Research Summary Based on a 2013 survey of 1,001 likely voters in Texas, public support for correctional reform in a “red state” was examined. Four major conclusions were revealed. First, the respondents displayed strong support for rehabilitation. Second, at least for nonviolent and/or drug offenders, the sample members showed a clear preference for the use of alternatives to incarceration as opposed to imprisonment. Third, when asked about a specific policy reform that used treatment rather than prison for nonviolent drug offenders, more than eight in ten Texans approved of the measure, and strong majorities endorsed various rationales for it. Fourth, with some minor variation, the respondents revealed substantial consensus across demographic groups in their embrace of rehabilitation and correctional reform. Policy Implications With the growth of mass imprisonment arguably at its end, the existence of strong public support for correctional reform even in the major red state of Texas, suggests that a new “sensibility” about crime control has taken hold. There is now an emergent national consensus that the overuse of incarceration is unsustainable and that low‐risk offenders no longer should be sanctioned with a prison sentence. The American public, in Texas and beyond, is willing to support a policy agenda that includes offender treatment, prison downsizing, and alternatives to incarceration. The challenge for elected officials is to take advantage of this ideological space and to pursue this agenda. Notably, politicians in Texas and in other red states are using this opportunity to implement correctional policy reforms. The data in this study indicate that they will face no public backlash and, if anything, will gain political capital for their efforts.

Using data from the 2012 AmericasBarometer survey collected in nine Latin American countries ( n =  14,705), this study examines two theoretically relevant potential sources of punitiveness: economic anxiety and fear of crime. Focusing on these two sources, we explore whether the public opinion dynamics often highlighted by punitiveness scholars also apply to the Latin American context and can thus be of value to explain recent movements towards punitive policies in that region. Generalized Structural Equation Modeling (GSEM) and bootstrapping are used to assess the direct effects of perceived national and personal economic insecurity on punitive sentiments as well as the indirect effects of these attitudes on punitiveness through fear of crime during a time of reduced economic growth, increased economic inequality, and harsh criminal justice policies. Results show that economic anxieties are positively associated with fear of crime, though their effects on support for increased punishments are mixed. Additionally, the effects of economic insecurity on punitiveness are partially mediated by fear of crime, supporting theoretical notions that insecurity produces fear of crime and subsequently influences punitiveness.

Prior studies demonstrate that victimization and fear of crime independently affect criminal justice attitudes, but few have examined trust in criminal justice institutions. In addition, research has been primarily confined to the United States. Using data from the AmericasBarometer survey collected in the United States, Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil, the current study investigates the direct and indirect effects of criminal victimization and fear of crime on (a) perceived fairness of the courts, (b) trust in the police, and (c) overall trust in the criminal justice system. Results show that while the direct effects of victimization are mixed across countries and outcomes, fear of crime consistently mediates the effects of victimization on trust in criminal justice institutions.

No abstract

No abstract