Components of Criminal Justice Police, Courts and Corrections

Criminal justice system is a lay down of legal as well as social organizations for putting into effect the criminal law according to the defined laid down procedural rules and regulations. The criminal justice system in the United States is made up of separate entities which include the federal, military, as well as state criminal justice systems. Every state has separate criminal justice system for juveniles and adults (Robinson, 2005).

Components of Criminal Justice  Police, Courts and Corrections
One of the defining functions of the government is maintenance of internal order. The police in the United States, just like other nations, have been created for the purpose of maintaining law and order. American policing is so distinct from other countries. One of its distinguishing features is its responsiveness to the demands of the citizens. Operations of the American police are largely determined by requests from individuals. The second basic of police operation is public accountability. The United States government has insisted on the need to make the police force accountable through multiple institutions. The third base of police operation is openness to evaluation. The police force in the United States believes that policy must be founded on precise factual information. The American police force is distinctively open to public examination. Almost all activities of the police can be accessed by scholars, politicians, consultants as well as members of the public (Gaines and Miller, 2008).

The political agreement concerning opposition to racial profiling in drug outlawing has led to development of efforts aimed at identifying and eliminating the practice. It is claimed by some critics that profiling does very little in apprehending criminals due to the fact that it is foundation of racial group differences in regard to criminality is flawed. Critics argue that racial profiling is responsible of the widespread investigation as well as mistreatment of innocent people. Racial profiling and efforts to ferret out in drug outlawing should be abandoned. Policy analysis should focus on race related consequences of the war on drugs regardless of whether an officer takes part in racial profiling. Due to the high level of imprisonment of the disadvantaged minority groups, the outcomes would remain significant even in cases where no innocent person is investigated (Robinson, 2005).

Within democratic nations the police are in a unique position. A great deal of power is bestowed on them and they can undertake any action that disrupts personal freedom. They are given the power to detain, power to search, power to arrest, as well as power to muse force. Nearly all police department have experienced some form of corruption be it organized or major scandals. Misconducts in policing are set in such a way as to acquire financial gains, personal gains or career progression for officers in trade for selectively pursuing an arrest or investigation. Soliciting as accepting of bribes are the most common types of corruption in the police force. They are done so that illegal activities may not be brought to books. Police officers may also break the code of conduct so as to secure conviction of offenders. Though rare, police officers may engage in criminal activities (Gaines and Miller, 2008).

The judicial system in the United States is unique in that it is made up of two distinct court systems the state court system and the federal court system. Though these courts are charged with the mandate of hearing specific types of cases, they are not independent of each other, and they interact regularly. Vindication of legal rights as well as finding solutions for legal disputes is the main objectives of these courts. The main duty of the American court system is to develop, affirm, put into effect, and implement the law.

The main ideals of the court system in the United States is to uphold fairness, constitutional rights, follow the established precedent and balance the interest of the defendants against the government  in any trial. Federal judges are not allowed to be in charge of cases in which they may have bias to a person involved. Geographic jurisdiction ensures that the courts exercise their authority on people residing only in designated areas. Under the principle of federalism, crime is regarded as a local as well as state issue. The U.S. government has the principle mandate of defining as well as taking legal action on crimes (Robinson, n.d.).

The main members of the court rooms work group are the defense attorney, the judge and the prosecutor. Every constituent of the court room workgroup carries out its function and has its own objectives. The objective of the entire court room work group is however the same to get rid of cases. If power was to be equally distributed in the court process, the defense attorneys would have an added advantage of having greater share of resources needed to make sure that their clients are charged fairly through the criminal justice system. However, due to imbalance of power, more power is bestowed on the prosecutors who also have a greater share of resources.

Pretrial phase encompasses all the undertakings from the time a person is arrested, booked up to the time heshe is tried. The major decisions involved in this phase include whether to bail or not as well as the way a case should be disposed off. The money paid to court in exchange for release up to the time a case is terminated is referred to as bail, and is given based on assumption that innocent people should not be detained in opposition to will until the date of trial. Bail can however be denied and held in preventive detention if the person implicated is a great risk to the public security. There are various problems associated with bail. These include prejudice against minority as well as the poor. It may be inflated in some cases. Bail may also promote guilty pleas. The risk of conviction can be increased by preventive detention and lastly bails may often be needless. The agreement made by the prosecution and defense to admit guilt and a sentence is referred to as plea bargaining. It is made voluntarily without being forced and with total understanding by defendant. Plea bargaining occurs due to the court load, understaffed courts and imbalance of power. This practice is however rejected by many as it does not establish innocence or guilt (Gaines and Miller, 2008).

It is the right of all U.S. citizens to a just attorney. One of the main importances of the public attorneys is that they promote fairness by encouraging their clients not to plead guilty. Many people however prefer private attorneys because in many cases, they get their clients released. They also do all they can to ensure that their clients are sentenced to prison less. Public attorneys on the other hand fight hard to make sure that their clients get shorter sentences. Conviction rates for both public and private attorneys are however almost the same.

According to Robinson (2005), though the U.S. court system is popular for its maintenance of law and order, it is faced by numerous challenges. One of them is that not all cases culminate in a trial. Criminal trials in a number of cases are also dropped without giving a tangible reason. Work overload is the other challenge that faces the court system in the United States.

The authenticity of the criminal justice system is founded upon both its efficiency and its fairness. The ability to detect and investigate crime, identify criminals and administer the suitable sanctions to those implicated is used to judge the effectiveness of the court system. Fairness of the court system is determined by the efforts it makes to rectify imbalance of resources between the defendants and the state during investigatory, pre-trial, trial as well as appellate phases. Wrongful convictions undercut the two determinants of legitimacy of the criminal justice system. Wrongful conviction leads to punishment of a person for a wrong heshe did not commit while the actual perpetrator of the offense goes without charge (Rosen, 1992).

There are four types of sentences existing in the courts, given according to the magnitude of the case discharges, fines, communal sentences, and imprisonment.  Appropriate punishment for a particular crime is determined by the courts. One form of punishment is imprisonment. Monetary fines may be used together with imprisonment or alone. House arrest and probation are the other forms of punishment. People are punished in order to reduce crime as well as instill a law abiding behavior in a person. Punishment however has got its problems. It dose not help understand a person. Punishment also does not produce restitution or teach a person any preferable conduct. It also diminishes the sense of self worth for an individual (Criminal justice system, n.d.).

The type of punishment that a particular crime deserves is given by the judge. The judge tries hisher best to offer the fairest punishment for a crime. Punishment works because if a criminal is imprisoned, it removes himher from the community thereby reducing the level of crime ensuring public security.

The criminal justice system in the United States is made up of separate entities which include the federal, military, as well as state criminal justice systems. The government of the United States developed the law enforcement agency in order to carry out the role of marinating internal order. The police force in the U.S. is distinctively characterized by its responsiveness to the requests of the people. Courts in the criminal justice system are very important as they help dispose of cases.

The Effect of the Fourth Amendment to Terrorism and Cyber Crimes

Prior to the September 11 terrorist attack, there has been an indefinite number of cases in the United States that involved cyber crimes and terrorism.  Domestic computer hijackers responsible for economic loss have led the government to use the power of the law in counteracting the threat brought about by cyberterrorism through the use of punishment to those committing cybercrimes.  The terrorists exploitation of the Internet led to the USA Patriot Act, which states that the government holds responsibility to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world and to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools.  The Patriot Act pushes Internet Service Providers to disclose information during investigations.  It allows Internet providers to give substantial information to the law enforcement in order to prevent threats of death or serious injury.  Groups such as the Al Qaeda, bonafide terrorists, and the other jihadists could be controlled through the Fourth Amendment.

By applying this law, cybercriminals like the Zyklon, the Mindphasr, the Shadow Knight, and the Mafiaboy are more likely to face their future in jails.  This act, therefore, justifies the proclamation that the U.S. Patriot Act of the Fourth Amendment applies constitutional principles and protection against the invasions of cybercrimes despite the attacks in terms of privacy and individual rights.  The Fourth Amendment may be an attack to liberty and privacy yet, it defies threats brought by cyberterrorism.

The key arguments in the nature versus nurture debate within criminology

If a child grows up in a household of actors, there are high chances that he or she will become and actor or actress in the same case, if a child is born and raised in a family where there are criminals, chances are high that he or she will turn out to be a criminal (Chase articles, n. d.). What explains these proven facts Is it just because the members of the family are actorscriminals that the child might also turn out to be an actor a criminal or is it in the fact that the child grew up seeing people acting committing crimes that over time, they developed such tendency There probably is no other question which is as fundamental to the existence of human beings as the one posed by the debate commonly known as the Nature Versus Nurture Debate (Gander, 2003). This paper will investigate the key arguments in the nature versus nurture debate, by examining the role played by each of them in determining the criminal behaviour of an individual.

For a long time over the past, it was held that nature did not have any role in shaping the behaviour of human beings and that a person was capable of getting socialized or educated to survive in whatever kind of an environment or culture. Today, this belief has been forcefully as well as directly challenged through the new mind science, the evolutionary psychology (Gander, 2003). The Nature -Versus -Nurture is a scientific debate whose major source is the questions whether it is the genetic make up of a person or the environment that dictate a persons behavioural characteristics. In other words, to which extent are human feelings, ideas or behaviour a factor of innate characteristics and to what extent are they learned (Gander, 2003). Instead of perceiving human mind as being a mysterious blank slate or black box, the evolutionary psychologists perceive it as representing a physical organ which has evolved over time so as to process given specific kinds of information in specific ways which enables human beings to survive only in given types of environments or cultures. Criminal behaviour is always a key focus of psychologists because of the relatedness with the old nature versus nurture debate is it as a result of genetic makeup or environment in which the individual is brought up that some people are criminals (Gander, 2003).

