial Circuit of Florida, for providing us with the data and information contained in this section.

62. William S. Bratton, "The New York City Police Department's Civil Enforcement of Quality-of-Life Crimes, " Journal of Law and Policy, 1995, pp. 447 -64.

63. Ibid., pp. 447-48.

64. Police Strategy NO.2 (NYPD, 1994), p. 31.

65. Police Strategy No.5 (NYPD, 1994), p. 40.

66. Bratton, "The New York City Police, " p. 464.

67. George L. Kelling, "How to Run a Police Department, " City Journal, Autumn 1995, p. 41.

68. Fox Butterfield, "Police Chief's Success in Charleston, S.C., Is What's Raising Eyebrows Now, " New York Times, April 25, 1995, p. A12.

69. Reuben M. Greenberg, "Less Bang-Bang for the Buck, " Policy Review, Winter 1992, p. 56.

70. Ibid., p. 56.

71. Ibid., p. 58.

72. Gregory Childress, "Leaders Turn to Police Wizard: Charleston Chief Takes Criminals to Task for Crime, " Durham Herald-Sun, March 20, 1994, p. A1.

73. Ibid.

74. Linn Washington, "Common-Sense Economy-Minded Sheriff Cuts Crime Rate, " Philadelphia Inquirer, January 25, 1994, p. 5A.

75. Drawn from a speech by Sam Nuchia to the Federal Bar Association on September 27, 1995. See also "Houston Murders Lowest Since '73, " Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, March 12, 1996, p. 8.

76. Katherine M. Skiba, "Zero Tolerance for Crime: Houston Moves to Sweep Up Gangs, Sees the Statistics Drop, " Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, March 12, 1996, p. 1.

77. Ibid.

78. From a speech by Sam Nuchia to the Katy Area Chamber of Commerce on October 10, 1995.

79. Drawn from a speech by Sam Nuchia to the Federal Bar Association on September 27, 1995.

80. Sarah B. Vandenbraak, "Bail Humbug!" Policy Review, Summer 1995, p. 75.

81. The Gallup Poll News Service, April 25, 1994. According to the Gallup data, in both 1993 and 1994, 18 percent of poll respondents expressed a "great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in the U.S. Congress, versus 17 percent in 1993 and 15 percent in 1994 for the criminal justice system. But the police were an exception, enjoying over 50 percent public confidence in both years, on a par with organized religion and a distant third to the military.

CHAPTER 4: DRUGS, CRIME, AND CHARACTER

1. Robert Hanley, "In Paterson, a Family's Sordid Existence Brings Arrests and Calls for Change, " New York Times, December 6, 1995.

2. Don Terry, "Detroit Family in the Jaws of a Monster, " New York Times, December 4, 1995.

3. Nancy Lewis, "Video Lands Couple in Family Court, " Washington Post, December 18, 1995.

4. Quoted in William J. Bennett, The De-Valuing of America: The Fight for Our Culture and Our Children (Summit Books, 1992), pp. 120-21.

5. National Institute of Justice, "Drug Use Forecasting, 1991, Annual Report" (on adult arrestees), December 1992, p. 21.

6. T. E. Feucht, R. C. Stephens, and M. L. Walker, "Drug Use Among Juvenile Arrestees: A Comparison of Self-Report, Urinalysis, and Hair Analysis, " Journal of Drug Issues, vol. 24, no. 1, 1994, pp. 99-116, quoted in Eric D. Wish, "Drug Use Among Juvenile Detainees in Maryland, " reprint from Proceedings: Maryland Statewide Epidemiology Work Group May 1995 Meeting.

7. E. D. Wish, T. A. Gray, and E. Levine, Measuring Drug Use Among Female Juvenile Detainees: Estimates from Self-Reports, Urinalysis, and Hair Analysis, 1995 (Center for Substance Abuse Research, forthcoming).

8. Kenneth Tardiff, et al., "Homicide in New York City: Cocaine Use and Firearms, " Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 278, no. I, July 6, 1994, p. 46.

9. Ibid., p. 45.

10. Robert Davis, "'Meth' Use in the 90's: A Growing 'Epidemic, ' " USA Today, September 7, 1995, p. 7A.

11. John McCormick, "A One-Man Children's Crusade, " Newsweek, April 25, 1994, p. 56.

12. Foster Care: Parental Drug Abuse Has Alarming Impact on Young Children (General Accounting Office, 1994), cited in Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA), Legalization: Panacea or Pandora's Box (1995), p. 25, note 83.

13. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "The Children of the State: Welfare Reform, Congress and Family Responsibility, " Washington Post, November 25, 1990, p. C1.

14. Nicholas Davidoff, "To Give or Not to Give: Inside the World of Beggars Who Cajole, Amuse, Shame-and Threaten-Their Way to $100 a Day and More, " New York Times Magazine, April 24, 1994, pp. 36-41, 50-51.

15. The Gallup Poll, "A 1995 View of the Drug Problem in America" (September 1995), released December 12, 1995.

16. The four best discussions of the issue of drug legalization are William J. Olson, "Why Americans Should Resist the Legalization of Drugs, " published by the Heritage Foundation (Backgrounder, no. 993, July 18, 1994); James Q. Wilson, "Against the Legalization of Drugs, " Commentary (February 1990); CASA, Legalization: Panacea or Pandora's Box; and Herbert D. Kleber, "Our Current Approach to Drug Abuse- Progress, Problems, Proposals, " New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 330, February 3, 1994, pp. 361-65. Many of the arguments in these works shaped this analysis.

17. David F. Musto, The American Disease (Oxford University Press, 1987).

18. Ibid., pp. 258-59. Also see Wilson, "Against the Legalization of Drugs, " p. 22.

19. Robert E. Peterson, "The Success of Tough Drug Enforcement, " PAE Report, January 1996, p. 5. Also: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 1990, in 1991, in 1992 (note 9), and in 1993 (p. 8), (U.S. Department of Justice, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 respectively).

20. Musto, The American Disease, p. 265.

21. Dana Eser Hunt and William Rhodes, "Characteristics of Heavy Cocaine Users, Including Poly Drug Use, Criminal Activity, and Health Risks" (Abt Associates for ONOCP, Spring 1993), released by ONDCP, August 9, 1993, as "Characteristics of Heavy Cocaine Users: A Research Paper, " p. I.

22. Associated Press, March 3, 1988.

23. Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, "Preliminary Estimates from the 1994 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (1994 NHSDA)" (Advance Report Number 10, September 1995).

