Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The effects of abortion on society
Abortions impact on society pros and cons
Negative impact of abortion on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The effects of abortion on society
Freakonomics
“Where Have All the Criminals Gone?” Makalynn Brown
Pols 101
Summary:
Chapter four of Freakonomics starts off by giving background information of the dictator in Romania. Nicolae Ceausescu was the dictator of Romania that made abortion illegal. With this new abortion law Ceausescu wanted to strengthen Romania’s population. Before the abortion law, there were four abortions to every live birth (Levitt and Dubner, 2009). However, women who already had four children and were apart of the communist party were exempt from this law. Within one year of this act the population had doubled. Studies had shown that people who were born after the abortion law would do worse in school, in work, and would sometimes be more likely to become
…show more content…
In the 1990s crime was at an all time high, but suddenly it dropped to an all time low. Experts investigated and found that numerous ideas could have been affecting the decline in crimes. A strong economy, prisons, gun laws, and population to name a few. Levitt and Dubner ask the question, why has crime risen so high in the first place? A strong economy would often be linked to lesser crimes, but studies have shown there is no relation. The biggest link to this is during the 60’s when there was a ton of crime and the economy was high as well. Another false idea of why crimes dropped in the 90s, is the justice system. Criminals were now being convicted for longer sentences. Criminals who would have originally got off the hook for doing drugs were now in prison; many other sentences got increased as well. This lead to more than two million people in prison (Levitt and Dubner, 2009). The increase of punishment for criminals quadrupled between the 80s and 90s (Levitt and Dubner, 2009). The first flaw the authors speak of is that executions are long and drawn out. Death row now only has a 2% execution rate while getting killed by a gang is 7% chance. (Levitt and Dubner, 2009). The second flaw is that capital punishment is more obvious. One criminal getting executed means seven fewer homicides (Levitt and Dubner, …show more content…
Where the authors talked about the Romanian dictator, Nicolae Ceausescu. It was interesting to learn about the different culture of Romania and what exactly went on when Ceausescu was dictator. I also thought it was intriguing reading about how many abortions actually happened in Romania. However, after Roe v. Wade the number of abortions in America was about the same as it was in Romania. A bunch of the facts and statistics that were incorporated throughout the chapter surprised me numerous times. That is one thing that I really enjoyed about this
In The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison by Jeffery Reiman and Paul Leighton, four multifaceted issues are focused on and examined. These issues are the Unites States high crime rates, efforts in explaining the high crime rates, where the high crime rates originally came from, and the success attained at a high price. The initial key issue that Reiman and Leighton discuss is America’s high rising crime rates with the understanding of the people that believe policy and regulations are the causes of the decrease in crime. The many graphs throughout the chapter represent information that undoubtedly illustrates that specific policy and regulation may cause rates to become stagnate or strike a plateau. While the rule makers make it appear as though their organization is functioning. Later guns and gun control policy are discussed. With the stern enforcement of the gun policy, at the time, crime appeared to decline, or become stagnate resulting in a plateau effect that is illustrated in the graphs. Countless arrests were made with large quantities of people being imprisoned. Du...
Summary In chapter one of Freakonomics, the beginning portion of the chapter discusses information and the connection it shares with the Ku Klux Klan and real-estate agents. The Ku Klux Klan was founded right after the Civil War, in order to persecute and subdue the slaves that were newly freed. The popularity of the Klan increased in the early 20th century, around the time of World War I. In the late 19th century, the Klan had only discriminated, persecuted, and subdued Blacks, but in the 20th century they did these things to Blacks, Jews, and Gypsies.
Through the first chapter of this book the focus was primarily on the notion of controlling crime. The best way to describe crime policy used in this chapter is comparing it to a game of ‘heads I win, tails you lose’. This chapter also addresses the causes for decline in America’s
The world is an increasingly tricky, sticky place. Mysteries present themselves every day; and in every way, people are puzzled and intrigued and on the hunt for answers. Steven D. Levitt, co-author of Freakonomics with Stephen J. Dubner, is one such person. Devoting his professional life to cracking the mysteries of seemingly mundane, and sometimes trivial, economic in daily life, Levitt jumps from assumption to decision, connecting dots in sometimes genius, sometimes haphazard, ways, and forming conclusions that occasionally defy conventional thought. Freakanomics gifts readers with several ideas to chew on and challenges deeply rooted thoughts.
This chapter's main idea is that the study of economics is the study of incentives. We find a differentiation between economic incentives, social incentives and moral incentives. Incentives are described in a funny way as "means of urging people to do more of a good thing or less of a bad thing", and in this chapter we find some examples public school teachers in Chicago, sumo wrestling in Japan, take care center in Israel and Paul Feldman's bagel business of how incentives drive people and most of the time the conventional wisdom turns to be "wrong" when incentives are in place.
Throughout history, it has become very clear that the tough on crime model just does not work. As stated by Drago & Galbiati et al. In their article: Prison Conditions and Recidivism, although it is...
Mass incarceration has caused the prison’s populations to increase dramatically. The reason for this increase in population is because of the sentencing policies that put a lot of men and women in prison for an unjust amount of time. The prison population has be caused by periods of high crime rates, by the medias assembly line approach to the production of news stories that bend the truth of the crimes, and by political figures preying on citizens fear. For example, this fear can be seen in “Richard Nixon’s famous campaign call for “law and order” spoke to those fears, hostilities, and racist underpinnings” (Mauer pg. 52). This causes law enforcement to focus on crimes that involve violent crimes/offenders. Such as, gang members, drive by shootings, drug dealers, and serial killers. Instead of our law agencies focusing their attention on the fundamental causes of crime. Such as, why these crimes are committed, the family, and preventive services. These agencies choose to fight crime by establishing a “War On Drugs” and with “Get Tough” sentencing policies. These policies include “three strikes laws, mandatory minimum sentences, and juvenile waives laws which allows kids to be trialed as adults.