The controversy between nature and nurture
After conducting several researchers that were aimed at separating controversy between environment and genes and their contribution to criminal tendencies, many researchers have come to the conclusion that the two factors are to some relative degrees responsible for the criminal behaviour in some people (Sage organization, 2005). This evidence was arrived at from several twin, adoption, family and laboratory studies and experiments. The researches also found out that mostly, it is the interaction between environment and genes that determines criminal behaviour. However, the outcome of the majority of the studies carried out (which will discussed later in this paper) showed higher connection between environment and crime than did the studies on the genes. This does not nonetheless imply that genes are less crucial in formation of criminal behaviour (Gander, 2003).

The measurement and dimension of criminal behaviour
To understand the contribution of the environment and genes and their influences on the making of a criminal, it is necessary to first determine what is referred as criminal and to which dimension it is referred so. Defining what exactly constitutes crime and criminal behaviour may comprise a range of activities and as such, vandalism, general defiance to the societal norms, robbery, theft and substance abuse. Researchers have the tendency of focussing on antisocial behaviour as the gauge for criminal behaviour in the society (Jones, 2005).

According to Gander (2003), social behaviour can be measured using three ways. The first one is to equate criminality to delinquency because both involve criminal acts. While criminality could result to conviction, arrest or imprisonment for the adults, delinquency results to juveniles being involved in unlawful activities. Secondly, criminal behaviour or antisocial behaviour can be measured by a criterion for which diagnoses personality disorders in a person. Finally, is can be measured through the examination of personality traits which might influence criminal actions in a person. In this dimension, the presence of traits such as impulsivity and aggressiveness are good gauges of the potentiality of criminality in an individual (Gander, 2003).

Structural criminology The effects of environment on criminal behaviour
Families with weak bonds and improper communication have a correlation with the childrens development and high tendency of aggressive or criminal behavior. In addition, families which are more financially challenged and possibly have many children, in addition to those who are not used to punishing their children, consistently have a larger likelihood of encouraging the development of delinquent or antisocial behavior (Jones, 2005). Another gauge of potential antisocial behavior is neglect and abuse in children. Statistics show that many children are fifty percent at a higher risk of being involved in criminal activities, if by any means they were abused or neglected during earlier years. Though research appears to recognize heritability influences as the stronger in determining adult criminal behavior, for adolescents and children the environment where they grew is a more important reason for influencing criminal behavior (Jones, 2005).

Another major factor in development of delinquent or antisocial behavior in teenagers is the peer groups.  During Pre School, children who are aggressive to others are condemned and reprimanded due to their antisocial behavior. This results in poor relationships with the peers and makes such children form the habit of relating with only the others with the same behavior as a way of searching for belonging. These kinds of relationships are likely to develop right from childhood, teenage and probably up to adulthood (Jones, 2005). The same tendencies when carried up to teenage and adulthood generate an environment which promotes influences towards aggressive and even criminal behavior. Social theory of learning explains the effect of the environment on the behavior of a child. According to the theory, the antisocial, criminal or aggressive behavior of a child is as a result of what they observe their parents doing, and since they consider their parents as their role model in behavior shaping, they interpret the aggressiveness or criminality to be the ideal normal kind of behavior for them (Jones, 2005).

Biological criminology The effects of the genetic makeup on criminal behaviour
The role played by the innate genes in an individual in the forming of criminal behavior in later years of their life has been explained using two basic elements which are innate. These elements constitute the neuro-chemicals and the personality disorderstraits (Lila, 2006). This is because these two elements are not developed during a persons lifetime but they are rather part of their genetic makeup right from conception. The neurochemicals are accountable for activating behavioral tendencies and patterns in definite regions of the human brain. Several efforts by scientists have attempted to find out the role played by neurochemicals towards influencing antisocial or criminal behavior (Lila, 2006).

There are several elements of the neurochemicals which include MOA (Monoamine Oxidase), norepinephrine epinephrine, dopamine and serotonin. MAO (Monoamine oxidase) is the specific enzyme related to generation of criminal behavior. Explicitly, low MAO action leads to lack of inhibition which results to aggression and impulsivity (Powell, 2009). MAO is linked with several neurochemicals that have an association with antisocial and criminal behavior serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine are all metabolized through MOA. Serotonin is the neurochemical responsible for personality traits such as anxiety bipolar disorder and depression. The same neurochemical has a role in the development of brain in addition to a certain disorder within the brain which is likely to cause an enhancement in impulsivity and aggressiveness (Powell, 2009).

According to Powell (2009), low serotonin levels are associated with emotional aggression and impulsive behavior. Furthermore, most children suffering from a disorder called Conduct Disorder (explained later) have very low serotonin in the blood. Therefore, serotonin has a high relation with aggressive behavior in children and consequently the probability of criminal behavior later in life. In addition, dopamine is also a neorochemical linked to pleasure in addition to being mainly connected with aggression in individuals. The activation of predatory and affective aggression is achieved through dopamine (Powell, 2009).

In recent studies on the factors influencing criminal behaviour, personality disorders as well as traits have become very relevant. These traits are observable right from childhood. There are three major personality disorders seen in children which are linked to the development of criminal behaviour in their later years in life (Bright Hub, 2010). These include conduct disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and opposition defiance disorder. In children, opposition defiance disorder (ODD) results to noncompliance, argumentativeness and irritability (Bright Hub, 2010). As a child with this disorder develops, these characteristics become worse, with these kinds of children starting to steal, lie, engaging in drug and substance abuse, vandalism as well as developing abnormal aggression to their peers. If the disorder remains, it later leads to conduct disorder (CD) in majority but not all the earlier victims of ODD (Jones, 2005).

The Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) on the other hand is a characteristic of lack of ability of a child to pay attention on one issue. Children suffering from this disorder lack the capability to anticipate and analyze the consequences and as well as inability to learn from previous actions (Anderson  Bakker, 2004). Children who have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are likely to also suffer from opposition defiant disorder and conduct disorder as they continue to grow. The cases become worse in the event that the ADHD is concurrent with CD this is what mostly leads to children becoming criminals in future when they are grown. CD shows up with the features of a persons defiance to societal norms. As behaviours of children diagnosed with ADHD or ODD become more established, the subsequent logical diagnosis of disorder is CD (Anderson  Bakker, 2004).

Significantly, ADHD ODD, and CD are high risk factors for the development of another disorder ASPD (Antisocial Personality Disorder). This disorder is diagnosed after a person attains eighteen years of age when they show persistent disrespect towards the rights of other people. ASPD is related to an increased possibility of criminal actions. Therefore, it is essential that these kinds of personality disorders are diagnosed as well as treated early enough since they are responsible for generating a breed of criminal in the society (UDEL, 2008).

The interaction between biological and structural criminology
To investigate the role played by the environment in which a person grows on the characteristic behaviours of that person, the scientific researchers came up with the Twin, Adoption and Family Studies. Twin studies are carried out on comparing the monozygotic (MZ) or the identical twins and their levels of criminal behaviour with the dizygotic (DZ) or the fraternal twins and their levels of criminal behaviour. If the results of the studies indicate that a rate of higher concordance exists in the MZ twins than the DZ twins for criminal behaviour, it is concluded that the influence is genetic (Kimball, 2002).

For instance, this test was performed on 32 MZ twins who were reared in different environments. These twins had been taken up shortly after delivery by a person who was not a relative. The outcome illustrated that for the childhood as well as adult rebellious antisocial behaviour, a high extent of heritability exhibited (Jones, 2005). The study proved that in the particular case, the criminal behaviour was devoid of the culture or environment in which the twins were raised. In another incidence, a certain researcher carried out a study on 85 myzogotic twins and 147 dyzogotic twins and discovered that a higher rate of concordance existed in the myzogotic twins. After ten years, police records were checked for the twins and it was found that 54 of the liability of the twins to crime resulted from heritability (Jones, 2005).

The adoption studies are crucial in investigating the connection between adopted kids and their adoptive and biological parents since they take up different nature from nurture (Sage Organisation, 2005). In this situation, an adoption survey was performed in Iowa that sought to examine the responsibility of genes on the criminal behaviour. The researchers established that in comparison to the same studys control group, adopted individuals, who had been born to imprisoned female criminals, exhibited higher rates of unlawful convictions when they were adults (Mark, 2002).

Family studies comprise the third form of tools used to evaluate the association between environmental influences and genetics on antisocial or behaviour criminal. Children go through both the influence of parents genes as well the environment where they grow up from (Mark, 2002). Consequently, it is hard to allocate which of their behaviours and conduct were influenced either of the factors. The presence of a genetic predisposition of criminal behaviour cannot predict that a person will become a criminal, but if the same person is raised in an environment where crime is very prevalent there are very high chances that they will become criminals. This is the major interaction that exists between the environmental influences and the genetic makeup in formation of criminal behaviour (Mark, 2002).

Studies and numerous numbers of researches conducted by scientific researchers have proved that it is hard to separate the effect of the environment from that of the genes since they both work together but in relative degrees (Chase articles, n. d). However, the contribution by the environment in which a person grew seems to have produced more positive results in criminality of an individual. The researchers have therefore come into conclusion that the environmental factors form the element of tendencies to criminality that cannot be explained through the genetic makeup of the person.

Cyber-terrorism and the USA PATRIOT Act

Cyber-terrorism is the interference of computers and computer networks through disruptive activities. This is mainly done by terrorist organizations with an aim of causing threat, panic or harm to the affected individuals. As the use of information technology and especially the use of the internet continue to gain popularity in most human endeavors, terrorist have also taken  advantage of anonymity that is afforded to them by the internet to further their terrorist activities resulting to what is now known as cyber-terrorism. Cyber-terrorism is taken as a crime just like all the other terrorist activities and therefore several laws have been developed to help in prevention of this crime. The USA Patriot Act is one such law that was enacted by the US government in 2001 to fight such forms of terrorism.

