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

Learn More →

Zero Tolerance, Naming and Shaming: Is There a Case for it with Crimes of the Powerful?

Zero Tolerance, Naming and Shaming: Is There a Case for it with Crimes of the Powerful? AbstractZero tolerance and public shaming are increasingly advocated for both crimes ofthe powerless and crimes of the powerful. In this essay we argue against zerotolerance with respect to both kinds of crime. However, we defend naming andshaming with respect to crimes of the powerful. Part I of the paper begins fromthe assumption that both zero tolerance and naming and shaming are policies thatdo not merit serious consideration with crimes of the powerless. It then goes onto consider harder questions: first whether zero tolerance and then naming andshaming have a place with crimes of the powerful. Drug abuse is used in Part IIas a case study to explore these distinctions. It will be contended that zerotolerance is a prescription for increasing drug abuse, but that naming andshaming is essential to the prevention of drug abuse. This conclusion is reachedby viewing the drug problem differently from conventional criminologicalanalyses in a radically reconfigured context as a corporate crime andorganisational regulation problem. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology SAGE

Zero Tolerance, Naming and Shaming: Is There a Case for it with Crimes of the Powerful?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/zero-tolerance-naming-and-shaming-is-there-a-case-for-it-with-crimes-qoedtpGy3r

References (48)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © by SAGE Publications
ISSN
0004-8658
eISSN
1837-9273
DOI
10.1375/acri.35.3.269
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractZero tolerance and public shaming are increasingly advocated for both crimes ofthe powerless and crimes of the powerful. In this essay we argue against zerotolerance with respect to both kinds of crime. However, we defend naming andshaming with respect to crimes of the powerful. Part I of the paper begins fromthe assumption that both zero tolerance and naming and shaming are policies thatdo not merit serious consideration with crimes of the powerless. It then goes onto consider harder questions: first whether zero tolerance and then naming andshaming have a place with crimes of the powerful. Drug abuse is used in Part IIas a case study to explore these distinctions. It will be contended that zerotolerance is a prescription for increasing drug abuse, but that naming andshaming is essential to the prevention of drug abuse. This conclusion is reachedby viewing the drug problem differently from conventional criminologicalanalyses in a radically reconfigured context as a corporate crime andorganisational regulation problem.

Journal

Australian & New Zealand Journal of CriminologySAGE

Published: Dec 1, 2002

There are no references for this article.