This article is focused on exploring the practical implications of applying Pepinsky and Quinney’s (1991) theory of ‘peacemaking criminology’ to criminal justice policies. Peacemaking criminology is a perspective on crime that suggests that alternative methods can be used to create peaceful solutions to crime. Peacemaking criminology can be implemented in society to reduce the amount of violence in the criminal justice field, and I argue that this perspective on crime can improve the administration of equitable justice more so than the current approach. The implementation of peacemaking criminology would be a radically different approach than current practices and methods of policing and the judicial process. The underlying goal of peacemaking criminology is to use a non-violent approach to solving crime. The uniqueness of peacemaking criminology and its lack of use within the administration of justice leave many within the criminal justice field skeptical of its efficacy. This article will explicate those features of peacemaking criminology that are criticized or supported by criminologists in the field today. Focusing on these critiques of this perspective on crime, I will attempt to demonstrate how peacemaking criminology can be used to address issues of domestic violence, mandatory arrest policies and community policing. Of these three issues, the examples illustrated in this paper are intended to demonstrate how the implementation of peacemaking criminology can create a more effective criminal justice system in America.
Undergraduate Review, 5, 78-83.
Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/undergrad_rev/vol5/iss1/16
Articles published in The Undergraduate Review are the property of the individual contributors and may not be reprinted, reformatted, repurposed or duplicated, without the contributor’s consent.