Cyber-terrorism can bring about adverse effect to many people and even to a country. It makes a country vulnerable to terrorist attacks which intern weakens the economy of the affected country since terrorist attacks scare away investors. For those businesses that depend on the internet, cyber-terrorism affects the business operations because of the security threat caused to such business and their customers. Fears caused by cyber-terrorism scare away the customers and the downtime that results from criminal activities results into immeasurable money loss for most websites that earn income either through facilitating monetary exchange of goods and services or just through advertisements. Cyber-terrorism may also have negative political implications because in countries like US where technology is so advanced political opponents use cyber-terrorism to fight one another (Gouvin, 2003).

Some real examples of cyber-terrorism activities include a case of terrorist in Romania who gained unauthorized access to the computers that were controlling the life support of a research center in Antarctic, endangering the life of the scientists working in the research center. Fortunately, the cyber-terrorists were stopped from executing their mission before any damage had taken place. In 1999 terrorist attackers who were protesting against bombings in Kosovo by NATO forces hacked the information flow and instead flooded them with emails. This resulted into lack of co-ordination between different units which made it difficult for the forces to execute their operations.  In 2007 there was cyber-terrorism in Estonia where most government networks were bombarded with traffic forcing them to go offline (Gouvin, 2003).

The Patriot Act being one of the laws used to fight cyber-terrorism in US empowered the US law enforcement agencies allowing them to search e-mail and telephone communication particularly the e-mails and telephone communications of the individuals suspected of terrorism activities. The Act came shortly after September 11 attack which occurred in the US and therefore the Act can be said to be one of the measures that the US government undertook to prevent terrorist activities (Gouvin, 2003).

According to the Patriot Act those people who gain unauthorized access to protected computers and cause damage to the owners either through destruction of data or stealing data will be liable for a stiff penalty. If as a result of gaining unauthorized access to a protected computer the affected party suffer a loss of US 5,000 or more the culprit is considered to have committed an offence and is liable for a penalty. In the same perspective, when a person gaining access to unauthorized computer is considered to have committed an offence which results into a threat to public safety or damage to the computer system of critical security departments of the government, the Patriot Act imposes a stiff penalty on an individual who carries out such terrorist actions. In addition, the use of viruses and other destructive software to cause damage to protected computers is also an offence under the Patriot Act and the culprit is liable to up to ten years imprisonment for such a crime (Gouvin, 2003).  

The Patriot Act emphasizes on the need to develop a cyber-security forensic to prevent cyber terrorism. The work of this security system is to examine intercepted computers and produce evidence for criminal activities like cyber-terrorism. The Act also specifies the need to educate the state law enforcement personnel on computer crimes. The Act promotes the need for the federal law enforcement agencies and the local law enforcement personnel to share information on investigations related to cyber-terrorism (Haigh, 2004).

Cyber-terrorism is surrounded by several controversies with some people arguing that labeling it as terrorism creates unnecessary fear and harm to people using electronic media. Numerous claims that the Patriot Act was passed opportunistically following the September 11 attack are also widely spread in America. The main issue of concern is that the application of the Act might cause abuse of individual rights embedded in the constitution especially when communication from law abiding citizens is intercepted by the law enforcement agencies in the name of fighting cyber-terrorism (Swires, 2004).

In conclusion cyber-terrorism is a form of crime with far reaching repercussions not only to an individual but to the whole country when unauthorized persons get access to protected information in computers. It is therefore imperative that all the necessary legislations are put in place to prevent cyber-terrorism just like the Patriot Act has indeed helped to fight cyber-terrorism to a great extent. When such legislations are put in place they may have some shortcomings such as intruding into the private life of innocent citizens. However, as long as the security of the citizens and the nation as a whole is enhanced in the short run, then necessary amendments should be carried out in order to ensure that individual rights are not affected.  

Leadership in a Medium-sized Correctional Facility

As the warden of a medium-sized correctional facility, I would take my responsibility as one of rehabilitating my chargees and helping them adjust to normal life. As my relationship with my juniors will affect their relationships with the inmates, I would aspire to establish a healthy and democratic relationship with all employees working at the facility. I would therefore employ participative leadership. As much as the responsibility of making final decisions on issues pertaining to the facility would rest on me, I would encourage my juniors to participate actively in decision-making.

Research has established that there exists a strong relationship between employee performance and the leadership (Hayward, 2005). Leaders who motivate, give the space and encourage their employees to take part in decision-making report better performance or increased productivity among their juniors. Participative leadership produces psychological empowerment which motivates workers to work harder and smarter (Huang et al., 2009). One of my aims of adopting the leadership style would therefore be to empower my juniors psychologically, thereby motivating them to treat and relate well with the inmates.

I would appreciate that as a warden, some of the decisions I make may not be the best for my juniors. Taking the entire responsibility of making decisions without taking contributions from the employees would increase my chances of making decisions which impact negatively on my juniors and their performance. By seeking the honest contributions of my juniors in decision-making, I would expect that my decisions would be sensitive to the needs of my juniors. In return, I would expect the employees to own the decisions and therefore feel motivated to implement them.

Police Civil Liability

The police force is entitled to apply force where necessary with reasonable care. This is a delicate task entrusted to police officers in that in situations where they abuse their power of force, there arise numerous complaints of misconduct from the community. The police are the principal agents of social control in an independent society. Thus, they come into contact with the citizens more regularly than any other agency in the criminal Justice system. Almost every resident of a nation has had a direct dealing with a police officer at one point or another in his or her lifetime. Because of this high interaction with the citizens and more visibility, the police are always under intense scrutiny when performing their duties (Kathryn  Craig 1999).

Lawrence and Robert (1988), explain that an imperative aspect of any people oriented establishment is its organization structure and also managerial practices or styles, and the police outfit has been accused for years for its ineffective organization and administration. They lack competent leadership, they are not prepared with well established principles and they resist change. In addition, they fail to deploy and employ personnel well and efficiently and do not adequately apply scientific advances that would promote the law enforcement (Lawrence  Robert 1988). This means that the police force still has a lot to learn about its organization and management of diverse departments which would enhance their duties as law enforcers.

In their daily duties, the police are likely to enforce an array of laws, and of most concern are criminal laws, traffic laws and ordinances. Criminal laws are misdemeanors and felonies traffic laws include moving and non moving violations while ordinances include wrong doings such as violations of permit requirements. Enforcement of each of these laws requires specific conduct from the police (Lawrence  Robert, 1988).

The functions of the law to duties of policing are provided for in the statutes formed in the constitution. This creates a distinctive relationship between the police force and the law itself in that the power, conduct and duties of the police officer stem directly as a result of the law. To avoid possible lawsuit situations, it is essential for every police officer to have an understanding of the constitution and the guarantees as they pertain in the process of policing. This can be done through training, workshops and briefings by senior officers. This shows how important it is for every police to be familiar with the constitution as well as it repercussions for policing (Lawrence  Robert 1988).

Police pursuits and common legal responsibility
Statistics in the U.S show that more than 40 of most motor vehicle police chases culminate in collisions and these cause almost 300 deaths of police officers, offenders, as well as innocent third party individuals each year (Chris  Dominick, 2001). Since most police pursuits result in accidents and injuries, agencies and officers end up being subjects of civil lawsuits. Initiated in state or federal courts, the lawsuits result cumulatively in case law that forces law enforcement agencies to develop pursuit policies. The U.S. Supreme Court has always issued rulings that have changed the threshold of negligence before an agency or officer can be held liable, which impacts police agencies across the United States (Chris  Dominick, 2001).

In their article Chris  Dominick (2001), make a recommendation that because of the critical nature of police pursuit situations, heads of law enforcement agencies must establish an appropriate policy governing the actions of their personnel during such incidents. There should be consideration first and foremost of the constraints and allowances set forth by state and federal statutes and court decisions appropriate within their jurisdiction. There should also be a creation of policies that balances the necessity to apprehend offenders in the interests of justice with the need to safeguard citizens from the risks linked to police pursuits. The policies should also be able to protect the financial wellbeing of the community based upon possible losses of public dollars due to successful proceedings against the group because of law enforcement practices considered inappropriate by the courts of law (Chris  Dominick, 2001).

Adopting a policy related to that of another agency does not easily resolve the law agencies dilemma because a variety of philosophies exist among the pursuit policies of law enforcement agencies. U.S. federal courts have appraised various police chase cases using diverse standards of behavior and the courts regularly have appraised the agencys chase policy before making any decision. The policy or lack of it could impact the result of a civil action (Chris  Dominick, 2001).

Case Study
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit examined the concern of whether police agencies can use police pursuits to arrest traffic violators. In the case of Galas v McKee, the court reviewed a case based in Nashville Tennessee, involving the police pursuit of a 13-year-old traffic violator. On the 16th of March 1983, Officer McKee from Metropolitan Nashville Police Department noticed a vehicle going beyond the speed limit. Officer McKee gave a chase, which attained 100 miles per hour, on a police motorbike. The pursuit ended when the car veered off the road and crashed. The driver sustained severe and lifelong injuries (Chris  Dominic, 2001).

The district court gave a ruling in favor of the police officer and the police department. The parents of the young driver appealed the decision and the court of appeals ruled that that the minimum interruption of a traffic lawbreakers Fourth Amendment right brought about by the officers partaking in a high-speed chase does not overshadow the longstanding police practice which we consider essential to a coherent scheme of police powers and the use of high speed pursuits to arrest traffic violators is not awkward and, therefore, not a violation of the Fourth Amendment (Chris  Dominick ,2001).

This gives the officers the right to engage in high speed pursuits as a satisfactory method to apprehend traffic violators. The court further reviewed the departments policy concerning traffic violators and police pursuits and concluded that, the policy provides, at most, that officers may pursue, that is, follow, suspects. The guideline on following traffic lawbreakers who decline to obey an officers command to pull to the side of the road does not contravene the right to life. This court acknowledged the use of police pursuits to capture traffic violators (Chris  Dominick, 2001).

