This effort was initiated by the Crime Policy Project, whose researchers have concluded that the guiding principle of crime policy in California should be the minimization of harm. All four of the principal papers speak to the need for rational public policy and the need to address citizen concerns. Zimring and Hawkins argue that criminal justice resources should be directed toward violent crime, because that is the real source of citizen concern, even if the citizens themselves displace that concern to other areas. Greenwood maintains that policy makers should focus on prevention programs that are directed at potentially violent individuals and that produce reasonably fast results. Petersilia argues that alternative sanctions should be explored only for those offenders who have not committed violent crimes that anger citizens, and that even these offenders must be subjected to a regime that citizens regard as punitive. Skolnick advises that the harm caused by drugs is best minimized in the short run through treatment programs and nonpunitive approaches such as methadone maintenance and drug courts, not by a war on drugs and the large-scale imprisonment of the enemy. The papers suggest a policy that represents a compromise between the best current research and citizens' concerns. Research suggests that prevention is generally more effective than punishment, that alternative modes of punishment are generally more effective than incarceration, and that mild sanctions or treatment for drug offenders are more effective than harsh punishment. Such policies, however, must convince the public that they are safer due to the policies. Five suggestions for further reading