Theoretical Contemporary Criminology

Ron D. Young

December 15, 2014

Abstract

Theoretical contemporary criminology involves the views of past and new analysis scientist and analysis alike test subjects to figure out their mental capacity. How fare can a person go before they become violent, why do people commit crime, what type of people commit crime, how do people respond to situations, and what are the controls that make people civilized are some of the theoretical studies that produce information that explains why a person reacts to a situation in the way that they do. The first type of theoretical exploration of crime came from spirituality. In the middle ages, lords ruled over the lands and proposed that the laws were met by spiritual reconciliation. The people lived by the laws made by the community that followed rules within their religion. These rules made up of reading that have been pasted down from generation to generation required full belief in the religion that they followed most of their rules were punishable by capital punishments that showed the public what happens to you if you break the laws. Most of these laws have value in our society today. In retrospect, the laws had to made more complex because the communities they served became larger. Our modern prison system was actually built around spiritual beliefs of separating the bad from the good as a punishment. In seventeen nineties the Quakers made up the concept of isolation by only providing a bible the Quakers made the first prisons. Later after many unanswered questions, the theorist started to become festinated with the way criminals think. Newer more explanative studies revealed contemporary methodology that had more precise demonstrations of why civilians commit crime. The main ideals that exaggerated why criminals commit crime are rational choice, deterrence theory, economic model of crime, routine activity theory, cultural conflict theory and subculture theory.

Rational choice this theory was created by Derrick Cornish and Ronald Clark. Rational choice theory explains how a citizen makes decisions by their situation, influenced by others that are considered to be close to the one that is making the decision. Rational choice theory is classified as Neoclassical theory because of its manner of decision making. This theory explains why people make certain decisions. When faced with an illegal act the ration choice theory has a positive outlook and a negative outlook. When making decisions there are many different there are many different choices to choose from positive and negative. The surroundings, personal background, friends, family, religion, schooling, social being, economic stability and geographical location all sway the decision making process explaining how one may react to situations that occur to do wrong. Other factors of Rational Choice theory include the intent or reason why one might benefit from a criminal act that allows the decision maker to think of how they may be rewarded for the crime they commit. Rational choice also recognizes the reasoning behind breaking the law and what might happen if they were to be caught. The way a person learns can also be a great factor within the rational choice theory if a person is mentally ill or have a learning disorder this will affect the learning process making it hard for them to comprehend wrong from right. Mental disorders can range from schizophrenia to manic pain disorder. These types of disorders and sicknesses can spark a person to do many wrong things including committing homicide and suicide. Mental disorders will most likely disturb the decision maker. Many people do not recognize mental disorders due to the complexity that they present. Mentally ill people look and act just like the ones without mental disorders most likely it takes an event to make them uneven. It has been found that there are also those who are thrill seekers. This type of person does anything to spark adrenalin. The adrenalin rush makes them go further than others to produce this chemical. Many lifetime criminals participate in crime for two reasons the adrenalin rush and peer pressure. Peer pressure can make for a large amount of problematic issues when the criminal is involved with groups of people such as gang relations the choice to commit crime is ultimately up to the person who is tempted to commit the crime. Peer pressure makes it harder for the subject to back out of committing the crime. Rationalizing criminal activity is a difficult task to take on. When dealing with rational choice theory the subject is considered to be a threat that has to determine what choice to make. When confronted with an opportunity the rational choice theory makes the delivery of thought bringing the capacity of intent to the question of is there a reason that a person may make decisions that do. Deterrence theory suggests that the decision making process is made upon the rules and laws thus keeping the possible criminal from committing the crime. The harsher the punishment the punishment the less likely the possible criminal will commit a crime. Steep punishments are for more server crimes. Crimes that include homicides, rape, intent to kill, and intent to cause bodily harm are some crimes that bring on more server punishments. People make decisions that rectify their reasoning this rational choice deterrence goes further than that it deters criminals from committing crime on a large scale. The greater he punishment the more the punishment the more they are to follow the rules and regulations in the area that they live. Severity of the laws has proven over history to be an effective way of deterring crime. The police presence and intervention makes a large difference in the community. During the Kansas City Missouri, police study the removal and addition of police presence did not stop criminal activity. Overtime the crime rate will plummet thus reducing the percentage of crime. Analysis found that lenient rules promote more crime because arrestees receive less punishment. Being at the midpoint of neoclassical theory deterrence theory revolutionized the way politicians made rules. Before the deterrence theory it was mandated that people follow the rules or be imprisoned most prison sentencing was for the actual crime and the intent of the crime its self. After the deterrence theory, the intent of the crime became just as important as the crime being committed. In most cases by using the method of deterrence, they found that many criminals were stopped while committing crime. This type of proactive policing causes many to view the police force as being more commutative rather than responding to a police call they simply hired more police officers to patrol the most dangerous areas. Specific studies have concluded that the rise in prison time and the crime rate both intertwine Analysis have proven that the more prison time a criminal may receive the higher rate of reduction occurred. The deterrence theory also suggested that retribution be used to deter crime. Giving harsher penalties in the form of retribution such as community service can drastically reduce petty theft. Being placed under community service is not only embarrassing but also a hard won fact that if you trade work for criminal activity that the criminal would choose a different reward for their efforts. Retribution can cause many problems within the prison system especially if the prisoners do not want to participate in the activities that are assigned to them. This none –participation could lead to more sever prison punishments. Just deserts is a policy that elaborates that those who commit crime deserve to be punished. Under this model many are incarcerated longer sentencing times for petty crimes. This type of sentencing keeps repeat offenders away thus reducing the recidivism rate. When faced with harsh penalties one might think twice before committing a crime. A smaller criminal act may not be worth trouble. In evaluation most people are rationalized thinkers as the justice model shows, if the propose of committing their crime is lesser than what the benefits are then the subject would change their idealism. A great deal of their time is spent contemplating if their situation is worth committing crime over.