The chief officers of every law enforcement agency must propagate a written vehicle pursuit policy that provides clear regulation for that agencys officers. Such policy should include statements that officers will not maintain a pursuit once the risk of danger to the officer and public brought by the pursuit exceeds the potential danger to the public should the suspect remain at large (Chris  Dominick, 2001).

Chris and Dominick (2001), add that officers assessing the danger must also put into consideration the nature of the violation committed by the offender, as well as environmental circumstances such as type of area, weather, and intensity of the traffic congestion. Additionally, based upon the uniqueness of the particular agency, the area it encompasses, and the people it serves, directors of police agencies may put into consideration restrictions in pursuit to cases in which the offender has been involved in serious offenses.

Moreover, agency directors also must observe state statutes and state level court decisions relevant within their jurisdiction. Although civil lawsuits will continue to be filed, directors of agencies can protect their agencies by proactively revaluating their agencys pursuit guidelines and providing sufficient training regarding the policy and motor vehicle pursuit in general (Chris  Dominick, 2001).

Policing misconduct is one of the oldest problems and this is viewed as any behavior that violates the acceptable or distinct norms under social order, the police organization and both criminal and civil law like being involved in corruption. These can cost officers their jobs and attract a penalty of jail terms. This also affects the agency through ineffectiveness and having a poor image to the society. It also creates fear and mistrust in their respective jurisdiction. This means that controls and regulations must be established which include agency tools such as strict executive orders, discipline, quality supervision, have special investigative units as well as integrated trainings. It is also advisable to educate the public and investigative bodies as well as police agencies. This would promote and encourage ethical behaviors and assist in the fight against police misconducts.

Acting Christianly

Christianity according to the Holy Bible, which is a library of books that have clear guidelines on how a Christian should behave under different situations, in the book of first Corinthians chapter 6, verse 1 to 8, it states the way for judgment among brethren in Christ.  St. Paul in the text urges Christians to extend the art of love and mercy for one another in that they should be able to bring their disputes to the wise council of the church, which is formed by the church elders (George, 2001).

Christian teaching here requires a Christian to solve disputes among follow Christians at personal level and if they disagree they should take it before the church elders then if it can not be solved here they may be allowed to take it to the secular courts and file law suits.

The law on the other hand requires that civil matters be sorted in the court to ensure justice for the offended.  Forgiveness is emphasized in the Christian way of life while in the secular society all crimes need be reported in the court of law and law suits filed.  Therefore, in order to act in a Christian like manner, justice must first be sought among the church members and if it is not possible the case can be passed to the secular courts (The Preachers Files, 2010). Justice means fairness of judgment in which the offended should be rewarded to satisfaction by the offender through a procedural manner like in the court judgment or for the Christians, in the council of elders of the church.

In conclusion, a Christian may seek justice from secular courts regardless of whether the offender is a Christian or a non Christian as shown in Romans 131-7.

Discretion in the Criminal Justice System

The use of discretion in the criminal justice system stems from a need and desire to be as fair as possible on an individual basis to avoid stereotyping fundamentals.  This is due to the foundation of laws that exist were created in a time gone by and are not as accurately correct for the society of today.   To remedy this, the criminal justice system has implemented the use of discretion in bringing disciplinary actions associated with crime into a fitting punishment that correlates with the times.

The Path of Discretion
The realization that all crimes committed differ in the reasoning of why and how has become a factor in the decision of how one will pay for the crime that was committed.  For example, a death occurs at the hands of an individual.  This is a homicide.  A murder has been committed and is punishable under the law.  Before the practice of discretion was in use, it would be a pretty cut and dry charge.

 Discretion has allowed the creation of levels of crimes. These levels are pertinent to the facts therein.  It all starts with the discretion of the arresting officer, who takes information in making a report and describes the circumstances according to the facts as he sees them.

The questions he will ask will be determined by the training and professionalism extended in relating the offense to the levels of the crime afforded by law.  This discretionary pattern will continue throughout the judicial system as the case proceeds and is inclusive of the prosecuting attorney and judge in alliance with the facts as they see them under the law.  Where discretion is not used is with a jury itself.  Presented with the offense their decision based on the facts of the case, will correlate with the law in its black and white significance.   Once the jury renders a verdict, the Judge at his discretion will hand down a sentence using discretion pertinent to the crime committed, how it was committed and of the individuals character.
Examples of How Discretion is used
Youth Justice is a great example of how discretion affects the criminal justice system.  At the discretion of concerned citizens, certain organizations were formed which called for the separation of juveniles from adults regarding the judicial system.  Jerrom (2008) tells us in the 1990s there was a huge increase of children who became active in the Justice System.  In 1998, redirection was given to the system and the Crime and Disorder Act was enacted, hence the birth of the Youth Justice System.  It underwent a lot of scrutiny from parents and legal departments alike while it became established.  It has a board of 12 members, who answer to the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Children.
It was at the discretion of the board to look for ways of improvement to the crime and disorder act.  One improvement was to seek professional interaction in recognizing causes for criminal activity performed by youth offenders and to counteract victimization that occurs during detention.  Health professionals countered victimization in detecting potential abusers in an effort to shield youths and to build trust for them in the system.  In this manner, redirection was possible as youth in retaining their youthful resilience were more open and accepting of treatment.  They can then resist negative peer pressure, and develop a positive sense of their own potential and future.

Sentencing also carries discretionary weight.  Judges listen to cases on an individual basis.  The professional demeanor and expertise they hold enables them to make decisions in sentencing at their discretion relevant to the case, the defendant, the verdict of the jury and the limits within the law.  Taking all of this into account a defendants sentencing is according to that which the judge deems fit in his discretion of not only the crime, but the circumstance and persons involved as well.  Key aspects as of late indicate that sentencing reformers believe that judges use too much discretion in handing down sentences.  Therefore, in this debate, somewhere along the lines written sentencing rules created as guidelines to be followed by judges, somehow were accessed by prosecutors, thus the tide has turned to influential factors addressing the transition of sentencing to that of prosecutors.  This defeated the directive, which was simply to make criminal sentencing subject to law (Stith, 2008).

Parole is adjudicatory to a parole board without the presence or participation of the justice system.  The responsibility of the parole board is to set the actual time of incarceration for a convicted person within 6 months (Gorton, 1978).  It is at the discretion of the parole board made up of persons with experience in the fields of sociality, law, or medicine inclined backgrounds, in the ability to determine the potential of would be parolees being mainstreamed back into society. Their decisions based on the remorseful acceptance of responsibility for the crimes as voiced by those seeking parole, are a result of the credibility and time served so far for the offense.  It is at the discretion of the parole board to either approve or deny parole as they see fit.

The Advantages of Discretion
The advantages of having discretion within the judicial system, is that it fills the gaps of laws built on black and white principles, therefore not realistic to life events.  Historically crimes committed by persons carried much longer sentences, and were harsh and at times considered as inhumane in their deliverance.  The 1600s reflects the state of homelessness as a crime.  Being homeless resulted in inhumane treatment of flogging or even executed, and the labeling of a vagabond if discovered.

The law of homelessness as a crime has since then been changed.  This change is a result of discretionary action.  It was at the discretion of those who did not like this law and wanted it changed.  Today, the judgment of homelessness is dependent on an individuals circumstances.  Persons are more likely to be empathetic to a woman with children versus people without, or older persons viewed as victims who were perhaps let down by the system.  Many charitable groups now support and assist homeless persons to regain footing into society (Morrell-Bellai et al, 2000).

Changing of laws is a strong point of the advantages and successes of the use of discretion.  Discretion is the making of a decision or choice after learning all the facts based on individual perception.  When more than one person is involved and shares this perception, discretion is a collective group effort and can make the changing of laws possible.  Other advantages of discretion in the justice system is that the practice is well known to occur and therefore states set limits of allowance in an attempt to keep balance of its use.  Some states may allow wide discretion to judges, and minimal discretion to police officers.  It all depends on the guidelines pursuant to that states laws (Gelsthorpe et al, 2003).

The Disadvantages of Discretion
The disadvantages of discretion, is that there is not a clear way to monitor its use.  The red tape of government actions gives discretionary practices a lot of space to work with.  The misuse of discretion would take a considerable time to be noticed, but once it is, measures are taken to right the imbalance.  There is continual gauging of the use of discretion in criminal justice.  The laws of the country enacted on a premise that did not take into account the extreme of longevity beyond its likely scope.  This left for a deep chasm of flexibility in connecting the laws of old with the times of today.  To fill the gaps and make connections complete, the use of discretion was born.  Drawbacks are that it has the potential for getting out of control, and unless closely monitored it has and will (Robinson, 2005).

Brasswell  Lafollette (2008) advise that associations to discretion is the concern that decisions are made that are not congruent with laws and are based on evasiveness and individual and corporate greed.  The pursuit of social peace is threatened by a system that is functioning out of control and discretion in the criminal justice system needs to be evaluated in giving meaning to social values and rendering results that were intended at the onset.

My Opinion on Discretion in the Justice System    
My opinion is that I would rather have the practice of discretion available rather than not.  Laws are a very scary thing and were discretion not used in aligning laws to specifics like an era, person, place, or thing, justice would not be a reality to look forward too.  There are downfalls to everything we undertake in life.  The reason for this is that we have to take risks in order to learn.  Therefore, first attempts may not deliver outcomes that match the expectations, but they do provide insight on what to do next to get closer or achieve goals.

Such is the case with discretion.  The purpose of its use is to seek a foundation that is par for the course.  It is to keep up to date with eyes wide open in the assessment and evaluation of crimes.  It is the use of logic in determining what, within the limits of the law, warrant follow through, or can be provided a warning status.  It is prevalent through all divisions of the criminal justice system, and in that capacity, it remains consistent.

