1. There are a couple of differences and similarities between the classical and biological theories of criminology. The biological theories of crime support the idea that an individual commits a crime due to their biological make-up and had criminal tendencies because of certain abnormalities that an individual may have had and not because the offender in their right mind chose to commit the crime.
The classical theory has the belief that every individual has their own right in the way in which they act upon, so they commit a crime because they choose to do so, not because it is in their biological make-up. Furthermore, the Classical theory ignores the possibility of an individual’s biological make-up, it places the entire responsibility on
…show more content…
This system, therefore, had two effects. In my opinion, Right and wrong are inherited in the nature of things, and people cannot deny that. The punishment must be proportional to the crime. There should be as few laws as possible. With neoclassical criminology, people are to be protected from actions that would kill them an in my opinion it is not just.
2. When looking at the labeling theory, those who are deviant get labeled which unfortunately results in isolating from the society they live in. deviant activity means those actions contrary to the norms whether discovered or not. Labeling shows a distinction between breaking the rules and deviance with deviance being that rule breaking that is labeled.
Conflict theory focuses on different interests of members of society. It assumes that people act as they do to further their interests and that doing so is sometimes at the expense of the interests of others. That's where the conflict comes in. A common examples are problems of society and their effect on the individual such as crime, lack of resources, even nonviolent competition like protests and the general male superiority over female
Bohm and Brenda L. Vogel, the Labeling theory is used to explain why people commit crimes and conceive themselves as criminals. Overall the Labeling theory consists of social groups creating rules and then applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. This theory is split into two types of deviances: primary deviance and secondary deviance. Primary deviance is the initial criminal act, for example, a man robs a bank. A secondary deviance is committing a crime after the first criminal act and accepting the label of a criminal. Following the previous example, after the man robs the bank, he decides to do it again because he now sees himself as a criminal bank robber and wants to continue doing it and is okay with being seen that
Labeling theory of deviance suggests that when one is labeled constantly on the basis of any minority it gives rise to deviant behavior in order to prove the strength of the minority. The minority has been labeled so by people for a long time. They have been labeled because of their race. The gang is labeled anti-social because of their criminal behavior which turns them further to deviance. The use of the labeling theory can be seen being implemented very judiciously
1. Cesare Lombroso applied the methods of natural science (observation, measurement, experimentation, statistical analysis) to the study of criminal behavior. Lombroso rejected the classical theory of crime, associated with Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, which explained criminal activity as freely chosen behavior based on the rational calculation of benefit and loss, pleasure and pain. Critically analyze both schools of thought and provide an opinion as to what theory you believe is more relevant.
Criminological theories interpret the competing paradigms of Human Nature, Social Order, Definition of Crime, Extent and Distribution of Crime, Causes of Crime, and Policy, differently. Even though these theories have added to societies understanding of criminal behaviour, all have been unable to explain why punishment or treatment of offenders is unable to prevent deviancy, and thus are ineffective methods of control. The new penology is a contemporary response that favours the management of criminals by predicting future harm on society. However, all criminological theories are linked as they are a product of the historical time and place, and because of their contextual history, they will continue to reappear depending on the current state of the world, and may even be reinvented.
Many of the traditional criminological theories focused more on biological, psychological and sociological explanations of crime rather than on the cost and benefits of crime. More conservative approaches, including routine actives, lifestyle exposure and opportunity theories have clearly incorporated crime rate patterns as a fundamental part of analyzing the economics of crime. Crime statistics are important for the simple reason that they help put theories into a logical perspective. For example, a prospective home owner may want to look at crime rates in areas of potential occupancy. On a more complex level, it helps law enforcement and legislators create effective crime reduction programs. Furthermore, it also helps these agencies determine if crime prevention programs, that have been in effect, have been successful. There are many factors that influence the rates of crime including socio economic status, geographical location, culture and other lifestyle factors. More specifically, Messner and Blau (1987) used routine activities theory to test the relationship between the indicators of leisure activities and the rate of serious crimes. They discussed two types of leisure actives, the first being a household pastime, which primarily focused on television watching. The second type was a non-household leisure event which was consisted of attendance to sporting events, cinemas, and entertainment districts. The focus of this paper will be to study the effects that substantial amounts of leisure activities have on the offender and the victim. Leisure activities not only make a crime more opportunistic for offenders, it may also provide offenders with motivation to engage in criminal activity. On the other hand, it may also be argue...
Biological crime theory describes that an individual is born with the desire to commit a certain crime. Evolutionary factors influence an individual’s involvement in criminal behavior. “Biological theories focus on aspects of the physical body, such as inherited genes, evolutionary factors, brain structures, or the role of hormones in influencing behavior” (Marsh, I, 2006, 3). Murderers that are innate to kill are born with factors such as mental illnesses that are the driving force as to why one may kill. Because of the biological crime theory, some individuals, though rare, are able to plead insanity. This is because the actions of the individual are said to be beyond their control (Ministry of Justice, 2006, 3).