24. Press release by the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research, "Monitoring the Future Study" (January 31, 1994), table 3.

25. Christine Smith and William Rhodes, "Drug Use by Age Cohorts Over Time" (Abt Associates, unpublished, quoted draft, August II, 1992), p. 3. This is one of several contracted studies done for ONDCP. Some, like this one, have not been released by ONDCP, but the office now wants them to be available to interested individuals.

26. 1994 NHSDA, tables 6-10.

27. Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, "Preliminary Estimates from the 1992 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (1992 NHSDA)" (Advance Report Number 3, June 1993).

28. University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research, "Monitoring the Future Study, " December IS, 1995, table 4.

29. Reuters, "Elders Reiterates Her Support for Study of Drug Legalization, " Washington Post, January 15, 1994, p. A8.

30. On February 9, 1993, the White House announced that ONDCP would be cut from 146 staff members to 25. For more detail on drug czardom under the Clinton administration see Bryon York, "Clinton's Phony Drug War, " The American Spectator, February 1994, pp. 40-44.

31. See Michael Isikoff, "Reno Has Yet to Make Mark on Crime, " Washington Post, November 26, 1993, pp. AI, A 10, All. For a thorough analysis-and refutation-of the Clinton administration claim that the prison population contains an excessive number of nonviolent or "low-level" drug offenders see Richard K. Willard and Shannen W. Coffin, "Prison Capacity and 'Low-Level' Drug Offenders, " Working Paper Series No. 60 (Washington Legal Foundation, February 1995).

32. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Losing Ground Against Drugs (December 19, 1995), pp. 9-10.

33. From $1.960 billion in FY 1992 to $1.293 billion in FY 1995 in current dollars: ONDCP, National Drug Control Strategy: Budget Summary (February 1995), p. 235.

34. Tim Golden, "Tons of Cocaine Reaching Mexico in Old Jets, " New York Times, January 10, 1995, pp. AI, A8.

35. H. G. Reza, "Border Inspections Eased and Drug Seizures Plunge, " Los Angeles Times, February 13, 1995. An NBC Dateline report by Fred Francis, February 24, 1995, focused on the same problem.

36. Charles Rangel, CNN News, January 31, 1994.

37. Press release by the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research, "Monitoring the Future Study" (also known as the National High School Senior Survey-HHS) for 1995 (December 15, 1995), for 1994 (December 8, 1994), and for 1993 (January 31, 1994).

38. CASA, Legalization: Panacea or Pandora's Box, p. 37.

39. Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, "Annual Medical Examiner Data, 1993: Data from the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN)" (Statistical Series: Series I, Number 13-B, 1995).

40. The data cited are from Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, "Preliminary Estimates from the Drug Abuse Warning Network: 1994 Preliminary Estimates of Drug-Related Emergency Room Episodes" (Advance Report Number II, November 1995).

41. Ibid.

42. National Drug Control Strategy, 1995, pp. 45-48, 146 (table B-16).

43. ONDCP, "Pulse Check: National Trends in Drug Abuse, " Fall 1995, p. 3.

44. CNN News October 30, 1995, 8:17 P.M. ET.

45. Quoted in Bennett, The De-Valuing of America, p. 120.

46. Orrin G. Hatch, Congressional Record, Senate, September 25, 1995, p. S14307.

47. William F. Buckley, Jr., "The War on Drugs Is Lost, " National Review, vol. 48, no. 2, February 12, 1996, p. 35.

48. Ibid., p. 36.

49. Ethan A. Nadelmann, "The War on Drugs Is Lost, " p. 38.

50. National Drug Control Strategy, 1995, p. 139 (table B-4).

51. CASA, Legalization: Panacea or Pandora's Box, p. 36.

52. "Preliminary Estimates from the Drug Abuse Warning Network, 1994, " p. 3.

53. ONDCP, "Pulse Check: National Trends in Drug Abuse, " December 1994, p. 10.

54. CASA, Legalization: Panacea or Pandora's Box, p. 37.

55. "Preliminary Estimates from the 1994 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, " pp. 58, 78 (table 22a), 80 (table 23A), 82 (table 24A), 86 (table 26a), and 56 (table 5A).

56. CASA, Legalization: Panacea or Pandora's Box, p. 12.

57. Kurt Schmoke, "The War on Drugs Is Lost, " p. 41.

58. "Preliminary Estimates from the Drug Abuse Warning Network, 1994," multiple tables.

59. ONDCP, National Drug Control Strategy: Budget Summary (February 1995), pp. 235-38; and ONDCP, National Drug Control Strategy (February 1995), pp. 112-13.

60. L. D. Johnston, J. G. Bachman, and P. M. O'Malley, Monitoring the Future: Questionnaire Results from the Nation's High School Seniors, 1995 (Institute for Social Research).

61. Partnership for a Drug-Free America, 1995 Partnership Attitude Tracking Study (February 20, 1996).

62. Ibid., p. 4.

63. Information provided by Community Anti-Drug Coalition of America.

64. Ibid.

65. Ibid.

66. ONDCP, National Drug Control Strategy: Strengthening Communities' Response w Drugs and Crime, February 1995, p. 139 (table B-4).

67. Hunt and Rhodes, "Characteristics of Heavy Cocaine Users, " p. 7; and David Boyum and Ann Marie Rochleau, "Heroin Users in New York, Chicago, and San Diego, " Office of National Drug Control Policy (November 1994), p. 5.

68. Hunt and Rhodes, "Characteristics of Heavy Cocaine Users, " p. 10.

69. Boyum and Rochleau, "Heroin Users in New York, Chicago, and San Diego, " p.5.

70. For a thorough discussion of drug treatment and the elements of effective treatment programs see ONDCP, "Understanding Drug Treatment, " June 1990.

71. Treatment funding from: National Drug Control Strategy, Budget Summary, p. 187. Estimated treatment capacity from: National Drug Control Strategy (1994), p. 103, table B-8.

72. Some advocates of greater federal treatment spending have asserted that while the federal government increased drug treatment spending, state and local governments cut such spending. There is no evidence to support this claim for treatment spending nationally. In fact, a study released by ONDCP last year, done by the U.S. Census Bureau, found that spending by state and local governments on all aspects of anti-drug programming increased between 1990 and 1991 (the two years measured) -- and treatment spending (under the category health and hospitals) increased 28.1 percent for state governments and 25.2 percent for local governments between 1990 and 1991 . See ONDCP, State and Local Spending on Drug Control Activities: Report from the National Survey of State and Local Governments (October 1993), p. 5.

