Build a Criminal Justice Policy for Terrorism

LaFree, Gary; Hendrickson, James C.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00471.x

Cited by 24 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…62-63). In this vein, the criminologists LaFree & Hendrickson (2007) note that ''The supreme penalty-execution-is used rarely in criminal justice, even in democracies such as the United States that have not banned its use'' (p. 9). In contrast, the killing of innocents in war is seen as inevitable and morally acceptable, even if sad and regrettable.…”

Section: Minimization Of Costly Mistakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Should This Fight Be Called?

Kruglanski

Crenshaw

Post

et al. 2007

Psychol Sci Public Interest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY-This monograph examines from a psychological perspective the use of metaphors in framing counterterrorism. Four major counterterrorism metaphors are considered, namely those of war, law enforcement, containment of a social epidemic, and a process of prejudice reduction.The war metaphor is as follows: Wars are fought by states; the enemy is thus an identifiable entity whose interests fundamentally oppose your own. The conflict is zero-sum-the outcome will be victory for one side or the other-and there is no compromise. The war metaphor is totalistic and extreme. Arguably, it was adopted in light of the immensity of damage and national hurt produced by the 9/11 attack. It has insinuated itself into the public discourse about counterterrorism, and it has guided policy, but it has also met challenges because of lack of fit and the availability of counteranalogies with different lessons of history.Some of the drawbacks of the war metaphor are addressable in the law enforcement metaphor of counterterrorism. Unlike war's special status and circumscribed duration, law enforcement is an ongoing concern that must compete for resources with other societal needs. A major advantage of law enforcement over warfare is its focused nature-targeting the actual terrorists, with less likelihood of injuring innocent parties. Yet despite its advantages, the law enforcement metaphor exhibits a partial mismatch with the realities of terrorism. Its complete and uncritical adoption may temporarily hamper terrorists' ability to launch attacks without substantially altering their motivation to do so.The public health epidemiological model was usefully applied to the epidemic of terror that followed the 9/11 attacks. It utilizes a partition between (a) an external agent, (b) a susceptible host, (c) an environment that brings them together, and (d) the vector that enables transmission of the disease. In the specific application to jihadist terrorism, the agent refers to the militant Islamist ideology, the susceptible host refers to radicalizable Muslim populations, the environment refers to conditions that promote the readiness to embrace such ideology, and the vectors are conduits whereby the ideology is propagated. The epidemiological metaphor has its own advantages over the war and law enforcement metaphors, but also limitations. Whereas the latter metaphors neglect the long-range process of ideological conversion and radicalization that creates terrorists, the epidemiological metaphor neglects the ''here and now'' of counterterrorism and the value of resolute strikes and intelligence-gathering activities needed to counter terrorists' concrete schemes and capabilities.Framing counterterrorism as the process of prejudice reduction addresses the interaction between two communities whose conflict may breed terrorism. This framing shifts the focus from a unilateral to a bilateral concern and acknowledges the contribution to intergroup tensions that the party targeted by terrorists may make. A major tool of prejudice reduction is the c...

show abstract

Section: Minimization Of Costly Mistakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Should This Fight Be Called?

Kruglanski

Crenshaw

Post

et al. 2007

Psychol Sci Public Interest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…as former attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach explained, "You are meant to win wars, and the War on crime was in a sense an unwinnable war." Similar arguments have been voiced in terms of the war metaphor applied to drugs (Robinson and Scherlen, 2007) and terrorism (laFree and Hendrickson, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 61%

“…First, in all three cases, law enforcement is a necessary but not a sufficient solution. although this argument has probably been the most controversial for the war on terrorism (laFree and Hendrickson, 2007), it seems fair to conclude that most commentators now imagine at least some role for law enforcement in preventing terrorism and responding to terrorist attacks. Second, in all three cases, much evidence suggests that taking a tough stand and attacking the problem aggressively does not always produce desired results.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Criminology's third war

LaFree¹

2009

Criminology & Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This division is also reflected in policymaking (i.e., in counterterrorism strategies). 10 In these approaches, preventing terrorism and focusing preparations through different situational definitions of threat is the task for national governments and their security authorities. Hence, several studies in this particular literature are focused on how different properties of the terrorism phenomenon might feed into counterterrorism policy.…”

Section: Understanding the Swedish Policy Context: Prevention And Mitmentioning

confidence: 99%