Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
You are here: HomeEssaySocial Sciences
Pages:
25 pages/≈6875 words
Sources:
Level:
APA
Subject:
Social Sciences
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 39.95
Topic:

Racial Bias in Drug related Arrests in Tennesse (Essay Sample)

Instructions:

enior Capstone Research Project Title of Research Name: Major: Mentor: Instructor: spring 2014 Background Introduction Problem Significance Need Purpose Theory Explain the theory, using author and date. Tell how this theory is related to your research. {USE THECONFLICT THEORY} Research Methods Research Design Independent and Dependent Variables Unit of Analysis Hypothesis: H1 Ho How collected data: Survey Method Secondary Data Focused Group Sample Size Research Question: Strengths and limitations Using method to collect data and limitations you may have had to do this study. Results (slides to support findings) 35 -r--------------------------------------•------•--------------------------------------------••--------------- 30--------------•----------- •----------------•--------•----------------- 25 --------------------•------•------------•---------------------• 20 -!--•--------- ••-----•---------------- 15 •-------••------•----••--•-----------••---- 10 -+. ------------------•---•-•------- 5 --1-.---__ _.. _ Conclusions Reject or fail to reject null hypothesis TABLE OF CONTENT I. Chapter 1 a. Introduction 1 PAGE b. Statement of problem 5 PAGES c. Significant of the study. d. Need for the study. e. Purpose of study f. Operational definitions. II.Chapter II -Review of Literature a. Introduction/Background about the overall topic. b. Discuss background on Independent Variable c. Discuss background on Dependent Variable d. Discuss the relationship between Independent and Dependent variables. e. Discuss the major theory and how the theory is related to Independent and dependent variable. III. Chapter III Research Methodology a. Research Question b. Research design — constructs included data collected/Qualitative or Quantitative kind of research. c. Selection of participants d. Procedure used to gather data. e. Instruments used to collect data f. Demographics collected g. Assumptions about the kind of research project. (Use information from research books). h. How was the data analyzed? IV.Chapter IV/Results Theories used to analyze a. Brief statement about what was done in this research project. b. Report on demographic data. c. Results from the survey. V.Chapter V/ Discussion, recommendation for next steps/replications, Conclusion a. Discussion — Briefly discuss the purpose of the paper. b. Discuss what was similar or different between results found in this research and what was presented in the literature. Compare, contrast, and discuss why data were similar of different? c. Recommendations- what advice would be given to others researching this project? Strength or weakness of the research instruments, data collection, individuals used in the study. d. What is the implication for the discipline/major? e. Conclusion summarize what was done, how was done, and findings. VI.References Abstract This is a 6-7-sentence summary of your study with details about the significance of the study, the method, the sample characteristics and findings/results.150- 250 words Xxxx xx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx x xxx xxxxx xx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxx x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx xxx xxx xxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Xxxxx xx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx x xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx. Chapter I (Fourth line) Introduction (fifth line) (Space here) Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxmxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxmxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxv(xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Xxx, 1999; Xxxxxx, 1999; Xxxxxxxxxxxx, 2001; Xxx & Xxxx, eds. 2002). Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Xxxx1989). Xx xxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. 1 Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxmxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxmocxxxxxxxxxxvocxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Xxxxxx, 2007). XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX7OCXXVOCXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.XXXXXX xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxx (Xxx, 2003; Xxxxxx, 2005; Xxxxxxxxxx, 2006). Xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xx xxx xxxxxxx x xxx xxxx xxxxxx. xxxxxxx x xx xxx xxxxx xxxxxx xxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. X xxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx x xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxx xxx x xx xxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Statement of the problem XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX Significance of the Study XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX 1 Need for the Study XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXVCX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX Purpose of the Study, including research question(s) XXXXXVOCXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX (Last Part of your argument) The research question is: What is the advantage of using hand sanitizer over washing hands with soap? The independent variable is XXXX, and the dependent variable is XXX. Chapter II Literature Review The first paragraph of the literature review tells how this chapter is organized. There should be no sub-titles or headings. The last paragraph should provide the rationale for your study\'s sample, unit of analysis, and data collection technique based on the literature review discussions. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx x xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Xxx, 2003; Xxxxxx 2005; Xxxxxxxxxx 2006). Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xx. Xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxx (Xxxxxx 2005; Xxxxxxxxxx 2006). Xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx x xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Xxxx (2005) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx. Conclusion Chapter III Methodology The purpose of this research is to examine the research question: 1.What is the advantage of using hand sanitizer over washing hands with soap? 2.XXXXX The independent variable is XXXX, and the dependent variable is XXX, and the unit of analysis is XXXX. Xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Conclusion Chapter IV Results Xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Table 1. Comparison of Capstone students\' submitted work, by major MAJOR File folder 10 E-Mails Acceptable Progress Report CRJS 2 1 1 HIST 2 2 2 POLS 2 1 0 SOWK 2 2 1 Do not repeat in the text what is in the table. However you may indicate what the table contents mean or their relationship to the issue being discussed. Chapter V Discussion, Conclusion, and Recommendations

