Myths and counterproductive policies abound. Nevertheless, most ACJS members seem content to debate among themselves at meetings and publish research findings in journals that are rarely read by anyone outside academic institutions. As a result, the criminal justice policy agenda has been shaped by politicians, criminal justice officials, and other interest groups that act on the basis of narrow personal or bureaucratic interests and reflect an ahistorical, atheoretical, provincial, and crisis-management approach to problems. Three policies that are clearly counterproductive and even disastrous are the war on drugs, the prison construction movement, and capital punishment. Academic criminal justice has much to offer in policymaking, but academicians must recognize that some of the research is less valid or comprehensive than it could be and needs to include female, minority, and lower-class perspectives. ACJS members must consider their future approaches and consider new approaches to achieving greater influence in criminal justice policymaking. 27 references and 1 case citation