Although discretion use is not perfect by all who use it in decision making without it I have a feeling we would be worse off.  Time and change bring about new processes always striving for improvement.  The purpose of life calls for constant improvement to processes, and the criminal justice system is at the front of the receiving line.

Borrowing from a Loan Shark

This paper is about a man who comes from an inner city life.  He was raised in a poor
single parent family, having several siblings and never knew his father.  His mother works 2 job
to make ends meet and they live in the projects.  He was a high school dropout and started
running drugs to help out the family and buy things he wanted.  

When he was 18 he was busted for possession and spent 7 years in prison.  Upon being
released he found out his mother and siblings had moved, leaving no forwarding address.
desperate for money and having no place to stay he started speaking to guys on the street
 looking for a hookup to make some money.

A guy told him about a loan shark that could hook him up and put some money in his
pocket.  He contacts the loan shark, meets up with him and is amazed that the loan shark doesnt
ask for collateral and provides him with a 4000.00 loan based on his word to pay.  He has 30
days to pay back the money in full with interest.

The terms for the loan are 500.00 for each 1000.00 borrowed and interest accruing
daily at the rate of 20 percent on the 6000.00 amount.  He agreed to the terms thinking that he
could connect with the guy he used to run drugs for and make the money back within the 30
days.  He takes the money and finds a cheap hotel, checks in, gets some food, takes a long hot
shower and gets some much needed rest.

Three weeks have passed and he is still not able to find the guy he used to run drugs for.
Talk on the street is that the area was cleaned up by task forces and nobody knows where the
drug action has moved to.  The loan sharks terms also included that he pay a visit to them each
week in checking in to assure that he is not trying to run out on his loan obligations.  It has been
three weeks and he has a little under 1500.00 of the loan money left.

The loan sharks attitude has deteriorated with each visit.  He has threatened that if he
does not receive his money at the end of the next week he will need to take measures to insure
that the man understands the importance of paying his debt on time.  After he leaves the loan
sharks office he is filled with trepidation on what to do to get the money.  All seems hopeless
and yet another day passes.

With time running out, the man thinks about his options.  He could take the last bit of
money he has and skip town.  But where would he go  He doesnt have anyone here anymore,
but at least he is familiar with the area.  He could try and find a job, but the reality is no
legitimate job will hire him.  On the off chance that one did, it wouldnt pay him what he
needs in such a short period of time, and time is running out.

He didnt have anyone to talk to about it, so he thought about the one thing he had
come accustomed to while he was imprisoned.  He thought about calling the police to see if
there was anything that could be done.  His life had been threatened after all.  He sat on his bed
in his hotel room contemplating his next move.

Making up his mind he grabbed the phone book and located the non-emergency number
for the police.  Dialing the number he began to talk quickly to the woman that answered.  She
asked him to slow down and start over.   After he was able to express to her his concerns, she
actually gave him encouragement.

She told him that the loan sharks terms were not legally binding and that he was not
 legally obligated to pay the money back at all.  She also informed him that he could get
assistance with this problem by immediately contacting the local Trading Standards office.
She advised for him not to worry, as that office would help him to deal with the loan shark.  She
 had him write down the number and advised in the meantime if he is being threatened by the
 loan shark, she could transfer him to an officer to make a report.  He thanked her for all of her
 help and it felt like a weight had been lifted from his shoulders.  After being transferred he
made a report with the police officer he spoke to, and in hanging up the phone he exhaled a
breath of relief.  He quickly dialed the local Standards Trading office and began to tell his story
again to the person who answered.

While speaking to this person, he felt a new found hope not just for the situation, but for
his life.  The woman at the non-emergency police number had also told him about a program
that helped ex-convicts to acquire employment.  That would be his next move on getting back
on track with life.

Police Brutality

Police officers not infrequently come across circumstances when the use of force in an appropriate measure is warranted. But unfortunately this power is often abused when the use of force becomes excessive either in warranted circumstances or in wholly unwarranted circumstances. Though many police departments have explicit policies that discourage the use of excessive force, traditionally the practice of brutality is readily accepted and condoned by police officers (Dantzker, 2005). As a consequence, the use of excessive force by police is widely prevalent, and even today only a relatively minor fraction of such blatantly brutal incidents come into the light of the media.

The use of excessive violence seems to happen particularly against blacks and other members of minority communities, though usually because of circumstantial reasons rather than any systematic racial prejudice. Studies have shown the lack of any marked racist tendencies among the police (MacDonald, 2003). Women too tend to be particularly vulnerable to unrestrained violence inflicted upon them by the police officers, in the form of rape and molestation. There are any number of brutality incidents that have come into public scrutiny in the past two decades. However, it is really difficult to gauge the true extent of police use of excessive force except by extrapolation from the known cases and surveys, such as those done on the public or on the professionals directly or indirectly involved with law enforcement. For example, a 2009 national survey of 315 ER physicians found that an overwhelming 98 of them believed to have handled at least a few patients subjected to police brutality, despite the fact that most of these cases were not reported as being such (Johnson).

There are some systemic problems with the police. For example, police departments in the US have a quasi-military type of organization which nurtures military values and outlook in the officers. While there is much to be appreciated in the military system of values, it does not encourage discriminative faculties and tends to dumb down ones moral sensitivities. The militaristic culture emerged strongly in the police departments during the 80s when a holy war mentality pervaded the police departments, in the context of war on drugs (Dempsey, Forst, 2010). Every criminal and potential criminal is seen to be on the opposite side. Police fail to distinguish between degrees of misdemeanor, felony and crime for them all criminals tend to be the same. For the police a person speeding on the road and disobeying the order to pull over is perhaps as sinful as a serial killer. And as the police are often not smart enough to nab serial killers and real criminals they take their anger and frustration out on perpetrators of minor felonies. Police brutality thrives.

The trends of police brutality have particularly intensified since 911 after the passing of the Patriot Act which significantly curtailed civil liberties in this country (Greene, 2008). The worsening situation in regard to police brutality does not bode too well for the welfare of the society in the future. People are more and more perceiving police as the oppressors rather than as protectors, even in a perfectly democratic country like the US as if America was some small police state in the Third World. This is indeed a very deplorable situation. We must seriously consider the systemic factors responsible for breeding a culture of violence and animalistic brutality among the police in the hope of finding ways to curb the police use of excessive force.

No doubt, use of force and violence lies at the core of the police role. But the need of the hour is to impart upon police officers the skill and discriminative ability to channelize the force in a responsible manner in the execution of their duties. Though the use of excessive physical force seems to be raging on epidemic proportions and the instances of police brutality are proliferating, some studies have shown that only a fraction of the police officers tend to habitually indulge in exhibiting excessively violent behavior (Siegel 2008).  Even in this group there are a few hard-core repeat offenders, and then there are those who sometimes give in to the stress of the job and frustration at corruption or incompetence of the superiors or at the liberalness of the judges and take it out on whomever they get their hands on. As such, the phenomenon of police brutality is tied up with the whole of the police system and culture and cannot be effectively dealt with in isolation.

However, simple punitive and disciplinary measures can go some way in counteracting unwarranted brutalization of the victims by the police. To begin with, the repeat offenders can be simply culled out of the system. If the police officers can be made more accountable to the public and to their superiors in all their actions, it would naturally provide more incentive for these policemen to check their violent impulses. Lack of proper accountability is at the crux of the problem as also is lack of transparency and lax investigation procedures. Even in our age of communications where the presence of media is ubiquitous, the police somehow manage to keep most of their acts of brutality away from the public knowledge. Apparently, the organizational procedures that exist to ensure some kind of transparency of police actions within the four walls of the police station are very inadequate.

In the more recent years particularly, the war on terror has given more freedom to act for certain law enforcement agencies, and many bad apples within the system seem to be taking perfect advantage of it in realizing their sadistic fantasies of inflicting pain on others. According to a 2007 report prepared by a United Nations committee, even the few mechanisms of accountability and transparency that existed in the U.S. police departments have fallen into abeyance. The report concludes in strong words that police brutality and abuse persist unabated and undeterred across the country.

The present situation cannot gather momentum toward change unless there is a massive outcry against police atrocities. Unfortunately, over the years the public seems to have grown into an apathetic attitude of tolerance with regard to police brutality. The atmosphere of public indifference is the biggest encouragement to the use of excessive force by police. When some of the incidents of brutality that have happened in the past ten years come into light as they are bound to sooner or later, a mass revolt could follow, and unless such a thing happens, the situation cannot really change for the better.

The tendency toward excessive use of physical force is deeply implanted in the entire police system and culture. Only a sort of upheaval in the society can help the police organization to shake off brutality, corruption, incompetence and many such undesirable elements all of which are tied up with one another. Hopefully, we are very close to that critical point where a turn-about can take place.

Anti-drug Legislation

Anti drugs legislation has existed in the United States both at the federal level and the states level for a very long time. The drug policies in the United States started as general policies which have changed with time to become more specific. The major roles of these policies are to reduce and control the supply of drugs that are considered illegal due to their addictive and harmful effects, enforce laws related to drugs and give guidance to sentencing and incarceration of criminals involved in drug possession and trafficking. Some of the policies are also aimed at reducing the demand of narcotics and other harmful drugs by discouraging the use of these drugs through educations, awareness campaigns, preventions and treating those affected by the drugs.

The federal anti drug legislators have existed since the early 20th century when the pure food and drugs act of 1906 was passed by the congress. The law restricted the transportation of certain drugs and foodstuffs from one state to another. Although the use of opium and cocaine had been restricted in some countries such as China and Philippines in the early twentieth century, these drugs were not prohibited by the federal legislature. However, the control of drugs was not limited to the federal laws. In some states and municipalities such as San Francisco, there were laws that outlawed the use of drugs such as opium. Towards the end of the 19th century, several states had enacted laws that controlled the amount of drugs supplied in the state. Some of the laws restricted who should be allowed to access the drugs where a medical prescription was required. These laws limited the use of morphine and cocaine in some states to medical uses only. The laws controlling the distribution of these drugs were not affected because of lack of uniformity in the laws where in some state drug use was not restricted while others tried to restrict them. The distribution of the drugs was therefore easy until the enactment of the federal legislation that restricted the transportation of drugs from one state to another (Harrison et al 1995).