source..
Content:

Racial Bias in Drug related Arrests in Tennesse
Name
Institution
Abstract
Objective: to establish the linkage between racial bias and racial attitudes towards drug-related arrests by law enforcers in Tennessee.
Design: The study used an exploratory survey design where qualitative or quantitative methods were used depending on the appropriate situation.
Setting: local community and criminal justice arena.
Patients: The study was conducted at University College from which a list of 1000 students was randomly generated from the university’s admission’s office. From the sampling list 133 students were selected for interview.
Main Outcomes Measures: They are: independent variable (racial bias) and the dependent variable (cocaine related arrests); this study seeks to establish correlations, linkages and consistency of scholarly literature on the two variables.
Results: There was a total population of 133 respondents who participated in the college survey held in Tennesse. There were 71% of whites and 29% of non-whites represented by blacks and Hispanics who participated in the survey. Most respondents confirmed that racial bias was correlated to drug-related arrests in Tennesse. Racial bias and stereo-types predicted attitudes towards cocaine related arrests in Tennesse. Stereotypes and beliefs systems among respondents further confirmed held that minority groups and law enforcement agents were biased in implementing the law based on their perceptions and biases towards other races.
Conclusion: Key findings indicated that racial bias was correlated to drug-related arrests in Tennessee. The study’s main recommendation is that there is need to change policy from its punitive nature to rehabilitative and accommodative form; to address attitudes, racial differences and media framing that shapes reality around nonwhites and whites in Tennessee.
Chapter One: Introduction
The major aim of the study is to find the linkage between racial bias and racial attitudes towards drug related arrests. Study objectives have been identified to be: understanding the extent of racial biases in the Tennesse in the criminal justice processes and to determine whether negative racial attitudes influenced drug related arrests in Tennesse state. Key variables have been identified as racial bias and drug related arrests.
This study adopts the conflict theory. Conflict theorists’ perception of society is one where there are two opposites that differ and conflict with each other on values. The two groups comprise of those that are powerful and less powerful (Sampson & Lauritsen, 1997). The study has explored the criminal justice system in Tennesse and the level of imperfections that exists between whites and non-whites.
1.1 Background
Going by the federal survey data in the US, it is clear that since the 1990s, African Americans (Blacks), Whites, Hispanics and other colored people consumed drugs at the same rate based on the proportion of their population (Garland & Bumphus, 2012). It is also documented that in some individual states, blacks and colored people have been convicted at higher rates ranging from 80% - 90% of prison admissions as compared to whites (Garland & Bumphus, 2012). Studies have therefore demonstrated that blacks and other minority groups were being arrested on drug charges at high rates as compared to their drug use. Drug related arrests of black and other colored people were also high compared to arrests of whites in according to their proportion (Garland & Bumphus, 2012).
According to Human Rights Watch report of 2000, the war on drugs declared in the 1980s resulted in an increase in arrest rates for drug offenders as well as an increase in racial discrimination among arrestees (Human Rights Watch, 2000). In this drug war, blacks and other minority races were more likely to be arrested as compared to whites (Human Rights Watch, 2000). Going by research, literature of 1970s, which shaped the public policy and opinion about blacks, it indicated that blacks were twice likely to be arrested for drug related offenses (Garland & Bumphus, 2012). The legal framework that ensued in 1988 was shaped by media hype on drug offenders. The criminal justice system and policy makers led by the political class resulted into punitive justice processes. The criminal justice system is portrayed as racially based through every step taken during the prosecution process. The policy and prosecution processes in the long run targeted traffickers and kingpins which later on trickled down to minor offenders in the inner city involved in selling and possession of the drugs (HRW, 2000).
The U.S Sentencing Commission (2000) outlined the type of racial disparities that existed among whites and non-coloreds. From 1993 to date, there has been a gradual decrease from 30% to 23% in the proportion of whites involved drug offences (Garland & Bumphus, 2012). At the same period, Hispanics increased their involvement in drug offending from 33% to 39% (Garland & Bumphus, 2012). According to the statistics, blacks were more likely to receive increased mandatory minimum penalties as compared to other races (Garland & Bumphus, 2012).