There is also an effort under way by the federal government bureaucracy to discredit its own data showing a decline in persons treated as spending on treatment dramatically increased. In a memorandum dated January 25, 1995, the administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) argues for a new methodology- that produces increases in persons treated as spending increases, of course substituting a one-day count of persons treated, rather than an estimate of persons treated per year by treatment providers and including both drug and alcohol treatment in the total. This highlights the problem rather than resolving it, however. It strongly suggests that funds requested and appropriated to provide drug treatment have been shifted to alcohol treatment. In addition, the memorandum openly concedes that treatment providers "change the classification of clients in response to changing, legal, regulatory or policy priorities" and, apparently, neither SAMHSA nor HHS has any intention of altering this situation.

73. National Drug Control Strategy, 1995, p. 139 (table B-4), p. 143 (table B-9).

74. The criminal justice system is probably the single greatest cause of addicts entering treatment today. "Drug courts" and so-called diversion programs give less violent addicts a choice of entering and completing treatment or going to jail for an extended period. Washington, D.C., mayor Marion Barry may be the most well-known example of this practice.

75. In remarks before the 1993 National Summit on U.S. Drug Policy (May 7, 1993), Dr. Mitchell S. Rosenthal, president of Phoenix House and one of the nation's foremost drug treatment authorities, noted that what he called "disordered drug abusers" (others might call them "hard-core addicts") require long-term, drug-free, residential treatment. This means 18 to 24 months of treatment within a therapeutic community. There are only an estimated 11, 000 such slots nationwide and they cost an estimated $17, 000 to $22, 000 per year (Mitchell S. Rosenthal, "Asking the Right Questions About Treatment, " May 7, 1993). President Clinton's drug strategy completely ignores this problem.

76. Yih-ing Hser, M. Douglas Anglin, and Keiko Powers, "A 24- Year Follow-up of California Narcotics Addicts, " The Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 50, July 1993, pp. 577-84. Quotation from p. 577.

77. Bayum and Rochleau, "Heroin Users in New York, Chicago, and San Diego, " p. 19.

78. Hunt and Rhodes, "Characteristics of Heavy Cocaine Users."

79. Jeff Leen and Don Van Natta, Jr., "Drug Court: Favored by Felons, " Miami Herald, August 29, 1994, p. 1A.

80. Jeff Leen and Don Van Natta, Jr., "Controversial Drug Court, " Miami Herald, December 18, 1994, p. 24A.

81. National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, "Evaluating Recovery Services: The California Drug and Alcohol Treatment Assessment (CALDATA)" (April 1994), p. 11.

82. Edwin W. Zedlewski, Making Confinement Decisions (National Institute of Justice Research in Brief, 1987). We note only that high cost-benefit claims have been made for prisons. We do not believe the 17-1 ratio is correct.

83. C. Peter Rydell and Susan S. Everingham, "Controlling Cocaine: Supply Versus Demand Programs" (RAND, 1994). The quotation is from the RAND press release on the report, June 13, 1994, p. 1.

84. ONDCP, Statement of Fred W. Garcia, Deputy Director for Demand Reduction, White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, on the RAND Studies' "Controlling Cocaine: Supply Versus Demand Programs" and "Modeling the Demand for Cocaine, " June 13, 1994, pp. 1-2.

85. Rydell and Everingham, "Controlling Cocaine, " p. 20.

86. William Rhodes, Paul Scheiman, and Kenneth Carlson, "What America's Users Spend on Illegal Drugs, 1988-1991" (Abt Associates, February 23, 1993), released by ONDCP, August 23, 1993, p. 10, table 1. This study has been updated with the data published in the National Drug Control Strategy, 1995, p. 145 (table B-14).

87. Coca is the bush whose leaves are processed to extract cocaine.

88. U.S. Department of State, International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR), 1995. Figures 4-17 to 4-21 are based on the INCSR data and unpublished analyses and a cocaine production model prepared by the staff of ONDCP's Office of Research during the Bush administration.

89. Note that the I994 estimate of cocaine available in the United States employs an estimate of federal seizures based on projecting a 12-month total from the available data for the first six months of the year.

90. Unpublished results of an ONDCP-funded analysis of data from the DEA's System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE). The analysis was conducted by Abt Associates.

91. Ibid.

92. Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, "Estimates from the Drug Abuse Warning Network: 1992 Estimates of Drug-Related Emergency Room Episodes" (Advance Report Number 4, September 1993), p. 45.

93. ONDCP, "Price and Purity of Cocaine: The Relationship to Emergency Room Visits and Deaths, and to Drug Use Among Arrestees" (October 1992).

94. National Drug Control Strategy, 1995, p. 139 (table B-4).

95. The decline in heavy cocaine use in the face of increased price indicates an important difference between casual and addictive use. As long as cocaine is easily obtainable, it seems that casual users not deterred by prevention efforts are unlikely to be deterred by even moderate increases in street prices. This is probably because they are spending so little of their disposable income on the drug that such price increases do not affect their ability to obtain it. Many heavy users, on the other hand, are using most of their disposable income to purchase cocaine (crack). When the price goes up they generally have to make do with less of the drug. This leads some of them to enter detox and treatment and apparently reduces the rate at which those who continue using suffer the health problems that cause them to appear at emergency rooms.

96. "Estimates from the Drug Abuse Warning Network: 1992 Estimates of Drug- Related Emergency Room Episodes, " p. 45; "Preliminary Estimates from the Drug Abuse Warning Network, 1994, " multiple tables; and STRIDE unpublished.

97. The record of Colombia's failure has been detailed in a wide variety of reports in addition to its treatment in the 1995 INCSR; see David L. Marcus, "Drug Traffickers' Grip on Colombia Tightens, " "Colombian President in Drug Lords' Pocket, Officials Say, " "Heroes and Victims: Cocaine Trade Brings Highest Earnings, Deadliest Toll to Colombia, " "Killer Drugs: Narcotics Trade Destroys Everyday Life in Colombia, " "Only the Good News: Censorship Bars Press from Reporting on Drug Trade, " "Fight for Clean Flights, " "Steep Price, Low Return: U.S. Wastes Millions in Colombia Drug Fight, Officials Say, " "Drug Money's Influence on Constitution Seen, " Dallas Morning News, February 26, 1955, pp. 1A, 32A, 33A, 1J, 10J, and February 27, 1995, pp. lA, 6A, 1D, 4D, 1H; Majority Staff Report on Colombia's anti-drug performance, Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, February 27, 1995; John P. Sweeney, "Colombia's Narco-Democracy Threatens Hemispheric Security, " Backgrounder (Heritage Foundation, March 21, 1995); Jim McGee, "The Cocaine Connection, the Cali Cartel in America: Drug Smuggling Industry Is Built on Franchises, " "The Cocaine Connection, Murder as a Management Tool: Violent Streak Raises Cali Cartel's U.S. Profile, " "The Cocaine Connection, Lawyers Under Scrutiny: Cartel- Related Probe Focuses on D.C. Law Firm, " Washington Post, March 26, 1995, pp. AI, A20; March 27, 1995, pp. AI, A12; March 28, 1995, pp. A1, A8.

98. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh prepared a report something like this that he released August 3, 1989 ("Drug Trafficking: A Report to the President of the United States"). But it was not made a strategic plan for federal drug enforcement.

CHAPTER 5: ABOUT MORAL POVERTY: SOME THINGS WE NEED TO DO

1. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society: Introduction, A Report by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (Government Printing Office, February 1967), p. 1.

2. Calculated from The Challenge of Crime: 1 robbery per 1, 630 equals 1.2 per 2, 000.

3. Calculated from Criminal Victimization 1994 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 1996), pp. 2, 3: the robbery victimization rate per 1, 000 was 6, and 55 percent of robberies were reported, for a rate of 6.6 robberies per 2, 000.

4. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society, p. 211.

5. Ibid., p. 213.

6. Ibid., p. 6.

7. Ibid., p. 12.

8. Ibid., emphasis added.

9. Violent Crime: The Challenge to Our Cities (George Braziller, 1969), p.82.

10. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Toward a National Urban Policy," The Public Interest, no. 17, Fall 1969, pp. 3-20.

11. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "The Underclass: Toward a Post-Industrial Policy," The Public Interest, no. 96, Summer 1989, pp. 16-27.

12. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Defining Deviancy Down, " The American Scholar, vol. 61, no. 1, Winter 1993, pp. 17-30.

13. Cited in Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Toward a New Intolerance, " The Public Interest, no. 112, Summer 1993, p. 122.

14. David Popenoe, "American Family Decline, 1960-1990: A Review and Appraisal," Journal of Marriage and the Family, no. 55, August 1993, p. 528.

15. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Vital Statistics of the United States, 1991, vol. I, "Natality" (Government Printing Office, 1993).

16. Congressional testimony of Lee Rainwater, Harvard University, in George Will, "The Tragedy of Illegitimacy, " Washington Post, October 31, 1993.

17. David Blankenhorn, Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem (Basic Books, 1995), p. 1.

18. David Blankenhorn, "Fatherless America," Certain Truths, Center of the American Experiment (Minneapolis, Minn.), 1995, p. 91.

19. James Q. Wilson, "The Contradictions of an Advanced Capitalist State, " Forbes, September 14, 1992, p. 112.

20. Daniel Yankelovich, "How Changes in the Economy Are Reshaping American Values," Values and Public Policy (Brookings Institution, December 1993), p. 22.

21. Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind (Simon & Schuster, 1987), p. 173.

22. William Galston, "Beyond the Murphy Brown Debate: Ideas for Family Policy, " speech delivered before the Institute for American Values Policy Symposium, New York City, December 10, 1993.

23. Maggie Gallagher, "Why Murphy Brown Is Winning, " Wall Street Journal, June 3, 1996.

24. Newton N. Minow and Craig L. Lamay, Abandoned in the Wasteland: Children, Television, and the First Amendment (Hill and Wang, 1995), p. 32.

25. See U.S. Department of Education, The Condition of Education 1993, pp. 351- 52; and Diane Ravitch, National Standards in American Education: A Citizen's Guide (Brookings Institution, 1995), p. 82.

26. Kids Count Data Book: State Profiles of Child Well-Being (Center for the Study of Social Policy, Annie E. Casey Foundation, 1993), p. 13.

27. Urie Bronfenbrenner, cited by Chester E. Finn, Jr., in "Ten Tentative Truths," Certain Truths, p. 31.

28. Sally Fitzgerald, ed., The Habit of Being: The Letters of Flannery O'Connor (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1988), p. 229.

29. Walker Percy, Sign-Posts in a Strange Land (Noonday Press, 1992), p. 393.

30. Patrick F. Fagan, "Promoting Adoption Reform: Congress Can Give Children Another Chance," The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, May 6, 1996, p. 5.

31. Albert R. Hunt, "A Good Mother's Day Gift: Pass the Adoption Bill, " Wall Street Journal, May 2, 1996 (citing the National Council of Adoption).

32. Conna Craig, "What 1 Need Is a Mom, " Policy Review, no. 73, Summer 1995.

33. Edmund Burke, "Letters on a Regicide Peace" (1796), The Works of Edmund Burke (London, 1909-1912), vol. 5, p. 208.

[admin]

INDEX

Abington Township, Pa., 23
abortion, 203
Abraham, Lynne, 24
adoption, 79
interracial, 203-4
rates of, 203
Adoption Promotion and Stability Act
(1996),204
adultery, 198
AIDS, 144
alcohol, alcoholism, 60, 63-64, 173, 178
broken bottle theory of, 71- 72
crime and, 65-76
disease and, 66
economic costs of, 70
laws and regulations on, 70-71
liquor stores and, 64, 69-71,74-75,
84
religious affiliation and, 73-74
research on, 65-70
restrictions needed for, 68-71, 73-77
taxation of, 69-70
alcohol beverage control (ABC)
jurisdictions, 71
Alexandria, Va., 172
American Bar Association, 172
American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU), 90, 132
amphetamines, 142, 154
angel dust (PCP), 97, 141, 165
anti-crime legislation, 54, 135
anti-drug campaign, federal, 149
anti-drug laws, 81,161-62
anti-incarceration advocates, 15, 198
anti-poverty programs, 192
appeals, 55
of death penalty, 51-52
Aristotle, 14,30,59,206
armed robbery, 32, 62, 84, 100, 116, 132
arson, 84, 132
assaults, 27-28,42,59,65,67,69, 73-
74,89,98-99, 101, 105, 113, 115,
135
aggravated, 18,32, 45, 115, 118
auto theft, 32, 100, 117-18, 129, 134,
171

