NCJ Number
192322
Journal
Law & Society Review Volume: 35 Issue: 1 Dated: 2001 Pages: 165-190
Date Published
2001
Length
26 pages
Annotation
This article presents the methodology and findings of a field experiment that examined whether residents of four States with differing criminal laws on some aspect of behavior hold views of that behavior commensurate with the law in their State of residence.
Abstract
Criminal legal codes draw clear lines between permissible and illegal conduct, and the criminal justice system counts on people knowing these lines and governing their conduct accordingly. This is the "ex ante" function of the law; lines are drawn, and because citizens fear punishments or believe in the moral validity of the legal codes, they do not cross these lines; however, is it in fact true that people in various jurisdictions know the lines that legal codes draw in their jurisdictions? Because several States have adopted laws that deviate from other State laws, this permits a field experiment that can address this question. Residents (n=203) of Wisconsin, Texas, North Dakota, and South Dakota were selected for this study. All subjects were employed by their State university system. They were selected because they represented a relatively diverse population in terms of occupation, income, and education. Participants read four short vignettes that described potentially illegal behaviors. For each participant, one of the vignettes corresponded to a law that was particular to his/her State. The laws involved pertained to the duty to assist a person in trouble, the duty to retreat from a threat prior to using deadly force in self-defense, the legal obligation to report a known felon, and the use of deadly force to protect property. Path analyses using structural equation modeling suggests that people make guesses about what their State law holds by extrapolating from their personal view of whether or not the act in question ought to be criminalized. 1 table, 4 figures, and 20 references