...more stimulus for the individual to learn from (Williams.F. McShane.M.2010.p241). Furthermore, deviance within the labelling theory is defined through society’s norms and value’s, where as the deviance within the learning theory is imitation of deviance from society.
Criminal behaviour, the biological and behavioural approach Psychology is the scientific study of psychological and biological processes and behaviours in individuals. Within psychology there are 3 main approaches: behaviourist, psychodynamic and biological. (Mischel, 2017) Using the biological and behavioural approach I will be exploring criminal behaviour regarding the study of Fred West. Biological psychology is primarily concerned with the relationship between psychological processes and the physiological events; its focus is on chromosomes, hormones, toxins and genetics. In relation to behaviour and cognitions.
There are many different aspects of criminal justice policy. One in particular is the different theories of crime and how they affect the criminal justice system. The Classical School of criminology is a theory about evolving from a capital punishment type of view to more humane ways of punishing people. Positivist criminology is maintaining the control of human behavior and criminal behavior. They did this through three different categories of Biological studies, which are five methodologies of crime that were mainly focused on biological theories, Psychological theories, which contains four separate theories, and the Sociological theories, which also includes four different methods of explaining why crime exists. The last theory is about Critical criminology. Their goal was to transform society in a way that would liberate and empower subordinate groups of individuals.
The theoretical study of societal reaction to deviance has been carried out under different names, such as, labelling theory, interactionist perspective, and the social constructionist perspective. In the sociology of deviance, the labelling theory of deviant behaviour is often used interchangeably with the societal reaction theory of deviancy. As a matter of fact, both phrases point equally to the fact that sociological explanations of deviance function as a product of social control rather than a product of psychology or genetic inheritance. Some sociologists would explain deviance by accepting without question definitions of deviance and concerning themselves with primary aetiology. However, labelling theorists stress the point of seeing deviance from the viewpoint of the deviant individual. They claim that when a person becomes known as a deviant, and is ascribed deviant behaviour patterns, it is as much, if not more, to do with the way they have been stigmatized, then the deviant act they are said to have committed. In addition, Howard S. Becker (1963), one of the earlier interaction theorists, claimed that, "social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders". Furthermore, the labelling theoretical approach to deviance concentrates on the social reaction to deviance committed by individuals, as well as, the interaction processes leading up to the labelling.
Classical criminology theory is a legal systems approach, which emerged in the 1700s age of enlightenment. Various philosophers like John Locke, Jeremy Bentham and Cesare Beccaria expanded upon the theory of the social contract to explain the reasons as to wh...
The Law today is a summary of various principles from around the world from the past and the present. Early practises of law were the foundation of the law that we know and abide by today. These practises were referred to as the Classical school. Over time however, different criminologist have altered and greatly improved the early, incomplete ideas and made them more complete and practical to more modern times. This newer version is referred to as the Positivist school. This rapid change from the classical to the positivist perspective was due to the change and growth of civilization. Even though one perspective came from another, they are still different in many ways and it is evident when relating them to section 462.37, Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime, and section 810, Sureties to keep the Peace. The Classical School of criminology’s time of dominance was between 1700 and 1800. Its conception of deviance was that deviance was a violation of the social contract. Classical theorists believed that all individuals were rational actors and they were able to act upon their own free will. A person chose to commit crimes because of greed and because they were evil. The primary instrument that could be used in regards to the classical school to control crime was to create “criminal sanctions that instil fear of punishment in those contemplating criminal acts” (Gabor 154). Classical school theorists believed the best defence was a good offence and therefore they wanted to instil so much fear into people about what would happen to them if they were to commit a crime that even those who were only thinking of committing a crime were impacted greatly. The classical school individuals operated entirely on free will and it was their ...
Labelling theorists interpret deviance not as a set of characteristics of individuals or groups, but as a process of interaction between deviants and non-deviants.
It also advocated for the abolition of the death penalty. Discretion used by judges was unlimited, which saw extremely inconsistent and harsh penalties applied to offenders, with disadvantaged offenders being given much harsher penalties than those offenders with a higher social status (Monachesi, 1955). The Classical School of Criminology worked off four main principles: firstly, that individuals act according to their rationality and their own free will, secondly, individuals will weigh up the benefits of committing the crime and compare the benefits to the consequences if they are caught, thirdly, the severity of the punishment must be tied closely with the severity of the crime to act as a deterrent to others and finally, the punishment must be carried out swiftly in an attempt to deter and reduce further crime (Jenkins,
The theory of free will is largely seen in the classical period of criminology which started in the 18th century, which was used by Beccaria. Whereas the opposite theory was of treatment of criminals (biological theory) which was used by Lombroso in the 19th century. The two different theories resulted in a clash of views and saw the need for the nurture versus nature argument in criminology as rehabilitation focused on the idea that criminals were responsible for their crimes as they had choice of free will whilst treatment focused on the idea that criminals were born of criminal nature and therefore were biologically prone to commit crimes which they would need medical treatment in order to keep their instincts