Crim Week 5 PDF

Development of rational choice theory  Rooted in classical criminology and work of Beccaria  Let the punishment fit the crime and the link between crime and punishment  Classical criminology theory has evolved into rational choice theory Concept of rational choice theory ...

Development of rational choice theory  Rooted in classical criminology and work of Beccaria  Let the punishment fit the crime and the link between crime and punishment  Classical criminology theory has evolved into rational choice theory Concept of rational choice theory  Criminality is the product of careful thought and planning o Offenders choose to engage in criminal behavior after considering  Personal needs  Situational factors  Risk apprehension  Seriousness of punishment  Potential value of criminal enterprise  Immediate need for criminal gain Rational Choice Theory  Structuring criminality o Offenders desist from crime if  Future criminal earnings are too low  Attractive and legal opportunities to earn income are available  Motivated towards crime if o They know about those who have been successful  Structuring criminality: is crime truly rational?  Street crimes o Unplanned crimes may also include careful risk assessment o Auto thieves, armed robbers, bank robbers  Drug use o At the onset, drug use is controlled by rational decisions o Drug dealers approach the profession as a business venture, like selling any other commodity Why do people commit crimes  Crime is a more attractive alternative than legal behavior o Rewards, excitement, and prestige o Produces a natural high o Edge work: excitement of completing the illegal activity in a dangerous situation o Seductions of crime: situational inducements or immediate benefits that lead offenders into law violations Rational Choice Theory Structuring Criminality: Choices Choosing the place  E.g., drug dealers carefully choosing their sales area Choosing targets Affluent homes for B&E; determine when no one is home, and which are unprotected homes (low target hardening) Rational choice involves both shaping criminality and structuring crime Situational crime prevention  A proactive approach to crime prevention that tries to reduce opportunities for crime by increasing risks and decreasing rewards  Crime can occur when three components converge at the right time and the right place o A motivated potential offender o A suitable target o A lack of capable guardianship Displacement and extinction  Situational crime prevention may produce unforeseen and unwanted consequences o Displacement  When efforts to control crime in one area shift illegal activities to another o Extinction  Crime prevention method has an immediate impact that then disappears as criminals adjust to new conditions Diffusion and discouragement  Situational crime prevention may also have advantages o Diffusion of benefits  Efforts to prevent one crime unintentionally prevent another, and/or crime control efforts in one place reduce crime in other areas o Discouragement  Limiting access to one target reduces other types of crime General deterrence  The decision to commit a crime can be controlled through fear of criminal penalties  An inverse relationship should exist between crime rates and the certainty, speed, and severity of legal sanctions.  Certanty of punishment o Deterance theory: if certantly of arrest, conviction, and sanctioning increases, crime rates should decline  Crime persists because o There is a small chance of getting arrested for committing crime  o The police are reluctant to make arrests even if they are aware of the crime o Lenient punishments  Level of police activity o Deterrence theory: increasing the number of police should decrease crime rates o Research shows that this is not necessarily the case o However it is thought that adding more effective police could reduce crime o “crackdowns”  Severity of punishment o Stricter punishments alone may not reduce criminal activity o The likelihood of getting caught can be low, therefore, any impact or fear of substantial punishment is muted over the long term  Capital punishment o In Canada, it was abolished in 1976 o Controversial o Is the fear of death a deterrent  Immediate impact studies o In theory, the deterrent impact should be greatest after a well-publicized execution o Brutalization effect  Capital punishment increases rather than decreases the level of violence in society o Other studies argue that it may bring rates down temporarily  Comparative research o A comparison of murder rates between areas with and without the death penalty o Studies found no difference in crime rates o International research found little evidence that the death penalty lowered rates of violence  Time series analysis o Use of statistical analysis to assess murder rates related to the statute elimination or creation o Capital punishment is no more effective as a deterrent than life in prison  Why capital punishment fails o The reason lies in the nature of homicide itself o Variables related to violent acts may prevent or inhibit rational thoughts  Swiftness of punishment o If people believe they will be punished quickly, they will not commit crime o Mixed evidence o Swift retaliation needs to be combined with very harsh punishments  Informal sanctions o Disapproval, stigma, or anger directed toward an offender by those close to you o May be more effective than formal sanctions o Anti-crime campaigns play on fear and shame o Informal sanctions vary by cohesiveness of community structure.  Critique o Deterrence theory assumes rational offenders, which may not be the case  o An ineffective Canadian legal system limits the certainty, speed, and swiftness of consequences o Threat of formal sanctions is irrelevant to high-risk offenders because they have little to lose, and the crime is necessary for survival Specific deterrence  Specific deterrence theory advances that criminal sanctions should be so powerful that offenders will never repeat their criminal acts  Punishment works to deter if the connection is made between planned action and memories of its consequence  If memories are sufficiently intense, will not repeat  Does it deter crime? o Chronic offenders, punishment has little effect o Two-thirds of offenders are back within 3 years of release o Incarceration may be delayed but does not decrease the probability of re-arrest  Stigmatization vs reintegrative shaming o Often in Western societies, offenders are stigmatized and set outside the mainstream; once marginalized, they come to resent the criminal justice system  Stigmatization o Ongoing degradation and humiliation o The offender is seen as evil and cast out  Reintegrative shaming o Brief, controlled shaming, followed by forgiveness, apology, repentance, and reconnection with the community Incapacitation  Incapacitation effect: keeping offenders in jail will reduce the risk of recidivism  Does it work? o 32 000 Canadians incarcerated o Is lower crime rate actually related to phenomena other than the increase in incarceration?  Research on the benefits of incapacitation is inconclusive  Logic behind incarceration o Hard to commit crime in jail o Does not deter future crime o Prison has few specific deterrent effects o Economics of crime  Why three stikes does not work o Three time offenders are usually about to age out anyway o Current sentences for violent crimes are already severe