Week 5 - Introduction To Criminological Theory PDF

Week 6: Introduction to Criminological Theory CRIM 101 – Introduction to Criminology Today’s Plan Part II of the course (Criminological Theory) begins today. An Introduction to Criminological Theory: Pre-Classical Approaches. The Classical School of Criminology. Modern...

Week 6: Introduction to Criminological Theory CRIM 101 – Introduction to Criminology Today’s Plan Part II of the course (Criminological Theory) begins today. An Introduction to Criminological Theory: Pre-Classical Approaches. The Classical School of Criminology. Modern Choice-Based Approaches. Criminological Theory A simple question – what sparked your interest in studying crime/criminology? For many, interest in crime stems from a desire to understand how/why people (especially criminals) do what they do. Criminological theories attempt to address these questions (and others). Criminological Theory All levels of the CJS (from street-level policing to the Supreme Court) operate based on theories of crime. Ideally, these theories should be continually developed, tested, and updated (though this is not always the case). ‘Theory’ guides many of our day-to-day decisions and outlooks whether we are actively aware of it or not Extends far beyond criminology! ‘Good’ theories persist and are supported and updated over time, ‘bad’ theories tend to fall out of favor over time. Criminological Theory A ‘good’ criminological theory: Is logical and consistent (premise must support conclusion). Is based in some sort of empirical evidence. Is testable. Is relatively ‘simple’ (or parsimonious). Holds up to testing, scrutiny, and new developments. Is (relatively) universal and/or generalizable (or at least aware to the extent that it is or isn’t). Helps us understand how and why crime occurs. Can lead to real world change/policy both large and small. Criminological Theory Why is it important to develop, test, and refine criminological theories?: Theory can directly influence policy. Theory can lead to more effective law enforcement and crime prevention. Theory can influence laws. Theory can call attention to inequalities, inefficiencies, or ‘errors’ in the criminal justice system. Theory can influence and inspire scientific development. Theory can call attention to nuanced social, biological, and psychological issues. Theory can challenge the incorrect assumptions of the media/general public. Criminological Theory Theories arise out of the context of their time. This is true of all ‘science’ – it is bound by politics, culture, society, trends, etc. Hence why some theories seem to be more influential (at certain times) than others. Things that may seem obvious now were not always the case. And things that seemed ‘strange’ back then may have made sense in historical context. How many things that we do today will be seen as ‘weird’ or ‘stupid’ in 100 years? Pre-Classical Approaches Pre-Classical Approaches: Refers to all outlooks prior to the establishment of ‘criminology’, ‘social sciences’, or the modern scientific method. Roughly speaking, everything pre-18th century. During this time, all aspects of the natural and social world were understood primarily though spiritual, theological, or other divine explanations. Religion often the first point of reference for understanding any phenomenon. Pre-Classical Approaches Some pre-Classical assumptions about crime/criminals: Criminals were possessed by evil demons/sprits (‘demonology’). Criminals ‘succumbed’ to the temptation of evil. Crime not typically seen as a choice or the result of free will. Criminals often interrogated and tortured in order to draw confessions. Criminals often violently executed after confession (no attempts at rehabilitation or healing). Interrogations, sentencing, and punishments typically carried about by religious authorities and clergy (with little regulation/oversight). No laws or safeguards in place to protect the accused (and no modern ‘state’ to offer such protections). The Classical School The Classical school of criminology: Arose out of Enlightenment ideals/thinking (roughly 17th century). A time of significant social, political, and scientific change. Primarily interested in reform and in challenging old assumptions about crime and criminals. The Classical School Based on the work of philosophers Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) and Cesare Beccaria (1738 – 1794). Challenged the assumption that criminals were ‘born bad’ or were otherwise acting in ways outside of their control (possession, evil spirits, etc.). Argued that criminals (like all people) are endowed with rationality and free will. Actions are the logical and rational result of hedonistic calculations and/or utilitarian pursuit. The Classical School Hedonism: Humans are naturally conditioned to pursue pleasure (while avoiding pain). Utilitarianism: Decisions at both the individual and the state/governmental level are to be made with the intent of: Creating the most amount of good or pleasure. Creating the least amount of pain or suffering. The Classical School Jeremy Bentham on rationality and deterrence: The decision to commit a crime is a rational one that is based on a logical weighting of costs and benefits. Therefore, punishments should be implemented in a way that best achieves deterrence. Saw extreme and brutal punishments as an unnecessary evil which served no practical or utilitarian purpose. Bentham’s Panopticon The Classical School Cesare Beccaria On Crimes and