August 24, 2009
AG Holder describes his "five principles" for combatting crime
In this new speech delivered today as part of the a White House Conference on Gang Violence Prevention and Crime Control, Attorney General Eric Holder has a lot of interesting old and new things to say about his approach to crime and punishment issues. Here are some highlights from the start of the speech:
You, our mayors and police chiefs in this room, are innovators in the administration of justice. You are the people who work to make changes on the front-lines. You are constantly refining your approach to crime. You know what works, and what doesn’t work, to make our neighborhoods and communities safer. You field-test new strategies and you prove that solutions are possible to some of our most challenging crime problems.
Much of your success is attributable to your sensitivity to the specific needs of the communities you serve, and to your ability to understand what works in a given context. Indeed, crime-fighting is more than anything a local pursuit, and we all know that there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all answer to the problem of crime. What works in Chicago may not work in Bismarck. So why come together in a gathering like this one?
I believe that, ultimately, we cannot get smart on crime in isolation. A rational, data-driven, evidence-based, smart approach to crime — the kind of approach that this Administration is dedicated to pursuing and supporting — must be part of a partnership in public safety. It requires the exchange and evaluation of experiences, and exposure to new ideas. That is what brings us together today.
I want to get us started on the day’s work by noting five principles that have guided my own approach to combating crime in my time as Attorney General and before. 1. Innovate. 2. Devise evidence-based strategies. 3. Show results. 4. Learn from peers. 5. Collaborate.
It is in the spirit of these principles that, for example, I have asked attorneys throughout the Department of Justice to conduct a comprehensive, evidence-based review of federal sentencing and corrections policy. The group is examining the federal sentencing guidelines, the Department’s charging and sentencing advocacy practices, mandatory minimums, crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparities, and other possible racial and ethnic disparities in sentencing. The group is also studying alternatives to incarceration, and strategies that help reduce recidivism when former offenders re-enter society.
In my view, the same principles behind that effort can also guide us in building successful partnerships in public safety.
August 24, 2009 at 11:35 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference AG Holder describes his "five principles" for combatting crime:
Here is something with good evidence. Crime and victimization correlate with bastardy. Illegitimacy accounts for half the variance in rates of violent crime, especially murder and murder victimization.
So, stop the all out lawyer war on family formation, including promotion of gay and all other types of alternative marriage rights, including the logical marriage to animals. Crime may decrease a little with more support for the family, a patriarchal abomination, according to the feminist lawyer. Why does the lawyer want the family gone? Feminism is merely a convenient masking ideology. The lawyer believes in nothing, except one thing. The family must be destroyed because it competes with government for authority. Government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the criminal cult enterprise that is the lawyer profession.
Will that self-evident illegitimacy point ever get recommended by this left wing ideologue and once intelligent lawyer, now mentally crippled by lawyer indoctrination? Never.
Let's guess the result of this deep research he commissioned. Hire more government workers to have more government programs.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Aug 24, 2009 1:14:42 PM
Isn't this the same guy who thinks that federal judges ought to be running police departments?
Posted by: federalist | Aug 24, 2009 2:19:25 PM
A good start would be to decriminalize marijuana.
Posted by: Anon | Aug 24, 2009 5:24:15 PM
Lawyer, Holder, wants to free the drug dealers. He now wants to prosecute our heroes and intelligence officers instead. Their crime? Keeping us safe, and attacking our enemy. This is despite lawyers embedding themselves down to the squad level and canceling field tactical decisions. Holder must be removed from office. After Republicans take back the Congress in 2010, they need to immediately impeach President Obama and to force an immediate and total purge of the disloyal lawyers in policy positions.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Aug 25, 2009 10:30:12 AM
"Let's guess the result of this deep research he commissioned. Hire more government workers to have more government programs."
Sadly one of the very few utterances by SC that is probably correct. This statement may also apply to the "Reform" commission proposed by Sen Jim Webb. Talk it to death, create a larger beaurocracy, and get re-elected because you "tried" to advance reform. What about simply passing some of the pending legislation that will provide immediate results while "studying" long term plans? H.R.1475 and H.R.1529 are two of the best and most human and humane among several.
Not a lawyer, Just an ordinary citizen
Posted by: HadEnough | Aug 25, 2009 10:51:36 AM
The principles seem pretty generic--seems to me they'd be equally applicable to running a law school or sending a man to Mars.
Posted by: Chris | Aug 25, 2009 10:56:30 AM
The reaction to Holder's attack o our heroes has started. Outside of this blog, my views are in the middle of the mainstream. The views of the left wing freaks here are the ones that are way out.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Aug 25, 2009 3:05:03 PM
Motherhood statements that lack clarity.
There’s a call for innovation and devising evidence-based strategies. But if an approach is really innovative, evidence on whether it actually works won’t be available until it’s applied.
(Or is the call for policy proposals to include criteria for testing whether the proposed policy is successful?)
“Show results”! Is this an injunction to score runs on the board, ie to play safe and avoid innovations that could be unsuccessful? Or does it mean to record/propagate results?
And, again, collaboration is often a good thing but it can be a disincentive to radical innovation.
By the way, why learn only from peers? A more useful injunction would be to learn from junior staff and others whose experience tend to be overlooked.
Felix (federal government employee)
Posted by: Felix | Aug 25, 2009 11:03:51 PM
If results are part of the Attorney General’s equation, then the results from the War on Drugs must be a complete shock, or perhaps they haven’t noticed. Because it is truly hard to believe that intelligent educated people could not see, if they looked, at the RESULTS. About 2% of the population had a “drug” problem before our little war. Guess what, just about the same percentage of people are in the same boat. No results there.
More folks have died in this War, than EVER died from drug use. (see LEAP.CC).
Drugs have become stronger, More lethal and More readily available.
85 Billion dollars a year to incarcerate drug offenders.
Children raised with incarcerated parents, because of low level drug charges.
Mistrust and corruption in law enforcement.
Loss of Civil liberties NATION wide.
The federal government pernicious disregard the States right to govern themselves (Federal arrest in California’s legally licensed medical faculties and pillage of legally obtained goods and monies)
11000 People killed since 2008 in Mexico according to the NY Times 12000 according to the POST
LEAP.CC Law Enforcement Against Probation See What ethical Police chiefs, ethical Prosecutors and Judges are saying.
Posted by: mbrizio | Sep 3, 2009 1:35:14 PM