Ballard, Charles, 200
Baltimore, Md., 165-66
Bentham, Jeremy, 206
Berkeley Township, N.J., 34
Best Friends, 200
Betty Ford Clinic, 198
Bias, Len, 148
Bidinotto, Robert James, 54
Big Brothers/Big Sisters (BB/BS) of
America, 58-59
Bill of Rights, 55
Black Community Crusade for Children,
36
blacks, 23, 27
alcohol and, 66
children, 36, 46
churches of, 43
crime rates of, 22-23, 45, 67, 78
families of, 22-23, 43
homicide rates of, 67
victimization of, 22, 31, 67
Blankenhorn, David, 196
Bloods (gang), 31
Bloom, Allan, 197
Blumstein, Alfred, 19
Bolivia, 180
boom-box cars, 16
Boston, Mass., 31
Boston Sunday Globe, 26
Bourne, Peter, 148
Bowermaster, David, 64
Boys Town, 204
Brady, James, 52
Brady Bill, 53-54
Bratton, William J., 128-30
Bronfenbrenner, Urie, 201
Brown, Lee, 177
Buckley, William E, Jr., 162-64, 166
burglary, burglars, 32, 44, 117
alcohol and, 67
in Charleston, 127, 130
in New York City, 128
rates of, 90, 114, 123
in San Antonio, 171
by super-predators, 27-28
Burke, Edmund, 205
Bush, George, 152
Bush administration, 167
Butterfield, Fox, 62, 131

Cabrini Green, 204
California, 33, 71, 117
prison population of, 96-97
California Civil Addict Program, 176
California Department of Alcohol and
Drug Programs, 178
California Department of Corrections,
96
Canada, 90
capital punishment, see death penalty
career criminals, 49, 104
Carter administration, 148-49
Casell, Paul G., 54-55
Census Bureau, U.S., 144
Center on Addiction and Substance
Abuse (CASA), 155, 163-64
chain gangs, 49
Challenge of Crime in a Free Society, The,
191
"Characteristics of Heavy Cocaine
Users," 177
Charleston, S.c., 14, 131-33
Chicago, 111.,12,204
Chicago Tribune, 12
child abandonment, 208
child abuse, 47, 56-57, 61-63, 65, 74,
76-81,83,132,138-39,143-44,
161,193,203-4,208
child neglect, 47, 56-57, 76-81, 204,
208
child protective service agencies, 79
children:
at-risk, 22, 64, 69
black, 36, 46
emotional needs of, 58-59
of inner city, 28, 63
low-income, 40
moral needs of, 58-59
moral poverty and, 77-81
see also juveniles; teenagers
Civil Enforcement Division, 129
civil liberties, 16, 55
Clay County, Fla., 125
Cleveland, Ohio, 141, 200
Clinton administration, 152-60, 173-
174,177, 179
"club drugs," 160
Coburn, Daniel R., 38
Coburn, Evelyn, 140
coca, crops of, 180-81
cocaine, 19,47,97,101,141-43, 147-
150,153,155-57,159,161,
163-165,168-69,172-73,175,
177-81,184-86,188,192
see also crack cocaine; drugs, drug
abuse
Cohen, Mark A., 40
Colombia, 148, 153, 180, 188
Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of
America, 172
Congress, U.S., 20,52, 135, 153, 189
conspiracy, 101
Constitution, U.S., 18, 54, 55
"Controlling Cocaine," 179
conviction rates, 89-90
Cook, Phillip J., 53
Cook County, 111.,25
Council on Crime in America, 24, 45
crack cocaine, 27, 44, 63, 65, 138-40,
141, 143-44, 148-49, 159-62,
169, 178-79, 18~ 192, 195
epidemic of, 29
racism and, 160-62
see also cocaine
crack houses, 129, 171- 72
Craig, Cheryl Allen, 47
crime, 15
alcohol-related, 65-76
black-on-black, 45, 67
community participation against,
129-30
cultural context of, 195-208
cultural differences and, 90
desensitization to, 13
drug abuse and moral poverty of, 65,
141-44
government response to, 13, 15-16
gun-related, 52-53; see also guns;
handguns
juvenile, see juveniles
petty, 92
poverty as root cause of, 39-41
property, 18,32,43,53-54,64, 89,
92,99-100, 113, 115, 120, 144
in public housing, 132-33
"quality of life," 128-30
racism and, 43-47
sex-related, 65; see also rape, rapists;
sexual assault
strategies for control of, 129-30
victimless, 72
zero-tolerance approach to, 133
see also specific crimes
crime, root causes of, 14, 18-81
conservative fallacies on, 39, 47-56
liberal fallacies on, 39-47
crime, violent:
of blacks vs. whites, 22-23, 45
as political issue, 35
social costs of, 40
see also specific crimes
Crime Act (1994), 162
crime-avoidance behavior, 35
crime rates:
black vs. white, 22-23, 45, 78
historical comparison of, 19
and imprisonment rates, 114-16
juvenile, 26-34,131-32
criminals:
adult, 14,28
career, 49, 104
code of, 27-28
criminal grade point average (CGPA)
of, 94-101, 109
first-time, 94, 95, 102, 104
histories of, 31-32, 209-40
nonviolent, 90-91, 95-96, 100, 102,
104
petty, 90, 92, 95, 102, 104, 134
poorly socialized, 39-43
repeat, 51,78-79,82,91,92,94,97,
100, 117, 135-36; see also
recidivism
street, 14,21,26,34,49,61,82-136
teenage, 11-14
white collar, 101
see also felons; imprisonment;
prisoners; prisons; specific crimes
criminogenic environment, 14,28, 194,
204
criminologists, 39, 72, 116, 128
Crips (gang), 31
Customs Service, U.S., 148, 153