Punishments (1764): Argued against the use of torture, violent interrogation techniques, and the death penalty in general. Under the social contract, the state/church should not have the right to torture/kill citizens or to punish criminals without due process (fair trials, etc.). Punishments should be proportional to the crime (and not the person committing it). Focus on prevention rather than punishment. The Classical School The writings of Bentham, Beccaria, and others are seen as foundational criminological texts that still serve as the basis for the modern CJS: Innocent until proven guilty. No cruel and unusual punishments. Clear and well-defined possible punishments for each crime. The law as an equally applied system (no one is ‘above the law’). The concept of mens rea and criminal intent. Free will, rational choice, and individual culpability. Deterrence based models, while challenged by some, are still more or less the standard in the Western world. Serves as the basis for modern choice-based theories. Choice-Based Theories of Crime Choice-Based Approaches Largely based on the assumptions of the Classical School: We have free will, we make calculated decisions based on the hedonistic principle, etc. Also inspired by economic theory (‘neo-classical economics’). Focused on the choices made in the present moment (rather than past experiences, environmental factors, etc.). Criminals are not pushed or pulled toward crime, rather, they are active, rational, and choice-making participants of crime. One may choose to commit a crime in one situation but not in another (even if they are quite similar). Choice-Based Approaches Rational Choice Theory: Based largely on the work of Cornish and Clarke (1986). There are costs and benefits to every action: When the anticipated benefits outweigh the perceived costs, we will typically take the action (including crime). Therefore, criminals can be considered ‘rational’ actors (even if we don’t agree with their choices). We are all capable of committing ‘crimes’ under this approach (and many of us do). Choice-Based Approaches If everyone is acting rationally, how can we explain the fact that people often make very ‘bad’ or seemingly irrational choices? The concept of bounded or limited rationality was introduced to address this critique. We do not always have all the information available, sometimes we need to make guesses or ‘gambles’ that don’t pay off. Sometimes our better judgement can be impaired due to a variety of reasons: Intoxication, lust, emotional turmoil (anger, revenge, etc.), physical discomfort, etc. Choice-Based Approaches Routine Activities Theory: Proposed by Cohen and Felson (1979). Argues that crimes, like a chemical reaction, only occur when the necessary ingredients are combined: A likely/motivated/potential offender. A suitable target. The absence of a capable guardian. These terms are somewhat flexible. Modern Criminological Theory ‘Modern’ criminological theory began developing in the 20th century and has carried on to the present day. Builds upon both the Classical and Positivist Schools (and others) with new insights, evidence, and breakthroughs. New technologies, access, sources of data, etc. allow for these old approaches to be re-examined in a new light. Still a widely contested field with no academic consensus on what theory is ‘best’ or the most universally applicable. Modern Criminological Theory Though a simplification, modern criminological theory can be divided into four different perspectives/schools: 1. Biological explanations of crime: Crime as primarily the result of biological factors. Genetics, testosterone, chemicals, nutrition, sexual urges, etc. 2. Psychological explanations of crime: Crime as primarily the result of psychological factors. Behavioural conditioning, personality, various disorders, psychopathy, etc. Modern Criminological Theory 3. Sociological explanations of crime: Crime as primarily the result of environmental/social factors Poverty, peer relationships, neighbourhood, social influences, etc. 4. Conflict-based explanations of crime: Crime as primarily the result of the imbalance between the powerful and the powerless in society. The over-criminalization of poor and minority communities, the under-criminalization of the rich and powerful, etc. Each of these approaches have their own strengths and weaknesses that we will be discussing over the coming weeks. Which makes the most ‘sense’ to you? Next Week Biological Approaches to Crime. Psychological Approaches to Crime. Writing Assignment #2 now posted. Criminological Theory In 2018 Nikolas Cruz opened fire inside his Florida high school, killing 17 and injuring another 17. Like all mass shootings, this generated massive amounts of media and press coverage. Media and public were deeply curious as to why and how someone could be inspired to commit such a terrible act. Criminological Theory What we know about the shooter: Adopted at birth, though both his adoptive parents died, and he was living with various friends/relatives. Interest in air firearms and weaponry, collected many. Known for having behavioural issues throughout school. Violent tendencies. Transferred to a school for students with emotional/learning disabilities. Suspended from high school for making threats to other students. Reported to have depression, autism, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Expressed extremist and prejudicial views and behaviors both on social media and offline. So, why did he do it?