Shin, Kilman, Death Penalty and Crime: Empirical Studies; Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Center for Economic Analysis, 1978
Today, half of state prisoners are serving time for nonviolent crimes. Over half of federal prisoners are serving time for drug crimes. Mass incarceration seems to be extremely expensive and a waste of money. It is believed to be a massive failure. Increased punishments and jailing have been declining in effectiveness for more than thirty years. Violent crime rates fell by more than fifty percent between 1991 and 2013, while property crime declined by forty-six percent, according to FBI statistics. Yet between 1990 and 2009, the prison population in the U.S. more than doubled, jumping from 771,243 to over 1.6 million (Nadia Prupis, 2015). While jailing may have at first had a positive result on the crime rate, it has reached a point of being less and less worth all the effort. Income growth and an aging population each had a greater effect on the decline in national crime rates than jailing. Mass incarceration and tough-on-crime policies have had huge social and money-related consequences--from its eighty billion dollars per-year price tag to its many societal costs, including an increased risk of recidivism due to barbarous conditions in prison and a lack of after-release reintegration opportunities. The government needs to rethink their strategy and their policies that are bad
The first three reasons are about mass incarceration, this is how mass incarceration just doesn’t work. While crime has fallen during the 1980’s, mass incarceration has had nothing to do with it. Its actually had zero effect on crime since the 2000s.
Abortion is arguably the most controversial topic in all the issues revolving around reproduction. Women of all different races, classes, and religions have been practicing abortion since before the colonial era in America. The laws pertaining to abortion have changed many times, adding and removing discrepancies and stipulations throughout many years, and still to this day. The views of abortion in society during different time periods have also changed and adapted. At the time of Sarah Grosvenor’s decision to abort, the laws pertaining to abortion did not make the act fully illegal. However in years after Grosvenor’s case abortion was outlawed. The law played a minor part in women’s decisions to have an abortion, however society, and gender played the most prominent role in the decision of abortion.
Crime is an extremely prominent part of American society. Recorded activity within the US saw 10,329,135 (1,246,248 violent crimes and 9,082,887 property crimes) crimes perpetrated with 62.5% of all violent crimes pertained to aggravated assault and 68.2% of all property crimes were considered larceny-theft in 2010. (FBI.2011) Despite the large number of crimes the United States also has the largest number of incarcerated citizens per capita in the world with nearly a quarter of the world’s prisoners coming from the United States’ 5% of the world population. This is due to much harder punishments in the US than those that are given a shorter longer period of incarceration or merely fined in other countries.(Liptak 2008) Due to the prevalence of crime in the US, economists have used models to explain the behavior and ramifications of government actions and the motivations behind crime and its effect on society that psychologists and sociologists are usually unable to address.
Choice, what is choice? Choice is the right, power, or opportunity to choose. Everybody in society has a choice and these choices have many outcomes. A woman’s right to choose to have an abortion or not, is her fundamental right. If society outlaws abortion, society is interfering with the woman’s right to make decisions related to her own body. Many theorists believe that sexuality is what divides women from men and makes women less valuable than men; keeping this concept in mind it can be said that gender plays an immense role in social inequality. In one of Thomas Jefferson’s speeches, he explains how we should never put at risk our rights because our freedom can be next. (lp. org 2007) Roe.V .Wade is believed to have been the United States Supreme Court’s decision that resulted in the dawn of the abortion controversy between pro-choice and pro-life advocates, and whether what the woman is carrying is simply just a fetus or a life, the debate is endless. The social-conflict theory reflects the inequality women face regarding abortion in society which brings about a negative change. If a woman’s right to choose would be taken from her then this would cause social inequity. Taking a women’s right to choose would mean taking her freedom and taking freedom away from any human being would imply inequality.
Throughout the United States violent crime has been a persistent problem that state governments are constantly trying to contain, if not eliminate. When a crime arises to the severity of the death penalty many times people instantly jump to the support of pro capital punishment , thinking that the accused should be put to death for killing another person. Currently updated as of 2011, there are 34 death penalty states and 16 states that have abolished the death penalty. In deed, very few issues are as polarizing as that of capital punishment. Support for the death penalty crosses all lines of race, socio-economic status, and religion. Given the right climate and circumstances, anybody can be quick to judge, convict, and condemn. Aside from the vengeful feeling of ‘an eye for an eye’, people are in favor of the death penalty because they feel it deters criminals and its less taxing on our penal system. However, what they fail to realize is that the death penalty has not been found to do either of those things, in fact, states without the death penalty have had consistently lower crime rates. Likewise, people are not correctly aware of what the results of the death penalty have really produced, or that life in prison without parole has been proven to be the more effective and economical path to go. The death penalty has proven to be more costly and a failure as a deterrent to crime.
Jacoby believes the death penalty protects society by threatening future murders with fear. Gaes believes the death penalty is necessary because the overpopulation in prisons causes emotional and physical distress. The stronger side of the debate seems to be that the death penalty does not discourage crime at all nor does it help the victim’s family heal. It would be useful to know whether or not death-penalty states as a whole have lower rates of crime than non-death penalty states when arguing for the death penalty.