Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Correspondence

Correspondence AUST. & N.Z. JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (December. 1973): 6) 4 is the most productive research technique. I will therefore procede to indicate whether or not the administrative prac­ tices outlined by Dr. Hills are compatible with the legislative norms set out in my article. With one qualification (or rather elaboration of my views) I stand by my original position. That is, the legislation discussed in this article does not sanction SIR Dr. Hills's comment (correspondence or make any special provision for alcohol­ (1973) 6 Aust. N.Z. J. Criminol. 119) that ics in the following instances:- my article (1972) 5 Aust. N.Z. J. Crim­ 1) There is no provision for (or reference inol. 172 is "Noteworthy for the total mis­ to) applications by a private person to the understanding of the position regarding effect that an offender who has been sen­ legislation for alcoholics in Western Aus­ tenced by the court be dealt with pur­ tralia" underscores the validity of Max suant to the Convicted Inebriates Re­ Weber's insight that "the increased habilitation Act 1963 [the Convicted In­ rationalisation of law is not necessarily ebriates Regulations 1964 are similarly accompanied by a growing acceptance of silent]. its normative validity". 2) http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology SAGE

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/correspondence-WAsR7tvmfy
Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © by SAGE Publications
ISSN
0004-8658
eISSN
1837-9273
DOI
10.1177/000486587300600410
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AUST. & N.Z. JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (December. 1973): 6) 4 is the most productive research technique. I will therefore procede to indicate whether or not the administrative prac­ tices outlined by Dr. Hills are compatible with the legislative norms set out in my article. With one qualification (or rather elaboration of my views) I stand by my original position. That is, the legislation discussed in this article does not sanction SIR Dr. Hills's comment (correspondence or make any special provision for alcohol­ (1973) 6 Aust. N.Z. J. Criminol. 119) that ics in the following instances:- my article (1972) 5 Aust. N.Z. J. Crim­ 1) There is no provision for (or reference inol. 172 is "Noteworthy for the total mis­ to) applications by a private person to the understanding of the position regarding effect that an offender who has been sen­ legislation for alcoholics in Western Aus­ tenced by the court be dealt with pur­ tralia" underscores the validity of Max suant to the Convicted Inebriates Re­ Weber's insight that "the increased habilitation Act 1963 [the Convicted In­ rationalisation of law is not necessarily ebriates Regulations 1964 are similarly accompanied by a growing acceptance of silent]. its normative validity". 2)

Journal

Australian & New Zealand Journal of CriminologySAGE

Published: Dec 1, 1973

There are no references for this article.