Throughout the twentieth century, several federal and states legislation aimed at restricting the use and distribution of drugs have been enacted. This includes the Harrison Act of 1914 which set the platform for the control of narcotics in the United States for over half a century. The enacted of this law made all non medical use of narcotic drugs illegal where many people who were already addicted to the drugs found themselves in the wrong side of the law. Following this law, the illicit drug trade increased in the United States which led to the enactment of the Jones Miller Act of 1922 which set the minimum penalty of individuals found guilty of supplying the drugs illegally. In the 1920s and 1930s, the federal officials used the media to educate the public on the harmful effect of the use of marijuana since the use of the herb for recreation had increased significantly due to ineffective laws. Following this campaign, all the states apart from two had enacted anti marijuana laws by 1937.  The same year, the congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act.

Other federal laws have been passed to regulate drug use. This includes the Opium Poppy Act passed in 1942 to control poppy production, Narcotic Act of 1946 which controlled the use of synthetic narcotics, the Narcotic Drugs Act of 1956 and the Boggs Bill which made penalties on drug crimes more severe. The united states also become a member of the Single Convection on Narcotic Drugs in the 1960s which enhanced the regulation of drugs at the international level.  All the federal drugs laws were consolidated in the Controlled Substance Act signed by President Nixon in 1970. In 1980s, several laws touching on drugs uses were enacted which included the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, the Anti Drug Abuse Act, the Anti Drug Abuse Amendment Act and the Crime Control Act. These laws aimed at strengthening the criminal sanctions in the federal system on drug related crimes such as production, possession or illegal trafficking of prohibited drugs. The laws also aimed at strengthening the fight against drug abuse by increasing federal grants to states authorities to reduce the supply and demand of prohibited substances (Morawetz, 2008).

Although the anti drugs laws may vary from state to state, all the states are subject to all the federal anti drugs law. The application of the laws in the states level varies from the federal levels. Moreover, different jurisdictions and countries may have different applications of the laws. In many states, the possession of small amounts of bang is not considered as a crime provided it is for personal use. Despite this, most of the states have maintained the anti drug use as stipulated in the drugs acts of 1980 or increased the severity of the penalty. For example, if a person is accused of possessing an ounce of marijuana in Nevada, it is considered to be a felony while the same will attract a fine of one hundred dollars in New York. In Montana, a person accused of trading one pound of marijuana may be sentenced to life imprisonment even if it was the first offense while selling ten thousand pounds of marijuana may attract a three years in prison sentence in New Mexico. Drugs laws applications differ from one state to another. However, there is no substantial evidence that less severe laws in some states have increased drug abuse or stiff penalties have reduced the use of illegal drugs (Harrison et al 1995).

The prohibition of drug use has been a very controversial subject in the United States and at the international level resulting into heated debate. One of the basic arguments against anti drugs law is based on the adverse effects of the illicit drugs as compared to legal drugs. It is argued that legal drugs such as tobacco and alcohol are more harmful as compared to some illicit drugs. Some people argue that some natural illicit drugs have been used for thousands of years and the dangers associated with their use are as a result of regulation. Drugs users who are not criminals have been stigmatized due to laws that relate drugs to crime. Despite these arguments, both public opinion and statistics on effects of drugs indicates that anti drug are justified. Although some people argue that all adults have cognitive liberty, there is no evidence that lack of anti drugs laws will reduce the harmful effects of drugs which is evident in the society. The presence of anti drugs laws has gone a long way in deterring the illegal distribution and use of illicit drugs (Maginnis, n d).

Parental Consent and Guardianship

Even though such laws are specific in every state or province, guardianship, in general, is a legal relationship when  someone who is appointed to care for andor handle the affairs of a person who is incompetent or incapable of administering hisher affairs (US Legal, 2010).   Furthermore, guardianship comes with responsibilities.  As the definition stated, these are individuals who are charged with making decisions for those who are incapable of doing it. In this scenario, it is quite apparent that the Smiths failed to appoint a suitable guardian and did not follow proper legal procedure that could have saved all parties involved from any complications.  It is quite apparent here that Bob is a man of questionable character as evidenced by his failure to watch over his ward led to her getting involved in a crime which also involved murder.   Furthermore, the Smiths appeared not to have any documentary evidence of Bobs authority to act as a guardian for Jane.

As a result, the Smiths can be held liable for this neglect (Fleming and Curti, 2009).  Even though a person (like Bob) may be someone known to the parents, proper legal procedure must be taken.  These are safeguards to ensure that anyone put in the care of the guardian will not be abused by the same.  Oral declaration would not suffice to affirm ones designation.  Even if he is the appointed guardian, Bob can still be held liable as well for his neglect and with Jane getting involved in a crime.  As stated earlier, guardianship entails having responsibilities nearly equal to that of a parent and anyone designated as such must be remiss in these duties and responsibilities.

Prison security lapses that could lead to prisoner escape

Prison or penitentiary, as Wortley (2002) puts it, is a place where people are actually confined and restrained and, more often than not, underprivileged of a variety of individual freedoms or rights. Prisons are conservatively establishments which form a branch of the criminal fairness and impartiality scheme of a nation, such that detention or confinement is an officially authorized, officially permitted and a lawful punishment which may be forced by the state after the discharge of a felony or lawbreaking. A person who is suspected of a criminal offence after being charged with, or waiting to answer some charges of criminal offense is detained on remanded in jail after he is unable to pay for bail or is unable to pay. A criminal suspect is also put in custody in prison as he awaits court hearing or a court judgment. If it is established that he is culpable, or in the wrong, a defendant is condemned plus may be given a custodial ruling necessitating incarceration.

There are numerous anomalies that can take place inside a penitentiary system. A number according to Shaffer (2003) may comprise of defective detection methods, with some resulting from insufficient training and learning on the division of the police officer. Besides, a few officials may be caught up in scandals within the prison. Detainees may also obtain or get access to bits of metal, apparatus, as well as rocks from the reformatory building sites. These can be used as weapons or tools to fight their way out. A security guard who is not attentive and focused may be accountable for placing the whole establishment in danger. Money matters too contribute a huge part in security. For sufficient and satisfactory curriculum to be realized, its mandatory to have sufficient sum of money to pay well the prison staff. This reduces the likelihood of officers being bought by the rich prisoners.

The physical construction of a detention center is exceptionally important. The function to keep the general public out along with to keeping the prisoners in. Therefore, elevated walls or boundary marker and recognition arrangement are necessary when constructing a prison. An unblemished blueprint in physical security gives a strong more secure facility, and plays a chief role in maintaining things operating smoothly within as well as outside the perimeters.

Black Female Homicide in the United States

The topic above is the title of the article written by Coramae Richey Mann, professor emeritus of criminal justice at the University of Illinois at Chicago. While this paper is intended to provide a short and detailed critique of the article, it is quite necessary to include the authors background in order to have a more precise understanding of the article.

Coramae Richey Mann was born in a segregated Chicago hospital in January 1931. At her young age, Mann exhibited talents in both painting and writing to which she has completed her first painting before she attended school. Though an African American, Mann was one of the two best students in her class. Despite difficult circumstances she has gone through during her youth, she made excellent academic performance maintaining an A average in spite of of her uncharacteristic behavior.

While in college, Mann engaged in card playing and drinking activities (Greene and Gabidon 2000, p. 84), and she also eloped after her first year. Notwithstanding her uncharacteristic love affairs while in college however, Mann was still managed to complete her college education receiving both B.A. and M.A. degree in clinical psychology at Roosevelt University.

Manns encounter with Dr. Charles Sumner during her college wandering leaves in her a profound impression that led her to take up psychology. Greene and Gabbidon pointed out that in 1956 Mann received a B.A. degree in clinical psychology and M.A. in clinical psychology in the same university (p. 85) six years after he she received her B.A. degree. However, while she was a clinical psychologist by profession, according to Greene and Gabbidon, Manns experience in varieties of jobs classified her more as urban sociologist than a clinical psychologist (p. 85). But this may not really be surprising since she has enrolled in the sociology program at the University of Illinois at Chicago where she finished her doctorate degree in sociology. Thus, the author was a clinical psychologist and a sociologist rather than criminologist in terms of her intellectual background and her practical work experiences.    

In her introduction, the author cited that black women rank second in the in the frequency of arrest for murder and non-negligent suicide in the United States (Mann, p. 176) prior to the 1970s but she lamented on the scarcity of information on this offending subgroup. To be able to obtain information necessary for her thesis however, Mann cited previous researches on Black women killer. Among such empirical studies she cited in this article was the work of Wolfgang (1958) which reported details on Black women who kill in his seminal study of violent crime. She also cited more recent works of Cole, Fisher, and Cole (1968) and those of others whose works centers on violent crimes carried out by Black women.

Critique of the article
Black Female Homicide in the United States was, as the title suggests, about crimes and offenses purportedly committed by black women. In this article, Mann intended to provide relevant findings regarding the offender profile, victim profile, victim-offender relationship, circumstances of the homicide, and criminal justice system processing. From this initial look on the content of the paper, Manns work appears interesting because it pertains to the most neglected issue in terms of crime cases in America.

