Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorPötzsch, Holger
dc.contributor.authorBurian, Matthew Stephen
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-10T08:18:15Z
dc.date.available2018-07-10T08:18:15Z
dc.date.issued2018-05-15
dc.description.abstractThis thesis is an analysis of the competing discursive constructions of policing, race, and criminal justice in the United States. I identify two main competing discourses active in this field, a Liberal Individualist Discourse, and a Social Collectivist Discourse. I explore the way these two discourses construct the three areas in focus and argue that the Liberal Individualist Discourse has led to the implementation of ineffective and counterproductive public safety policies and masks systemic abuses and biases. Using data gathered from interviews with police officers and their critics, I analyze how different parties discursively construct three different areas. First, I look at discursive explanations for the causes of crime and analyze how these explanations position police officers and policymakers to implement certain strategies to prevent crime. The Liberal Discourse constructs crime as the result of rational choices, and positions policymakers to implement deterrence strategies of crime control, while the Social Discourse constructs crime as the result of societal failures and a lack of social programs. Second, I look at how the role of race, bias, and racism in the criminal justice system and U.S. society in general is defined and what explanation this definition provides for the overrepresentation of Black Americans in arrests, prisons, and police shootings. The Liberal Discourse disconnects individuals from race though a discourse of colorblind individualism, masking individual and systemic biases. In contrast, the Social Discourse defines race as a relevant social category that affects an individual’s life. Finally, I look at how different actors frame police conduct and interactions between police and the community, focusing on when and why police use lethal force, and how they are (or are not) held accountable for unnecessary uses of lethal force. The Liberal Discourse frames the use of lethal force as rare, usually justified events and constructs the criminal justice system as able to impartially dispense justice on these matters. The Social Discourse frames police use of lethal force as rampant and brutal, and highlights biases in the criminal justice system that make holding police officers accountable for misconduct difficult, if not impossible.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/13193
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherUiT Norges arktiske universiteten_US
dc.publisherUiT The Arctic University of Norwayen_US
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2018 The Author(s)
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0en_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)en_US
dc.subject.courseIDSVF-3901
dc.subjectDiscourse Analysisen_US
dc.subjectCriminal Justiceen_US
dc.subjectPolicingen_US
dc.subjectRaceen_US
dc.subjectVDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200::Statsvitenskap og organisasjonsteori: 240::Internasjonal politikk: 243en_US
dc.subjectVDP::Social science: 200::Political science and organizational theory: 240::International politics: 243en_US
dc.titlePerspectives of Policing: An Analysis of the Discursive Constructions of Policing, Race, and Criminal Justice in the United Statesen_US
dc.typeMaster thesisen_US
dc.typeMastergradsoppgaveen_US


File(s) in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)