Abstract
Prominent sociologists and criminologists have not accorded the respect that criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) deserves. They have questioned CCJ’s standing as an autonomous discipline; they have criticized CCJ for its lack of a “common conceptual language,” a “core theoretical tradition,” and a “methodological commitment.” Consequently, criminologists and criminal justice scholars have been warned not to stray too far from their sociological roots. This condition leads to the following question: are there new ideas about crime and justice that are contained in the annual addresses of ACJS presidents? This article examines the addresses delivered by the presidents of ACJS. The findings indicate that three key domains of reflections can be discerned in the ACJS presidential addresses: (1) legitimacy through accreditation; (2) policy irrelevance as a prelude to public criminology; and (3) visions of justice. The three findings are compared and contrasted with the core themes found in a prior study of ASC presidential addresses.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
