Connecticut Poison Control Center. 2002 and 2003 Annual Report and Poison Exposure Statistics

The Connecticut Poison Control Center (CPCC) at the University of Connecticut Health Center (UCHC) was established in 1957 under Connecticut General Statute 10a- 132. The CPCC’s main responsibility is to provide 24-hour emergency toxicology management consultations for victims of poisoning, and serve as a source for pharmacology and toxicology-related information. The center monitors the epidemiology of human poisoning and provides surveillance for environmental and occupational chemical exposures, drug abuse, and pharmaceutical interactions and adverse effects. The CPCC performs toxicological research, and provides formal toxicology instruction for allied health professionals, as well as professional and consumer poison prevention education. The CPCC is one of 63 nationwide centers certified by the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC), and the only poison center in the state of Connecticut. The AAPCC establishes standards of care for poisoning and administers the Toxic Exposure Surveillance System (TESS), a national database of poisoning statistics, to which the CPCC is a contributor.

Criminal Solicitation, Entrapment, and the Enforcement of Law

This paper examines the optimal use of criminal solicitation as a law enforcement strategy. The benefits are greater deterrence of crime (due to the greater likelihood of apprehension), and the savings in social harm as some offenders are diverted away from committing actual crimes through solicitation. The costs are the expense of hiring undercover cops and the greater likelihood of punishment. The optimal use of solicitation balances these factors. The paper also examines the justification for the entrapment defense, which exonerates those caught in a criminal solicitation but who otherwise had no predisposition to commit a crime.

Credible Criminal Enforcement

Economic models of crime and punishment implicitly assume that the government can credibly commit to the fines, sentences, and apprehension rates it has chosen. We study the government's problem when credibility is an issue. We find that several of the standard predictions of the economic model of crime and punishment are robust to commitment, but that credibility may in some cases result in lower apprehension rates, and hence a higher crime rate, compared to the static version of the model.

Criminal Solicitation, Entrapment, and the Enforcement of Law

This paper examines the optimal use of criminal solicitation as a law enforcement strategy. The benefits are greater deterrence of crime (due to the greater likelihood of apprehension), and the savings in social harm and apprehension costs as some offenders are diverted away from committing actual crimes through solicitation. The costs are the expense of hiring undercover cops and the greater likelihood of punishment. The optimal use of solicitation balances these factors. The paper also examines the justification for, and impact of, the entrapment defense, which exonerates those caught in a solicitation but otherwise not predisposed to commit a crime.

Deterrence and Incapacitation: Towards a Unified Theory of Criminal Punishment

Economic models of crime have focused primarily on the goal of deterrence; the goal of incapacitation has received much less attention. This paper adapts the standard deterrence model to incorporate incapacitation. When prison only is used, incapacitation can result in a longer or a shorter optimal prison term compared to the deterrence-only model. It is longer if there is underdeterrence, and shorter if there is overdeterrence. In contrast, when a fine is available and it is not constrained by the offender's wealth, the optimal prison term is zero. Since the fine achieves first-best deterrence, only efficient crimes are committed and hence, there is no gain from incapacitation.