Judging from a fair point of view, Manns discussion and interpretations of data under the subject offenders profile is important because it high lights her agreements and disagreements with some of the research works previously done on the subject especially homicide and murder cases perpetrated by black women. Her findings confirm her proposition regarding Black women crime rate. Manns findings that women killers are older than their male counter part was important as it suggest that Black women killers were simply victims of males dominance and abuses. On socio economic level, her interpretation of the data available was fair and she seemed to have obviously considered what the original researchers intension of presenting balanced information, admitting that though most of the women killers were not really poorly educated, the black women who killed appear to be from the lowest economic strata suggesting link between economic status and homicide. She must be right in her interpretation that that the combined disadvantages of being poor, Black, and female create a degree of life-style stress that contributes to homicide (p. 182).

While these findings were not surprising at all, her work was very credible because she apparently based her findings on various scholarly works using very clear and straightforward language. The comparative data presented in table 1 of crimes committed on a yearly basis on six cities namely, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta and Baltimore representing higher homicide rates based on the records of the Federal Bureau of investigations, was a credible source for her findings regarding the age group of female murderers which was between 25 to 39 compared to the male killers which ranges from age 15 to 24.

Manns presentation of data reflects that she was indeed an objective writer. The fact that she was black herself she could have made statement to justify Black women killers in view of the unavailability of usual measures of economic deprivation (p. 182).yet she was apparently more concern on presenting factual information. Her interpretation of the data however, though appropriate given the fact that it was reality as it could happen to any particular group regardless of race and gender, was more on the perspective of a sociologist than on the perspective of a criminologist or of a psychologist. Though she was talking of Black race and a female gender, yet her work appeared to be a representation of a general scenario. That is, she presented the case as the tendency when an individual regardless of race or gender is under extreme circumstances.

On her second subject that was about the victim profile the author confirms previous study that most often women kill men of their own race. However, the writer particularly adds that non-Black frequently killed children than did Blacks. It appears that in this subject, Mann was more concern on presenting the discrepancy between the white women children killers which was relatively higher compared to their Black counter part. This seemed to imply that there was practically no different between the Black and the White women as both would engage in uncharacteristic behavior if in the same circumstances.

In fairness to the author, her presentation of the subject was extremely well. Her writing ability enable her to write such a great paper using simple words but with profound meaning.
In this article, the authors writing skill and her deep inclination to sociology was very evident as she provided careful interpretations of data which was not only a product of sociological study dealing with the subject of criminology but also a work of a black woman writer writing on the case of black women killers. The article was indeed a complex subject but was discussed with great excellence.

Regarding victimoffender relationship, Mann confirms the earlier idea presented on the subject that Mann being Black herself implies that there is indeed no differences between the behavior of Black and White when facing extremely difficult and complicated circumstances. That either race can be prune to such criminal instinct when the combined disadvantages of being black, poor, and the life style stress are present. Or in some cases, when faced by difficult and complicated relationships being a victim themselves their tendency would be to escape and some times the only way to do it is to kill. Mann cited various studies which confirm that Black women who kill prove no exception to this rule (p. 186). Mann, states that when family included legal and common-law spouses, lovers, separated or divorced partners, children, parents other relatives, and in-laws, 66.5 of the Blacks killed member of their family (p. 186).  

From these ideas, it appears that Mann was now concern on the plight of Black women who were victims of domestic violence. In this case she was more of a psychologist than a sociologist as she was particularly concern on the family matters and in the relationship between the opposite sexes. That is, it seemed that the author was shifting her focus based on the subject she was discussing. But this can be understandable because Mann was herself a black and has experienced perhaps during her early life the experiences of women subject to her study. Thus, her presentation of data in this subject though it appeared to be objective and was intended to shed light on the nature and timing of the crime of homicide. In this case also, the author seemed to disagree on the studies done on the subject especially when the homicides is likely to occur whether during on weekends or during weekdays.

Again, the author seemed to have employed her expertise in clinical psychology in this portion of her research. The authors presentation of facts based on the previous works (Goetting 1986, McClain, 1982 Suval  Brison, 1975 and Cole 1968) about the extent of alcohol use and other drug involvement in relation to homicide suggest that Black female offenders were under the influence of alcohol at the time of the homicide and 12.5 identified themselves as alcoholics (p. 187).

Manns interpretation of the data provided in the studies mentioned above implies that homicide victims as per autopsy reports were legally drunk during the time they were killed and their killers were unlikely to have been drinking at the time of the crime. It appears therefore that women killers likely to execute killings when their partners were drunk. These again suggest that the author was trying to demonstrate that Black women tend to commit violent reaction when their partner is drunk. These in turn suggest that it was they were being abused physically abused by their partner when they were under the
influence of liquor or the illegal drugs.

Here again, the authors back ground in psychology provided distinct skills in presenting her subjects while staying perfectly academic. Definitely, the authors work is very informative and at the same time, was very objective. She was able to blend naturally her distinct identities being a sociologist, a clinical psychologist, a black woman writer, and a criminologist.

Manns position as Black woman writer however is very evident as she clearly sympathized with women in the context of the so-called battered syndrome. According to Mann, The battered woman syndrome suggest that a homicide committed by an abused female maybe a reasonable and necessary act because the woman believed that she was in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death and that the force she used was necessary to avoid that danger (p. 190). In this statement, the author seemed to agree that it is perfectly normal to kill the husband when he appeared dangerous. This seemed to say that black women killers should not be judge out rightly nor identify her crime on the basis of her race. That is, what the author seemed to demonstrate was that Black women were victims of unjust system where in a person can be tagged as criminal simply on the basis of the color of his or her screen.

Overall, the article was scholarly and brilliant written as the author seemed to have shifting her identities based on the given circumstances. Overall, the article was fair and the facts presented were very interesting and informative. However, one weak point of the article was that the author simply provided and interpreted the facts contained in empirical studies done previously but failed to strongly or categorically identify the good and bad of these works leaving judgment on the capacity of the readers to understand.

The Interrelation between Prison and Community Culture of Violence

While there is little evidence to establish any conclusive remarks on how prison culture is structured and how it evolves, adopted and manifested by the subjects involved, the idea that a prison culture of violence exists is an accepted fact. It is important to note that the question is not so much in the presence of prison culture of violence itself, rather than on how that culture is formed and adopted by the different relevant stake holders.

To analyze culture formation, it is crucial to understand what prison culture is. This paper suggests that culture prevalent inside the prisons be understood as necessarily comprised of the collective attitudes and cultural summary manifested in the interactions of different stakeholders namely inmates, management, staffs, and the regular spectators.  

That prison culture and community culture of violence are not two distinct entities is strongly considered in this paper. The relationship may be viewed in two ways either one-way or two-way. Furthermore, it can be viewed as either affirmative or negative. To this second possibility, two debates surround the issue. Byrne (200529, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.27), for instance, argues that prison culture and community culture violence are two related factors evident in the sense that exogenous factors are actually brought by inmates to play roles in the inmates behavior inside prisons. The other view is forwarded by Sykes (as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.27) in which essentially it is argued that the prison culture is generated right within the distinct conditions and circumstances found in the prison, without necessarily the participation from community or outside culture. Sykes (19586, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, 2005, 28) argues that the deprivation of liberties and the environmental conditions that apply in prison illicit that culture of violence that is distinct of a prison culture.    

This paper maintains that the individuality of the individual plays a key role in understanding the possibility that the cultures of violence in prison and community may not be totally distinctive elements that should be treated as void of any connection. The analysis involves consideration of the individual cultures that the different stake holders involved have. As the penal institutions is a stage for these different individuals who have, intentionally or otherwise, collaborated to form a cultural identity that in turn becomes reflected in prison context, considering how each group exerts their influence on prison culture formation is important.

1. Introduction
The attempt to analyze how the culture of violence in prisons is formed and adopted entails making an enquiry on whether such particular culture is formed apart of any outside influence such as what is called the community culture. Byrne and Hummer (2005, p.45) say that there is little study and empirical evidence gathered to support a well-established position about how the culture of violence is formed and perpetuated. Nonetheless, intuitively, we may argue that as the ways and thinking of an individual is a product of the different cultures surrounding him, at least at the intuitive level, we find valid support to the inquiry on how different cultures shape the mentality and dispositions of an individual.

One interesting thing to look at is how the community culture and prison culture of violence may be interacting in ways that may be difficult to quantify, yet nevertheless happen (Stowell and Byrne, p.37). The position of this paper is that prison culture and community culture are interrelated and not two distinct entities that are devoid of any interaction. While there is ample empirical evidence to support the case, a theoretical framework to establish the conclusion is possible.

In the course of the analysis, premises are drawn in consideration of the other factors that may help shed light in the understanding if, and how, such a relationship between community violence and prison violence exists. These factors include the social structures, legal framework and other social conditions that are operating within a specific community. Furthermore, in the process of analysis, ideas will be drawn heavily from the two book chapters written by Stowell  Byrne and by Byrne and Hummer, as well from the findings offered by the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE).

Whereas this paper acknowledges cultural relativity, it has been attempted here to approach the issue universally and thus, crossing over the limitations or borders or cultural relativity and diversity.    

1.1. Definition of the Problem
To put it somehow differently, this is a question on whether the individual is capable of exhibiting the same traits that he has outside the prison or, on the other hand, be empowered by the new culture which he gets acquainted with inside the prison (Stanford Prison Experiment). This is not a simple issue to explore on as there are many things that need to be clarified and made distinction about before the issue can be addressed adequately. These include the definitions of prison culture and community and what the possible nature of relationship is exactly being referred to- is it one-way, two-way, etc.

1.1.1. Definition of Prison Culture
An analysis of the matter regarding the link between community and prison cultures entails defining what prison culture is. The definition no doubt has a very important impact on how the matter will be viewed an analyzed. Yet, arriving at a comprehensive definition of prison culture is quite a challenging task because this requires the integration of the different perspectives, or notions on what culture is, that come from the different groups of individuals.

