Midterm

Discuss in detail the two primary historical schools of thought presented in the text and this week's lesson pertaining to criminology i.e., the classical and positivist schools of criminology. Further briefly give an overview of the timeline of criminological theory beginning about 1920. Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham are credited with establishing what is known as the Classical School of Criminology. According to Beccaria, people have free will to choose either legal or illegal acts. A fear of punishment will deter the majority, but it is up to society to make sure this punishment is severe enough to deter them. Classical Criminology came about during the mid-nineteenth century. During this period of time, law, punishment and justice were dealt out very harshly. Some have referred to it as barbaric as torture to obtain confessions were common place. People could have been thrown in prison for the most petty of “crimes”. Crimes such as disobedience to your parents was included. Other times, people were put in jail for simply no reason at all (Adler, 2013). Beccaria is most known for his notes, oddly enough, that were taken during his tenure at the Academy of Fists. In July of 1764, a publication titled On Crimes and Punishment detailing his notes. With this publication, he was now known as the father of modern criminology (Adler, 2013). Beccaria’s view of bad laws, not bad people took the world by storm and shed an entirely new light on the laws. A few of these are: punishment should be based on the act, not the actor; punishment should be based on the pleasure/pain principle; and capital punishment should be abolished (Adler, 2013). Classical criminology stood the tests of time for many years until scholars began to think that criminal behavior was not a choice, but rather engrained in people’s DNA. Cesare Lombroso rode the coattails of Charles Darwin in stating that criminal behavior is embedded, not a choice. His Positivist school of thought taught that there was no free will with criminal behavior, but rather people were born and bred that way. Lombroso argued that people’s physical characteristics proved how a person was, criminally. He said, that if a person had abnormally large jaw structure, strong canine teeth, arm span greater than their height, etc., that they are more likely to be a criminal (Adler, 2013). This “inherited criminality” has later been proven that the methodology was flawed and many conclusions were simply fabricated. One of Lombroso’s colleagues, Enrico Ferri claimed that criminals were not capable of being held morally responsible but committed crimes based on their lives conditions. Another associate said “an individual who has an organic deficiency in these moral sentiments has no moral constraints against committing these crimes”- Raffaele Garofalo (1851-1934) (Adler, 2013). In all, there have been many theories as to what makes people commit crimes. Ultimately, we may never know for sure. However, through the years it has proceeded from moral anomalies in the late 1800s to replacing moral responsibility with social accountability in the early 1900s. That idea stood from then until 1950s when it was replaced by hereditary inferiority, and the somatotype in the middle 60s. Lastly William Sheldon has attributed body type to illegal behavior in the 1970s. Who knows what the “experts” will come up with next? References: Adler, F., Mueller, G. O., & Laufer, W. S. (2013). Criminology (Eighth ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Briefly compare and contrast life-course theory with evolutionary neuroandrogenic (ENA) theory, as discussed in the week 2 lecture. In doing so, discuss the nature versus nurture notions, as possible causes of criminal behavior. Life course theory was first introduced in the 1980s as a study of criminal careers or the sequence of crimes that were committed by an offender. They argue that weak social controls are to blame for crimes that are committed as a child. Social controls such as poor parental supervision, delinquent peers, set boundaries, etc. In addition to these, a poor relationship between the child and the parents could be to blame (Adler, 2013). This theory of self-control focuses its attention on the fact that criminals are deficient in self-control (Gottfredson, 1990). Gottfredson stated that people who are shortsighted in their goals, or are impulsive are more prone to commit criminal acts. Ellis (2003) on the other hand, says that the evolutionary neuroandrogenic (ENA) theory is based on two observations: 1. Neurohormonal DNA and 2. Force of Evolution. In the case of Neurohormonal DNA, Ellis confirms that the male hormone, “androgens” cause the brain to alter the way it would normally function. In doing this, criminal behavior is promoted and associated as a status symbol. Basically, these hormones enhance the need for self-control and balanced lifestyle. As for the case of evolution, Ellis contends that females have evolved to the point of choosing mates that provide a reliable source of resources. The findings of Ellis and his team are that those with a low voice, high sexual drive, and physical strength are more prone to criminal behavior. In addition to those, they found a correlation to poor parental relationships and deviant behavior (Ellis, 2003). Nature says that, we are predestined and cannot change whether or not we will commit criminal acts. It is our biological clock and turns on or off at certain times in our lives. Nurture, on the flip side, says that we commit acts by learning how to do them. An example with nature might be something as simple as water. We use water to sustain our lives. It is not until we “nurture” someone into a Pepsi, that it is ever wanted. References: Adler, F., Mueller, G. O., & Laufer, W. S. (2013). Criminology (Eighth ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Gottfredson M. R., Hirschi T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar Ellis L. (2003). Genes, criminality, and evolutionary neuroandrogenic theory. In Walsh A., Ellis L. (Eds.), Biosocial criminology: Challenging environmentalism’s supremacy (pp. 13-34). New York, NY: Nova Science. Google Scholar Provide an overview of the text book's comments and the week 3 lesson content pertaining to social control theorists focus on the reasons why an individual would choose a delinquent subculture and join a gang. In doing so, elaborate on both social control theory, and subcultural theory. Social control theory is where society determines and regulates human behavior. These influences or rules determine people’s activities and even morals. The more involved a person is with family, friends and society as a whole, the less likely they are to deviate from the straight and narrow. This concept first emerged in the early 1900s at the hand of E.A. Ross. According to Ross, what people believe in, controls how they act, not the laws that are imputed upon them. According to David Matza, adolescents crave moral obligations to be bound by the law. This bind substantiates control and responsibility. When it is excluded, the commitment will drift towards criminal behavior and gang activity. There are many “risk factors” for gang membership, however, several are included in all theories. Ideas such as family disorganization, lack of parental involvement, drugs and alcohol abuse, academic failure, and aggressive behavior are some indicators. The subculture of gang life promotes all of these in a positive light and gives kids the attention and affection that they crave. This subculture exists within the social norms of society, not apart from it. Members are seeking money, recognition from peers, protection, or just the thrill of it. References: Adler, F., Mueller, G. O., & Laufer, W. S. (2013). Criminology (Eighth ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Provide an overview of the text book's comments and the week 4 lesson content pertaining to the similarities and differences between outward environmental sociological factors and inward hereditary psychological factors, as the possible cause of criminal based behavior. In doing so, elaborate on explanations of crime and criminal behavior, as presented in the theories discussed in the week 4 lesson. References: Adler, F., Mueller, G. O., & Laufer, W. S. (2013). Criminology (Eighth ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.