Post

• Domínguez, P., & Raphael, S. (2015). The role of the cost‐of‐crime literature in bridging the gap between social science research and policy making: Potentials and limitations. Criminology & Public Policy, 14(4), 589-632.
• Harvell, S., Welsh-Loveman, J., Love, H., & La Vigne, N. G. (2016). Reforming sentencing and corrections policy: The experience of justice reinvestment initiative states. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
• Lee, H., Cullen, F. T., Burton, A. L., & Burton Jr, V. S. (2020). Millennials as the future of corrections: A generational analysis of public policy opinions. Crime & Delinquency, 00111287211022610.
• Ward, T., Gannon, T. A., & Fortune, C. A. (2015). Restorative justice–Informed moral acquaintance: resolving the dual role problem in correctional and forensic practice. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(1), 45-57.

QUESTION: What general guidelines or strategies exist for effectively sanctioning all who commit crimes, reducing crime and recidivism, and improving justice?

use the above literature to answer question.

The answers to the weekly discussion questions must be substantial, meaning fully answering the question(s) with examples (qualitative) and writing at least 300 words (quantitative). Students are to respond substantively to at least two (2) other students using at least 200 words (excluding references, figures, illustrations, or other extraneous elements outside the main body of the discussion). All answers to the discussion questions and responses to other students are to be supported with at least one scholarly source, in addition to the assigned weekly readings. Each week, the professor may post a follow-up question on your discussion post. If so, you must reply to the professor’s question as one of your two reply posts. Lastly, a question must be posed to the course professor and peer(s) in your initial discussion board post. These responses are due by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. of each week. APA 7th Edition guidelines are to be followed.