Abstract

Across the U.S., policy makers are enacting criminal justice reform while limiting many of those reforms to low-level, non-violent offenders. Given the power the public wields in shaping policy, it is necessary to consider which arguments for reform are most effective and who is viewed as most deserving of those reforms. The current study finds that varying the argument for reform, such as highlighting racial inequities, does not affect support for reform policies, regardless of the type of offender. Additionally, although respondents generally supported reform policies, results revealed significantly less support for implementing those reforms for violent offenders. Finally, findings indicate that individuals who believe violent crime is more of a Black phenomenon are less likely to support reform. These findings demonstrate that, to enact broader reform, it is necessary to address the public’s preexisting opinions about crime more so than debate which rhetorical arguments should be used.

摘要

在美国各地，政策制定者正在实施刑事司法改革，同时将其中许多改革限制在低级别、非暴力的罪犯身上。鉴于公众在制定政策方面的权力，有必要考虑哪些改革论据最有效，以及谁被认为最值得进行这些改革。目前的研究发现，改变改革的论点，例如强调种族不平等，不会影响对改革政策的支持，无论罪犯的类型如何。此外，尽管受访者普遍支持改革政策，但结果显示，对实施这些针对暴力犯罪者的改革的支持要少得多。最后，调查结果表明，认为暴力犯罪更多是黑人现象的人不太可能支持改革。这些发现表明，