Policing and Imprisonment

Engineering notes

Key topics: autonomous driving. See the paper for implementation details and experimental results.

Chinese explanation / 中文解读

中文解读待补充：本站会优先为端到端自动驾驶、BEV感知、3D目标检测、轨迹预测、路径规划、LiDAR感知等高价值论文补充中文说明。

Original abstract

Observed racial disparities in criminal justice outcomes are increasingly understood as being driven primarily by structural or systemic mechanisms. In this framework, the existence of any hierarchies of power, authority, or influence that correlate with racial or ethnic groups implies racial injustice at face value. Hence, alternative analytical frameworks regarding the descriptive diagnoses for the causes of racial disparities, replete with practical oppositions to certain political reforms, are both viewed as culpable at worst, or complicit at best, regarding racial injustice. Is such a critique of liberalism warranted? In short, no. This chapter defends classical liberalism against such criticisms by first surveying the long-standing attention paid by classical liberal scholars to the focused topics of policing and imprisonment. Second, classical liberalism represents an alternative descriptive and prescriptive framework regarding the institutional dynamics of the American criminal justice system and racial disparity therein. The prescriptive disagreements regarding criminal justice reforms stem more foundationally from divergent descriptive beliefs about the positive character of society, the cause and effect relationships therein, the evidentiary burdens required to prove causation, the practical viability of different reform efforts, and the moral culpabilities and responsibilities associated with all of the above.

Links and sources

• PDF from original source

Comments