Discuss/debate with your classmates about the early history of the criminal theory and its application to crime

Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Question:

Discuss/debate with your classmates about the early history of the criminal theory and its application to crime control i.e., Positivist School vs. Classical School, plus gender, class, and race as they relate to crime.

The early history of criminal theory is marked two leading schools of thought: the Positivist School and the Classical School. These theories differ in approach, however, both have significantly changed our understanding and management of crime.

The Classical School originated in the 18th century and was led by thinkers like Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. It emphasized rational thinking and free will governed by an individuals' decision-making processes. According to this school, crime is a result of individuals making choices based on the perceived benefits weighed against the consequences of their actions. Beccaria's influential book, "On Crimes and Punishments," advocated for a rationalization of criminal justice, proposing proportionate punishments in order to deter crime while avoiding unnecessary cruelty. Luigino Bruni and Pier Luigi Porta sum this in that "Punishment is the reparation demanded by society from someone who has harmed society through his/her own behavior", in other words, the criminal must make society whole regardless of the circumstances involved in the crime (Bruni & Porta, 2014). Generally speaking, Classical School is no longer used in today's criminal justice system.

In contrast, the Positivist School arrived in the 19th century, led by Cesare Lombroso and Enrico Ferri. This challenged the Classical School's assertion of free will and suggested that biological, psychological, and sociological factors shaped a criminal's behavior. Lombroso proposed the concept of the "born criminal," suggesting that certain individuals were predisposed to criminal actions due to genetic traits. Later, Hans Eysenck proposed that specifical personality traits such as extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism are some of the more driving factors of deviant and criminal behavior (Sikand & Reddy, 2017). Positivist's advocate for individualized treatment and rehabilitation, rather than a set punishment for the crime, reflecting a shift towards a more scientific understanding of crime causation.

Examining gender, class, and race in relation to criminal justice has long been a discussion in criminal theory. Women and men possess many differences beyond their physical traits and this has led to changes in societal attitudes and biases which influence perceptions of who is most likely to commit crimes. This also has resulted in disparate consequences of these actions. Biases associating criminal behavior with masculinity portray men as more prone to violence and aggression, which is generally true however not always the case. In a study submitted to the US Census Bureau, it was identified that women are more likely to conduct crimes related to property, fraud, or forgery, than their male counterparts suggesting a socioeconomic reason behind crimes committed by women (Campaniello, n.d.).

Similarly, class has also been closely linked to crime and criminal justice. Socioeconomic factors such as the one mentioned above to include poverty, inequality, and lack of opportunities contribute to criminal behavior. Classical School's focus on rational choice often overlooks these inequalities that influence individuals' decisions. Additionally, differences in access to legal representation only further harm these communities as they interact with the criminal justice system.

Race is a contentious issue in crime and criminal theory. Racial minorities historically have been overrepresented in crime statistics and criminal justice systems. Often attributed to systemic racism, however, the Positivist School factors in these societal factors such as unequal access to education and employment as well to link ethnicity as a factor in criminal behavior. This highlights the need for interventions to address underlying social inequalities.

References

Bruni, L., & Porta, P. L. (2014). Cesare Beccaria's On Crimes and Punishments. History of Economics Review, (60), 64-74. http://ezproxy.apus.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fcesare-beccarias-on-crimes-punishments%2Fdocview%2F1644752050%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D8289

Campaniello, Nadia. (n.d.), Women in crime, (fig. 4).https://wol.iza.org/articles/women-in-crime/long

Sikand, M., & Reddy, K. J. (2017). Role of Psychosocial Factors in Criminal Behaviour in Adults in India. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 12(1), 24-44. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.345701

2. Discuss if racial profiling is justifiable? Ever? If the answer is yes, discuss how effective the profiling must be to remain justified? If the answer is no, do the events of 9/11 suggest a justification for other forms of ethnic profiling?

Whether racial profiling is justifiable is a very complex and contentious issue. Some argue that racial profiling can be a useful tool in combating crime and terrorism, most contend that it is unjust and ineffective in targeting crime.

Racial profiling is the act of targeting individuals for criminal suspicion based on traits such as race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. This itself is widely condemned and unconstitutional. It violates principles of equality and fundamental human rights.

To answer the question, is racial profiling justifiable, ever? The answer is no. However, accepting that there are disparities in criminal conduct that aligns to race, ethnicity, gender, etc. is a healthy conversation to have. One useful tool to help police departments combat racial profiling is the SPLC's "10 best practices for writing policies against racial profiling", some of these best practices include: creating periodic scenario-based training for officers, avoiding language that encourages over policing, among others (SPLC, 2018). However I would argue that California's recently passed, "Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA), takes addressing racial profiling in the police force a step too far.

This act requires data collection and consolidation on every person detained and/or searched by police (Burkley UCPD, n.d.). However the resulting data does not properly account for these disparities mentioned, as well as other factors conveniently left out of said report such as the "Veil of Darkness" statistical test, as argued by the Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) 2022/2023 reports of the California Racial & Identity Profiling Advisory Board (PORAC, 2023).

The question of whether racial profiling can ever be justified depends on whether it meets certain criteria, including its effectiveness and the presence of alternative methods. Use of racial profiling would need to be subject to rigorous oversight and accountability mechanisms to prevent abuse and ensure compliance with legal and ethical standards.

The events of 9/11 ultimately led to increased analysis of particular groups and ethnicities with Middle Eastern and Muslim heritage. Out of an overabundance of caution, national security defense measures were put into place that we still largely have today more than 20 years later. Today the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) still examines every person who passes through airport security regardless of ethnic status. Are there likely instances of racial profiling, sure, but I expect those are handled on a case-by-case basis and the abundance of profiling conducted is based on credible, behavioral or intelligence-based information.