Dade County, Fla., 108, 171
Dallas, Tex., 11-12
death penalty, 44, 47, 49-52, 98
commutation and dismissals of, 50
legal appeals and, 51-52
moral case for, 51
racial bias and, 44, 51
reinstatement of, 51
support for, 51
delinquency, 14,28,42,56,60-62,64,
73,82,118
democracy, representative,
revolving-door justice vs., 135-36
Depression, Great, 41, 43
Desert Shield, 186
Desert Storm, 186
deterrence value, of prison, 49
Detroit, Mich., 59, 138
Police Department of, 139
deviance, 14,28,42,56,62, 73, 82,
201
214
divorce, 41,195, 199,202
domestic abuse, 58, 59, 65, 129,
144
drinking age, lowering of, 74, 76
drive-by shootings, 29, 161
Drug Abuse Warning Network
(DAWN),157
drug courts, 177-78
drug culture, history of, 146-47
drug czar, 149
drug dealers, drug dealing, 27-28,37-
38,47,73,83,99,117,128-31,
135, 138, 143, 148, 152, 162, 172,
188
Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA), U.S., 183
drugs, drug abuse, 13, 14, 15, 19-20,42,
56-57,59,61,63-66,71,79,81,
104, 115, 127, 135, 136-37, 138-
144, 146, 163
addiction and, 42, 62, 65, 76, 138,
144, 146, 150, 180-86; see also drug
treatment
and crime, 141-44
cultural context for, 195-208
decline of, 149-55, 162-63
by grade school children, 149
by high school seniors, 147-48, 150,
155, 165
interdictions of, 153, 181, 186, 189
laws, enforcement of, 151, 152-53,
189
legalization of, 19,47,70,141,144-
145, 147-48, 152, 162-67, 169-
172,177, 180, 196
liberal views on, 167
markets, open-air, 131, 171-72,
188
media attention to, 168-70
moral and political origins of, 146-
152
as national priority, 153
origins of, 168- 71
popular music and, 169-70
prevention of, 169-71, 187-90
social costs of, 19
stigmatization of, 170
supply reduction and addiction to,
180-86
trafficking in, 188-90, 192
drug treatment:
effectiveness of, 174-80
system of, 172-80, 206
Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program,
141
drug users:
in hospital emergency rooms,
157, 161, 164, 166, 181, 183,
186
mortality rates of, 156-57, 176-77,
184
drunk driving, 19, 71, 135
drunkenness, public, 16,64, 66
Duke, Steven B., 163
Duval County (Fla.) Jail, 125
DWB (driving while black), 46

East Jersey State Prison, 55
economic poverty, 14,39,56, 144, 167,
192-94, 201
Elders, Joycelyn, 152
embezzlement, 101
England, 11, 89-90
Ethics (Aristotle), 59
exclusionary rules, 55
executions, see death penalty
extortion, 101

Fair, Tal, 161
family, families:
black, 22-23, 43
criminality and, 60-63
decline of, 196
delinquency and, 60-62
destruction of, 144
disintegration of, 56, 144
dysfunctional, 64
no-parent, 144
preservation of, 79
single-parent, 46, 63, 143, 195-96,
203
violence in, 58, 59, 65,129,144
fare-beaters, 130
Federal Bar Association, 134
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
114
felons, 48-49,62,87,96, 102-3, 106-7,
109-10, I 14, 132, 135
arrest rates of, 71
and gun control, 53
"low-risk," 32
repeat, 134
violent, 45, 93
see also criminals
Fifth Amendment, 54
firearms, see guns; handguns
First Street Crew, Washington, D.C., 161
Fleisher, Mark S., 3 I, 6 I, 77
Florida, 11, 32-33, 107
juvenile criminal population of, 32-
33
Florida State Prison, 125
"400 Blows, The," 116
Fox, James Alan, 21-22
France, 89-90
Fraternal Order of Police, 52
fraud, 101
Fresno, Calif., 91

Gallagher, Maggie, 198
gangs, 27, 29,36,43, 52
Bloods, 31
Crips,3I
juvenile, 30, 37
killings by, 30
task forces against, 133
"gangsta" rap, 75, 140, 198
Germany, 89-90
Gillis, John W., 45
graffiti, 16,66, 132, 171
Graterford Prison, 107-8
Greenberg, Reuben, 131-33
Greenfield, Lawrence A., 94
group care homes, 204
gun control, 14,52-53
debate over, 53
legislation on, 53-54
guns, 27, 30,31, 36,39,47, 52-54, 84,
91, 114, 129, l32, 135, 138, 139,
142-43
see also handguns

Hall, Michael, 139
handguns, 22, 52, 132, 139
see also guns
hashish, 164
see also drugs, drug abuse
Head Start program, 40, 42
Health, Education and Welfare
Department, U.S., 148
Health and Human Services
Department, U.S., 157
heroin, 147, 154, 157, 159, 163-64,
173-76,182,188
see also drugs, drug abuse
Herrnstein, Richard J., 42
Hispanics, 156
HIY, 144, 152
Hochschild, Jennifer L., 38
Holmes, Oliver Wendell, Jr., 16,
207
homelessness, 144
homicides, 45, 65, 69, 74, 78, 107, 109,
135, 143, 193, 194
by age groups, 21-22
by blacks, 67, 89
cocaine and, 142-43
death penalty and, 51
decline in, 127, 128, 130-31
map of, 23
in Philadelphia, 23
rates of, 18, 19,21-22,49,67,89
stranger-stranger, 31, 105
by super-predators, 27-28
by teenagers, 11-12, 13, 19,21-
22,30-31,32,34,36,38,
118
and unemployment, 42-43
victims of, 22-23, 65, 76
by whites, 89
House Select Committee on Narcotics
Abuse and Control, 148
Houston, Tex., 14, 133-34
Humes, Edward, 116

Ice Cube, 75
illegitimacy, see out-of-wedlock
births
illiteracy, 28
imprisonment, 15,27-28,32,38,47,
62-63,83,84,90,94,100-101,
104, 110, 115, 127, 135-36, 206
alternatives to, 38
of blacks, 43-46
crime rates and, 114-16
cultural differences and, 90
for life, 50
long-term, 116
rate of, 85-92, 114
of whites, 43-46
see also prisoners; prisons
infant mortality, 144
"Inside the World of Beggars Who
Cajole, Amuse, Shame-And
Threaten- Their Way to $100 a
Day and More," 144
Institute for American Values, 196
1nternational Association of Chiefs of
Police, 20,30
Italy, 90

Jackson, Jesse, 149, 160-62
Jacksonville, Fla., 120-28
Jacob, John, 161
Japan, 90
Job Corps, 40
Joint Centers for Political and Economic
Studies, 97
Jordan, Michael, 11
Jordan, "Pops," 12
judges, juvenile court, 32, 118
justice:
no-fault, 127
revolving-door, 49, 82-84, 101, 108-
111,117-20,135-36,194
Justice Department, U.S., 92, 148
Justice Statistics Bureau, U.S., 94
Juvenile Justice Awareness Summer
Program, 125-27
juveniles:
arrests of, 20
convictions of, 99
crime by, prevention of, 123-28
crime rates of, 26-34, 131-32
delinquency of, 60-62, 64, 118, 125,
127,206
drug use by, 142, 148
institutions for, 62, 67, 77
justice system for, 30, 117-20
as murderers, 23, 30-31, 118
murder victims of, 23, 31
population, increase in, 41
pre-teen, 25, 27, 47
probation officers of, 28
prosecution of, 121-23
punishment of, 120-28
see also children; crime, juvenile;
teenagers

