AT PRESENT, THE CRIMINAL APPREHENSION, TRIAL, AND PUNISHMENT SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES IS CAUGHT IN A DEBATE BETWEEN LIBERALS, WHO FEEL THAT FIRST OFFENDERS SHOULD RECEIVE MINIMAL CONTACT WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM LEST THEY BE FORCED INTO A LIFE OF CRIME, AND THOSE WHO FEEL THAT SWIFT AND JUST RETRIBUTION IS ESSENTIAL TO CRIME DETERRENCE. LACK OF PHYSICAL FACILITIES ALSO HAMPERS THE SYSTEM. PRESENT FACILITIES ARE TOO LARGE TO BE SAFE. TO OFFER ANY ATTEMPT AT JUSTICE, MANY SMALL FACILITIES, EACH DESIGNED TO HOUSE CERTAIN TYPES OF OFFENDERS, ARE NEEDED. CITIZENS ARE NOT OPPOSED TO BUILDING PRISONS: THEY ARE OPPOSED TO SPENDING ANY MORE TAX MONEY ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. JUDGES AND THOSE IN AUTHORITY ALSO HINDER REFORM BECAUSE THEIR ATTITUDES TEND TO BE TRADITIONAL. AS ONE MONITORS CONTEMPORARY DISCUSSIONS OF PUNISHMENT, ONE IS STRUCK BY THE EXTENT TO WHICH SCHOLARS, PUBLIC OFFICIALS, POLICE, AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICIALS ARE MOVING INTO AGREEMENT, WHILE LARGE SEGMENTS OF THE LAW PROFESSION AND THE BENCH ARE ABSENT FROM THE CONSENSUS. THESE INTELLECTUAL AND POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS HELP EXPLAIN WHY, IN A NATION BESET WITH CRIME IN WHICH A DOMINANT CONCERN OF THE MAJORITY OF CITIZENS IS FEAR OF VICTIMIZATION, LITTLE HAPPENS THAT MIGHT AFFECT CRIME RATES OR AT LEAST SATISFY THE POPULAR DESIRE FOR JUSTICE.