Studies show that economic status of blacks played to their disadvantage (Beckett, 2005). The issue of differential access to private space explained some of the racial disparities. Based on perceptions and held biases about the blacks and coloreds, the justice systems focused on the inner city heavily populated by blacks or Hispanics than white dominated middle class neighborhoods for drug arrests (Beckett, 2005). Studies have consistently confirmed that racial disparities have been attributed to racial inequalities (Currie, 1993). Low status races were more likely to live in inner city neighborhoods normally targeted by the criminal justice system (Blumstein, 1993, Coker, 2003 and Goode, 2002). This explains why inner city areas are likely to experience public drug use and dealings in the public places as compared to private spaces where such deals occur more discretely to known people. Drug dealings in open and public places are characterized by small transactions that are frequent and sold to strangers. This makes them an easy target by the police and criminal justice system, explaining why there have been heightened arrests (Beckett, 2005).
Another explanation for increased black arrests is attributed to sub-conscious racial bias by the police (Alexander, 2010). Various policy and tactical changes brought about by policy makers tactfully influenced the police and other criminal justice processes concerning drug arrests. There are still more stereotypes that link African-American minorities to illicit drugs use and offending in America (Devine, 1989; Provine, 2007).
From the fore going discussion, it has been shown that Tennesse state still experiences the same racial biases on drug arrests. Research in the state is congruent to the fact that the criminal justice system still undergoes some racially-related biases on drug use (Provine, 2007). Just like other states in the USA, it is imperative to understand the extent of racial biases in the Tennesse in the criminal justice processes that are cocaine-related. It will also be prudent to understand the nature of racially related biases based on drug use (cocaine) and offences in Tennesse. This study seeks to investigate the premise that racial bias existed in cocaine related arrests in Tennesse. The drug under investigation shall be cocaine, meaning the extent of cocaine related arrests will be examined.
1.2 The Statement of the Problem
Studies have been consistent from various scholars and institutions in confirming that racial bias resulted in adoption of punitive policies that were harsher to minority groups (HRW, 2000). Human rights Report asserts that blacks were more likely to be arrested for drug related offences than whites or Hispanics (HRW, 2000). Furthermore, drug related arrests among blacks and other minority groups were being arrested at higher rates as compared to whites and drug usage (Justice Quarterly, 2013). However, the studies do not address to what extent this racial biases have taken root in Tenesse based on cocaine-related use. The major purpose of the study is to find the linkage between racial bias and racial attitudes towards drug related arrests in Tennesse state. The focus of the research shall be on cocaine use in Tennesse.
The study also seeks to determine racial differences that exist among various racial groups in relation to drug related arrests. Studies demonstrate that various status levels exist in communities. There are for instance inner cities and middle level cities with differing sub-cultures towards drug offending. These racial differences will form the subject of study to examine the extent of imperfections among various racial groups in Tennesse. The US sentencing commission found out for instance that blacks were much more likely to receive mandatory minimum penalties than whites and Hispanics (US Sentencing Commission, 2000). The concern in the study is to determine what differences exist and how they relate to drug (cocaine) arrests in Tennesse. The study seeks to establish correlations between racial bias and racial differences among racial groups on drug (cocaine) related arrests.
Another purpose of this study is to find out whether racial attitudes influence racial bias towards criminal justice policies in Tennesse. As noted by Cochran & Chamlin (2006), an enduring racial divide existed within the criminal justice system. Their findings in US indicated that public perceptions toward the criminal justice system and policies among whites favored harsher penalties such as death penalty and longer prison sentences for drug related crimes (Cochran & Chamlin, 2006). This study seeks to sub...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Other Topics:

Need a Custom Essay Written?
First time 15% Discount!