Introduction In the post-modern and multicultural worlds of criminology and criminal justice characterized by post-structuralism, post-Marxism, post-affirmative action, and post-feminism, the variables of class, race, and gender remain fundamental to both theory and practice. In the process of trying to sort out these differences, virtually every theoretical framework has addressed class and race overtly, and gender at least covertly.
NCSL recognizes that its members have differing views on how to treat cannabis in their states and believes that states and localities should be able to set whatever policies work best to improve the public safety, health, and economic development of their communities.
NCSL believes that federal laws, including the Controlled Substances Act CSAshould be amended to explicitly allow states to set their own cannabis policies without federal interference and urges the administration not to undermine state cannabis policies.
Where states have authorized cannabis production, distribution, and possession by establishing an effective regulatory scheme, the administration should direct federal prosecutors to respect state cannabis laws when exercising discretion around enforcement.
NCSL maintains that the administration should prioritize its enforcement actions against criminal enterprises engaged in cannabis production and sale, and not against citizens who are compliant with state cannabis laws.
Furthermore, NCSL urges Congress to prohibit the administration from using federal funds to enforce the CSA in a manner inconsistent with these enforcement priorities. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine identified challenges and barriers in conducting cannabis research in a report: The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids.
NCSL urges Congress and the administration to address the challenges and barriers identified in this report. NCSL believes that it is especially important that Congress and the administration provide researchers access to cannabis in the quantity, quality, and type necessary to research the health effects of cannabis use and that adequate funding sources are made available to support cannabis and cannabinoid research that explores the health benefits and risks of cannabis use.
Civil Justice The National Conference of State Legislatures recognizes the importance of permitting aggrieved parties to seek full and fair redress pursuant to state law in state courts for physical harm done to them due to the negligence of others.
NCSL also understands the importance of having clear state rules to govern the means and methods by which people can seek such redress. Our American federalism contemplates diversity among the states in establishing these rules and respects the ability of the states to act in their own best interests in matters pertaining to civil liability due to negligence.
NCSL regards the regulation of medical professionals, products, and other civil tort actions as purely state matters, not meriting federal intervention or preemption of state laws.
NCSL maintains that no comprehensive evidence exists demonstrating either that state medical malpractice laws, product liability laws or general tort laws have created a problem of such dimension that a federal solution is warranted or that federal legislation would achieve its stated goals.
NCSL believes that this type of legislation would create serious new problems in the fields of medical malpractice, product liability, and tort law by dictating a single set of rules controlling the timeliness of claims and the admissibility of evidence.
It would conflict with long-standing state laws governing tort liability, workers' compensation and insurance regulations.
By doing so, such proposals would place state legislatures and state courts in an untenable position legally.
Most states have taken up the issues surrounding medical malpractice, product liability and tort reform and continue to handle the issues surrounding the filing and processing of these cases in ways that are consistent with existing state law, giving due consideration to factors that may be unique to a particular state.
Criminal Justice It is the policy of the National Conference of State Legislatures to advance and defend a balanced, dynamic criminal justice partnership between governments at the local, state and federal levels while preserving traditional areas of state authority in this area of the law.
NCSL urges Congress and the Administration to avoid federalizing crime policy and substituting national laws for state and local policy decisions affecting criminal and juvenile justice. Federal jurisdiction should be reserved for areas where a national problem has been identified and states are unable to adequately provide solutions due to scope, or is required to protect federal constitutional rights.
The federal government should partner with states to examine ways to avoid unnecessary preemption of state laws; and should strive to maintain its current financial commitments to existing state-federal partnership programs.
NCSL believes that federal actions must recognize that states and local governments have the predominant responsibility to ensure public safety and the administration of justice, and must adhere to fundamental principles of federalism in all areas of criminal justice, including but not limited to: Improvement of the Structure of State Criminal Justice Systems NCSL urges the federal government to include states in the development stages and on the board of any commissions or task forces that work to improve or review state criminal justice structures.
NCSL insists that the federal government not infringe on the legitimate rights of the states to determine their own criminal laws, but shall include them in the process of working to create better state criminal justice systems overall.
As states strive to improve policies and practices related to criminal justice, NCSL supports direct participation by state policymakers in any federal policy efforts or proposed legislation to redefine how those relationships should be strengthened.
Federal Financial Assistance States continue to improve criminal justice systems and policies, and recognize that federal funding is sometimes necessary to implement state reforms in this area. Funding levels for Department of Justice grants and reimbursements to states should be maintained or increased.
NCSL also supports any other federal grant program that seeks to assist states in addressing state criminal justice issues, such as school violence or opioid abuse reduction.
NCSL opposes the withholding of any federal criminal justice funding as a penalty for state policy choices. NCSL urges the federal government to respect state criminal justice priorities and advance change through partnerships rather than mandates.
Where new federal grant programs to states are created, NCSL maintains that funding should be directed to states rather than pass directly to local governments.
The mandates imposed by this Act are not only preemptive, they are inflexible and in some instances not able to be implemented by states.
States should be permitted to classify and penalize sex offenders, and establish registration and notification requirements in accordance with their own state laws, particularly with respect to juveniles.
States should define and decide which juvenile offenders meet criteria for sex offender registration, and be afforded the flexibility to implement state procedures that best address this population.
The federal government should provide technological support and federal funding assistance to states with regard to sex offender registration and public notice systems, including cooperation with the federal National Sex Offender Public Website NCOPW.
NCSL supports frequent and meaningful communication between the Department of Justice and state policymakers and implementing agencies so that information on procedures that meet or fail to meet federal guidelines and statutory requirements are effectively conveyed to the states.
NCSL calls upon the federal government to exercise the utmost flexibility in determining whether to penalize states that are working in good faith toward compliance with federal law.
States should not be responsible and penalized for absence of compliance by sovereign tribal jurisdictions. Juvenile Justice States must preserve authority to determine which juvenile offenders are treated like adults, under what circumstances, and for how long, with regard to sex offender registration and all other matters of juvenile and criminal justice policy.Cultural concerns and influences raises a lot of attention of the affect it has on justice and the security administration.
In this paper it will first discuss how cultural concerns and influence affect the justice and security administration and its practices. What are some predominant cultural influences that affect the administration of justice and security?
What are the positive and negative effects of these cultural Continue reading "What aspects of cultural diversity should be considered critical knowledge for security managers in a global environment?".
Dec 09, · What are some predominant cultural influences that affect the administration of justice and security? 1 following. 1 answer 1. Report Abuse. We are experiencing some problems, please try again. You can only upload files of type PNG, JPG, or attheheels.com: Resolved. To develop a strategic plan, as a nonaccounting manager, you need to analyze and link management accounting data and performance information with business strategies.
Culture & Science — Cultural Influences and Effects. financial security, and power), metaphysical worldviews (that form the foundation for some criteria used in conceptual evaluation), Some cultural-personal influence is due to a desire for personal consistency between ideas, between actions, and between ideas and actions.
For example. Cultural differences in criminal justice systems also can affect victims, Lyness said. “It might have an impact on how cooperative the victim is,” she said.