Kelling, George L., 72, 130
Kelly, Raymond, 193
Ketamine, 160
Keyes, Alan L., 43
kidnapping, 135
Kleck, Gary, 53
Klein, Joe, 77

LaCourse, Dave, 98
larceny, 32
Latin America, 188
Latinos, 23, 27
Laub, John H., 60
laws:
anti-drug, 81,161-62
on crack, federal, 162
enforcement of, 27
loopholes in, 39, 47, 54, 56
morality and, 16
three-strikes, 97 -98
truth-in-sentencing, 103
on weapons, violation of, 30, 53
Lewis, Anthony, 162, 166
Lincoln, Abraham, 207
Iiquor-disorder-crime nexus, 14,64-82
liquor stores, concentration of, 64, 69-
71,74-75,84
Logan, Charles H., 92
Los Angeles, Calif., 12, 64
Los Angeles Police Department
(LAPD),65
Los Angeles Times, 153
Lowry, Glenn, 22,37
LSD, 154, 160, 165

malt liquor, 75-76
manslaughter, 98
Maricopa County, Ariz., 117
marijuana, 59-60, 97, 141, 147, 154-57,
160, 163-65, 168-70, 173, 186,
188
see also drugs, drug abuse
Marquart, James W., 50
Marston, Ginna, 170
Massachusetts, 31
massage parlors, 129
MDMA (drug), 160
Medicaid, 40
Medicare, 85, 87
Mentors Fighting Back, 172
methadone maintenance programs, 176
methamphetamines, 143, 160
Mexico, 90, 153, 188
Miami, Fla., 11, 108
Miami Coalition, 171
Miami Drug Court, 177-78
Miami Herald, 178
Milwaukee, Wise., 32, 84, 99
Milwaukee County, Wisc., 32
Miranda rule, 54-56
Moore, Mark H., 24, 53
moral bankruptcy, 117
moral capital, 58, 202
moral education, 57
moral health, 57-59
moral poverty, 13, 18-81, 117, 123, 127,
128-34, 13~ 191-208
alleviation of, 194
causes of, 14, 137
character scars of,S 7
children and, 57, 77-81
crime, drug abuse and, 63, 123-25
criminogenic consequences of, 62
definition of, 13-14,56,208
drug use and, 139, 190
governmental policy against, 80, 202-
203
religious dimension of, 205-8
solutions for, 14,200-208
moral relativism, 197-98
moral standards, 192
moral wealth, 57, 60
217
Morgan, J. Tom, 76
Moynihan, Daniel Patrick, 143, 193,
196
muggings, 65
murder, see homicides
murderers, 102
criminal histories of, 31-32
execution of, 51
juvenile, 30-31, 118
pre-teenage, 25
sentences served by, 102, 103, 104
see also homicides
murder-for-hire, 12

Nadelmann, Ethan, 163-64
Nagin, Daniel S., 60
National Academy of Sciences, 43, 114
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), 167
National Association of Black Social
Workers, 203
National Bureau of Economic Research,
116
National Center on Alternatives and
Institutions, 90
National Council of Adoption, 203
National Council on Crime and
Delinquency (NCCD), 90, 92
National Drug Control Strategy, 157
National Fatherhood Initiative, 200
National Household Survey on Drug
Abuse, 150
National Institute of Justice, 61,76,114
National Research Council, 24, 43, 62
National Review, 162, 165
National Rifle Association (NRA), 52
necrophilia, 143
Netherlands, 89
New Jersey, 38, 108-9, 114-15
New Mexico, 143
Newsweek, 11, 143
New York, N.Y., 14, 16, 128-30, 142,
166
New York Police Department (NYPD),
128-30
New York Times,62,92, 153, 162
New York Times Magazine, 144
Nixon, Richard, 193
Nixon administration, 147
North Aurora, III., 104
North Dallas, Tex., 12
Novak, Michael, 196
Nuchia, Sam, 133-34
Nuisance Abatement powers, 129
O'Connor, Flannery, 201
Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP),
63
Office of National Drug Control Policy
(ONDCP), 149, 152, 163-64, 174
Office of the Corporation Counsel, 129
O'Malley, Jack, 25
opium, 147
orphanages, 204
out-of-wedlock births, 16, 18,41, 152,
193, 195-99, 202-3

panhandlers, panhandling, 16, 66, 74
parents:
adoptive, 57, 203-4
biological, 57
and drug abuse, 170
foster, 203-4
malfeasance of, 204
substance-addicted, 19,76-77
surrogate, 206
see also adoption; children
parole, 12,45-46,50-51,84,92,98-
99,105-7,109-12,135-36,178
discretionary, 100
reinvention of, 110-12
violation of, 32, 92, 105, III
Partnership for a Drug-Free America,
169-70
Paterson, N.J., 137
PCP (angel dust), 97, 141, 165
Pell education grants, 49
Pennsylvania, 116
Percy, Walker, 201
permissiveness, culture of, 199
Persian Gulf, 186
Peru, 180
Petersilia, Joan R., 96-97, 106, 111-12
Philadelphia, Pa., 23, 134-35
crime rate in, 23, 29
physical abuse, 63
Piehl, Anne Morrison, 31
Pittsburgh, Pa., 11,47
Plano, Tex., 12
Plato, 16
plea-bargaining, 51, 84, 89, 101
police, policing, 15, 28, 38, 55-56, 83,
128-34,136
Popenoe, David, 196
poverty, economic, 14,39,56, 144, 167,
192-94,201
poverty, moral, see moral poverty
pregnancy, teenage, 77, 203
President's Commission on Law
Enforcement and Administration of
Justice, 191
pre-teenage crime, 25, 27,47
pre-trial release, see prisoners, pre-trial
release of
prisoners:
adult, 27,32
appeals of, 55
community-based supervision of, 99,
105-10,112
criminal grade point average (CGPA)
of, 94-10 1, 109
criminal histories of "low-level," 209-
240
electronically monitored, 107
female, 63
geriatric, 116
"Lifers' Group" of, 55-56
low-risk, 99-100
nonviolent, 100, 102
pre-trial release of, 51, 105-7, 135,
178
rights of, 136
prisons, 14-15,38,45,47,55,62, 135-
136,152,196
black population of, 43-46
cost effectiveness of, 48-49, 112-17
deterrence value of, 49
"no-frills," 39, 47-49
overcrowding of, 84
population of, 84, 92-94
rehabilitative value of, 48, 198,206
social benefits of, 113
white population of, 43-46
prison sentences, 85, 102-5, 108-9,
112, 121
of blacks, 43-46
early release from, 107-8
for low-risk prisoners, 99
mandatory, 48, 103
reduced, 107
suspended, 107
truth-in-sentencing laws and, 103
of whites, 43-46
probation, 31-32, 45-46, 51, 84, 92, 94,
97,99,105-7,109-12,117,135-
136, 178
costs of, 112
criminal histories of "low-level," 209-
240
reinvention of, 110-12
violation of, 105, 111
"Procedures for Establishing a
Community-Based Curfew
Intervention Program Through
Religious Organizations," 172
Promise Keepers, 200
property crimes, 18, 32, 43, 53-54, 64,
89,92,99-100,113,115,120,144
see also burglary, burglars; theft
prostitution, 16,66, 128, 144, 161
public housing, 132-33
Public/Private Ventures, 58-59
public urination, 130
"Pulse Check: National Trends in Drug
Abuse," 159-60
punishment:
capital, see death penalty
crime related to, 49, 88-92
"intermediate sanctions" as, 111
see also prisons; prison sentences
"Punitive Society, The" (Wicker), 92