The plurality on opinions as to what prison culture is can be seen from the discussion by Sykes. Sykes (1958, as cited in Byrne and Hummer, p.42) states, For prisoners, inmate culture may take the form of a unique inmate code that defines how prisoners should act and react in prison settings. Sykes, in one sense, suggests a way by which the definition of prison culture is formed from the perspective of the inmates. Byrne and Hummer (2005, p.42) also mention other notions of prison culture that include inmate culture, staff culture, and management culture. In effect, these three cultures are the elements consisted in the prison culture.
1.1.2. The Different Perspectives
Theories Supporting the Absence of Interconnectedness between Community Culture and Prison Culture of Violence
According to Stowell and Byrne (p.28), one perspective that addresses this inquiry is apparent in the argument forwarded by Sykes. Sykes (19586, as cited Stowell and Byrne 2005, p.28) argues that the deprivation of liberties and the conditions of incarceration that apply in prison illicit that culture of violence that is distinct of a prison culture. In addition to that, Sykes (195822, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.29) argued that there is an untrusting behavior present among inmates that makes it conducive to commit crime. Sykes also argues that culture is product of individual behavior (as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.29). Krienert and Fleisher (2005, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.21) argued that culture has its own logic from which it forms its own reality.

Theories Supporting the Presence of Interconnectedness between Community Culture and Prison Culture of Violence
One of the major criticisms that theorists supporting the interconnection between community and prison cultures of violence against those who do otherwise is found in the latters definition of community. For instance, Heitgard and Bursik (1987, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.30) argued that prison is not to be treated as an isolated social institution. Taking Sykes arguments, for instance, we see how Sykes applied a limited definition of the word community and treated prison as an entity that is apart from the existence of this community (Stowell and Byrne, p.29).

Further to that, there is also the so-called importation model in which it is suggested that prison culture results from transfer of exogenous factors that are necessarily found in the outside community (Pattavina, et al., 2006, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.31). This idea is also supported by the empirical studies conducted in which the results clearly show that social institutions have interactions (Baller, et. al, 2001 Anselin, et. al, 2000, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.30). Additional support to this idea is seen in James Byrne (2006, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.31) who states that gangs are formed with basically the same pragmatic reasons, both inside prison and outside prison, in which individuals tend to seek advantage and interests protection by joining a gang. The opposite view is also forwarded by Byrne (as cited in Byrne 200529) in which essentially it is argued that the prison culture is a product of inmates experience prior their incarceration.

2. Discussion
2.1. The Reality of Culture of Violence in Prison
Prisons are correctional institutions, their existence has been made to help offenders change their devious ways and be better citizens (Foucault 1977233, as cited in Stowell and Byrne, p.27). This function associated with prisons as institution makes the idea of prison violence come rather contradictory to the very nature and function of this institution. However, there are a lot of reports regarding incidents of prison violence. Many of these cases have been initiated by the very people who are supposed to be working with the offenders to achieve the desired changes in behavior. According to the 60 Minutes report by CBS News (1999), Two years agoCorcoran State Prison was being investigated by the FBI because numerous correction officers- prison guards- were accused of staging inmate fights, sometimes wagering on the outcome and then, when those fights go out of control, of shooting the inmates involved. There are a number of evidences supporting the fact that prison culture of violence exists. The vast number of incidents of this nature prompted the inquiry of policy designs that would effectively lessen the number of incidents. This then leads to the question about the nature of this violence, that is, how it comes about and gets manifested by individuals who stay in the penal institution.

At this point, it is important to draw a distinction between whether that culture is a summative account of the different individualistic identities that are necessarily imported from the community culture or a culture that is formed right within the very conditions and borders of the penal institution, quite distinct from the community culture. In this case, it is helpful to cite what happened in the Stanford Prison Experiment.

The Stanford Prison Experiment sought to find out whether the individual culture will manifest over the shared culture within context of prisons. The answer to this puzzle is a very crucial thing in understanding the link between community and prison culture of violence because it necessarily provides key understanding how the violence as fostered by this culture can be minimized. Quoting from David Spence, in a report made to the Commission on Safety and Abuse in Americas Prisons, The culture of our prisons virtually dictates the level of violence you will have in them. And if you change that culture, you will reduce the violence (2006, as cited in Byrne and Hummer, 2005, p.45)
2.2. Arguments and Proofs about the Interrelation in Community Culture and Prison Culture
Argument The key argument forwarded in this part is that the culture and identities found in the individuals are the same cultural identities that they carry into the penal institution, although the manifestation of it may be distorted by other factors that are defined by the conditions and circumstances of the new environmental setting.

Proof This claim may find its strength and support from the two theories in criminology called the theory of rational choice and conflict theory.

The rational theory is built around the understanding that each person is responsible for their actions based on thought.  This thought is surmised by making choice decisions in reference to means versus ends, costs, and benefits (Scott, 2000, para.1).  The fact that the individual decides and claims responsibility for such decisions based on thoughts suggests a correlation between community culture and prison culture in the sense that, the individual before going to prison is necessarily shaped and influenced by the community culture and that influence will be reflected in the decisions he will make when he goes inside the prison.

To what extent such culture will be reflected is difficult to say but the point is, the individual is already a thinking person with his own culture before he committed the crime and whatever external influences he might receive from the new environment will just accumulate together with what he has or he is already. It cannot change totally because saying so would entail admitting the fact that the individual will totally be a new person, quite distinct from what he is originally, without any slightest form of similarity. This very unlikely and any theory of knowledge cannot accept a total change of the individual- empiricists would say knowledge is  the accumulation of experience while rationalists would say that knowledge is based on reason which is a permanent possession by an individual which is not contextually-based (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, para.1).

The other criminological theory that can explain this interrelation is the Conflict Theory which is based on the theory of Karl Marx. The literature from  HYPERLINK httpwww.criminology.fsu.educrimtheory  httpwww.criminology.fsu.educrimtheoryconflict.htm (para. 1) states that the conflict theory attributes the fundamental cause of crime to social and economic forces that may result to different conflicts (i.e. interests, welfare, etc.). The conflict theory grounds for the interrelation of community violence and prison violence in the sense that social forces are factors that interplay to affect social structures and the interactions that happen therein. Thus, it is very hard to treat one particular structure as a totally separate entity.

Lastly, the interrelation is also supported by the fact on the study of race. Byrne and Hummer (2005, p.46) identified studies with findings indicating that higher prison violence is committed in prisons with high racial mixtures- white guards, female wardens, etc. These studies suggest that there a culture that is necessarily formed from the outside community is being reflected inside the prisons.  

2.4. Counterarguments- The Implausibility of Interrelation in Community Culture and Prison Culture
The introductory part of the Stanford Prison Experiment where they featured a study about memory and the mentor administering an electric shock strongly reveals a lot about human nature. Specifically, it reveals how humans would respond to the stimulus of authority that they recognize. Analyzing how prison culture may be formed and perpetuated can be done using the findings in the experiment with the teacher and electric shock. One very disturbing finding of the study is that humans can act against their conscience on the dictates of a recognized authority, regardless of whether such authority is legal and ethical or not.

The notion of authority is also crucial in understanding how an individual may be disposed to take certain course of actions, and in analyzing how the attitude, culture and beliefs of the person becomes re-shaped to accommodate respect for such authority. In the Stanford Prison Experiment, we saw how the traits true at the individual level has been overshadowed, to a great extent, by the newly formed collective traits that then operate within a particular context- thus, a restructuring of culture takes place and the authority functions as a very influential factor that affects ones thoughts and behavior, as well as the one of the conditions for the restructuring.

There are two ways by which the authority may be established. The funny thing is that an authority needs not even to be established with force, although in many cases the force was necessary to position such authority  either of these is necessarily a result of the legal framework being adopted. In the experiment, we have seen how the misconduct of the experimental law enforcers has been tolerated with silence by most of the experimental inmates simply because these inmates have recognized the power of the law enforcers over them- this is authority established without force. In parallel with real-life prisons, the same observations can be made and be backed up by the fact that the circumstances of the inmates leave them with little choice but to play cards well with the law enforcers because being in prison, some rights that are being enjoyed by free individuals become void as it applies to the inmates- liberty, choice between comfort and discomfort, privacy, etc. This is compounded by the fact that in prison, inmates are expected to obey. Being in a correctional institution where there is a prevailing mindset that the system corrects the deviant behaviors, less rebellion and more obedience are expected from the inmates.    

3. Conclusion
The issue on prison culture and its relation to community violence is a broad one that crosses perspectives- criminological, psychological, legal and sociological. The reasons cited to provide the counter arguments may be very tempting grounds to say that the two cultures (prison violence and community violence) are not at all related as the cultures are formed distinctly from one another, with different elements, environmental context and factors of consideration.

Admittedly, there are changes on how the individual things and acts outside prison and how he does inside because of the constraints they experience inside the institution. However, these are not sufficient, neither necessary, to conclude that the individual, upon entry to prison, will have a totally changed perspective as this also means  changing his individuality or everything  that defines his being a he or her being a she.

This paper suggests that prison culture may be considered as a summative account of different elements that all interplay to come up with the culture that then applies in the context of prisons. These elements are segregated based on the perspectives to which they comply, that is, as defined by the different groups of individuals all to be understood as having different interests, beliefs, attitudes, functions and roles to play. In an attempt to provide a more comprehensive, if not holistic, approach to the issue, this paper thus defines prison culture as the sum of the mentalities and ways of the different peoples who are part of the penal institutions. In addition to that, the justice system adopted also influences how this prison culture is structured as this is the legal context by which the factors of prison culture interplay and form a singular cultural identity that applies true for the penal institution
Moreover, individuals who have the experience of living both a community life and a prison life end up dealing with two different cultures  and this necessarily affects how these individuals think and act. Despite a readily admitted gap between these two cultures, there is however strong support to the argument that these two may not be totally distinct at all as the individual who get to be immersed with. In other words, these two cultures may affect each other in ways that may be hard to quantify and qualify, yet nevertheless present.