"quality of life crimes," 128-30

racism, 14,45,56,91, 167, 192
crack and, 160-62
crime and, 43-47
death sentences and, 44, 51
procedural, 39
RAND Corporation, 44, 96, 179
Rangel, Charles, 153
rap, "gangsta," 75, 140, 198
rape, rapists, 13, 18,23,27-28,32,34,
45,67,73-74,89,98,103,105,
109,113,115,117-18,128-29,
135
see also sexual assault
rap sheets, 100-102
Reagan, Nancy, 149
Reagan, Ronald, 152
Reagan administration, 52, 91
recidivism, 67, 84, 95,103,111-12,
134-35
see also criminals, repeat
rehabilitation of prisoners, 48
religious faith, importance of, 15, 205
Reno, Janet, 152, 177
Republic (Plato), 16
revolving-door justice, 49, 82-84, 101,
108-11, 117-20, 135-3~ 194
Reynolds, Morgan 0., 87, 89
Rivers, Eugene, 200
robbery, 12, 18,27-28,29,32,44-45,
61,65,69,73-74,89-90,100-
101,103-5,113-15,117,128-31,
135, 191-92
armed, 32, 62, 84, 100, 116, 132
Robert M. LaFollette Institute of Public
Affairs, 99
Rockwell, Norman, 198
Rogers, Don, 148
Rubenstein, David, 43
Russell, Don, 23
Ryder, Norman B., 41

Sacramento Bee, 97
Safe Streets Campaign, 171
Sampson, Robert J., 60
San Antonio, Tex., 171
San Antonio Fighting Back, 171
"Scared Straight," 56
Schmoke, Kurt, 165-66
school dropout rate, 144
schooling, home, 200
schools, violence in, 36
Seattle, Wash., 98
sentences, see prison sentences
Sentencing Commission, U.S., 160,
162
Sentencing Project, 90
setial killing, 143
see also homicides
sex offenders, 12, 109
sexual abuse, 61,63, 138
sexual assault, 12, 18,67, 101, 107,
132
see also rape, rapists
shootings, drive-by, 29, 161
Shorstein, Harry L., 120-21, 123, 125-
128
Shover, Neal, 48
Siegel, Ron, 143
Silber, John, 200
Singapore, 90
Smith, Carolyn, 61
Smith, Emmitt, 12
smoke shops, 129
Snohomish County, Wash., 98
Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandt, 207
South Africa, 89
South America, 153, 181, 188
Soviet Union, 89
Spain, 89-90
spousal abuse, 65, 67, 74, 77
squeegee pests, 16, 130
State Department, U.S., 148
suicides, 53, 195
super-predators, 25-34, 59, 83, 117, 194,
206
Supreme Court, U.S., 50-51, 54
Sweden, 89

Tacoma, Wash., 171
Task Force on Violent Crime, 52
teenagers, 24, 58, 66, 74
black, 24, 36
criminal histories of, 31-32
curfews on, 131, 132
drug use by, 154-56, 164
pregnancies of, 77,203
see also juveniles
lun
television, 198-99
Texas, 50, 89, 116
theft, 18,34,42,90, 101, 104, 113,
117-18,135
three-strikes law, 97 -98
Time, 128
Tinton Falls, N.J., 34
Tipton County, Ind., 198
"Tons of Cocaine Reaching Mexico in
Old Jets," 153
tough-love programs, 127, 131
Treatment Outcome Prospectives Study
(TOPS),l77
truancy patrols, 132
Truffaut, Francois, 116

Urban League of Greater Miami, 161
urination, public, 130
U.S. News & World Report, 64
Utah, 117
Uzis,38

vandals, vandalism, 16,66
Victim Impact Panels (VIP), 127
victimization, criminal, 18,24,36-37,
39,87, 113, 131, 133, [42-43,
171
of children, 63, 67, 132
victim restitution programs, 38, III
victims' rights, 136
victims' rights organizations, 35
Vietnam War, 18,38, 147
Violent Crime: The Challenge to OUT
Cities, 192
violent crime tax, 19
Virginia, 50, 102-3, 107

Walchak, David G., 20, 30
Wales, 89
Warner, Bob, 23
Washington, D.C., 12,38, 161
as "murder capital" of America, 12
Washington State, 97-98
Wattenberg, Ben, 112
Watts, Calif., 198
welfare dependency, 42, 116
welfare recipients, 202
West, Cornel, 38
West Palm Beach, Fla., 104
white collar criminals, 101
White House Conference on Narcotics
and Drug Abuse, 192
Whitman, David, 64
Wicker, Tom, 92
271
Wilson, James Q., 25-27,40-42,55, 72,
89, 140, 197
winos, 65
Wisconsin, 100, 114-15,209-40
Wolfgang, Marvin E., 29

Yankelovich, Daniel, 197

[admin]

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

William J. Bennett served as Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President Bush and as Secretary of Education and Chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities under President Reagan. The author of numerous bestselling books, he is a fellow of the Heritage Foundation and co-Director of Empower America. He lives in Chevy Chase, Maryland.

John J. Dilulio, Jr., is Director of the Brookings Institution Center for Public Management, as well as Professor of Politics and Public Affairs at Princeton University and a member of the Council on Crime in America. He lives in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

John P. Walters, Executive Director of the Council on Crime in America, is President of the New Citizenship Project, and former Deputy Director for Supply Reduction, Office of National Drug Control Policy. He lives in Washington, D.C.