The economic model of crime theory explains that when a person is confronted with the same alternatives they will commit the same acts. Within the economic model, they propose that people that are in the lower commit more crime than people that are middle class or higher class. In fact this is not true most lower class stick together during hard times while middle and higher class separate. In most situations, those that are found not to have a placement are usually mentally ill. With polices of schizophrenia, Hyper Attention Disorder, Emotional stress disorder, manic headache disorder such as brain tumors, anger disorder, and other mental illnesses that are sure come from the extent of child hood rearing. Some disorders are reconcilable while most disorders are considered medical with only medications to slow down the process of brain malfunction. The mentally ill gradually declining in mental stability most mentally unstable subjects commit crimes because of loss of control rather than planed intent. Economic stability is one part of crime that will never go away. When a person feels they are understated or left behind the economic winds have passed them by they tend to commit crime as a way to survive. Only a hand full of subjects are actually made to be life time criminals simply because of the stress and pressure of having authority over an area. The criminal calculates what they should do in this type of situation they most often calculate the same when presented the same situation. In the economic model of crime, theory most people located in a specific community will commit the same crime.

Routine activities theory, also called RAT suggests that people tend to make a routine out of criminal actions. Routine activities theory created by Lawrence E. Cohen and Marcus Felson explains why criminal delinquency occurs in specific places under the same conditions. The motivation, targets, and absence of possible guardians against violations help possible offenders make their decisions on whether to be delinquent or not. Interest in ones possible criminal self-motivation to become a offender succeeding to criminal activity. Many motivational individuals may break laws to trend with the people around them. The value of the criminal act is measured by how much energy is spent on the assault or the subsequent crime may be. The deterrence of breaking the law includes burglar alarms, auto alarms, guards, surveillance cameras, lights, gates, open uncovered spaces. All of these protect possible victims from being sought after by criminals. Routine criminal activity makes the public aware that there is a problem with their security that allows the place or type of people that are being sought after. This situation calls for special attention by the police department because of the severity of the situation at hand. Most likely, the reported criminals have recidivism they have been put in jail or prison before and are released to the same situation that they were in before being incarcerated. Having the same friends, family members, groupings, social background as before committing a crime the routine criminal will most likely strike in the same places that they had struck before. Routinely burglarizing, robbing, and selling illicit drugs is a way of life for these types. Routine activities theory focuses on predatory violators that are usually perpetrators of victims. Routine activities focus on the redundancy of crime rather than criminals themselves.

According to criminologist Thorsten Sellin the creator of Culture Conflict theory he suggested that all societies have normalized propaganda that change from each cultural background. Sellin noticed changes the laws from one culture to the next. What may be against the law in one culture may not be against the law in another. Persons who posses power within the community are able to control the conduct of norms. Powerful people make rules up that suite their type of living style. When the area is extended with the controllers laws they then take over another area in most cases causing conflict with the old leader. When members of one cultural group migrate to another, the cultural code is broken to adapt to the others rules and laws. The evolution of our own culture explains that the origin changes as they take over other cultures. Sellin uses American Indians as an example because of their laws and rules. American Indians lived in America before Europeans where able to cross the Atlantic Ocean when the first settlers made home in James Town in 1607 the Indians were already their Thanks giving was a feast to commemorate the hard times that the Plymouth colony in 1620 had when they first landed and the Indians taught them how to survive in their new environment. Secondary conflicts such as morals and laws made as the Europeans took over the made the Indians have to adapt or move away. This made many American Indians distained from Europeans and eventually retaliate causing the great Indian wars. The Europeans ways of business producing liquor, and shipping of goods conflicted with the Indians simple life of migration. Eventually the American Indians had to either move to a region of their own or fight for their land. They ended up fighting for their land. Since the European could not stand having the Indians in their culture, they then found a way that both the American Indians and the Europeans descendants could be happy that was by making reserves for the American Indians to live on. This is an excellent example of secondary conflict it explains about culture and what happens when two cultures do not agree with one another. Culture conflict theory provides boundaries such as New York and immigrants the original New Yorkers thought of immigrants as not as worthy as the first settlers that settled the United States in the sixteen hundreds to the eighteen hundreds. The early settlers complained that the newer nineteen hundred immigrants were taking over the area and the city grew during the nineteen twenties even though work became scarce and everyone blamed it on immigration. While still trying to join in to the normalized crowd the nineteen twenties immigrants started to form gangs and especially the Italians. The laws were made stricter to counter the cultural differences of the original settlers and the new immigrants. As time proceeded, the abolishment of liquor became the result of unruly behavior of the city. Gang violence still increased as illegal liquor sales and gambling became the norm in the city. The police force was increased to keep away violence, vandals, and thieves. The rules continued to change placing call boxes at corners during the great depression and the industrial revolution police communications changed as the CB radio took effect and proactive community policing became the norm. After many years, they found that the immigrants that had first settled in the early nineteen hundreds help build the city while the ones that came during the great depression had a distorted view of America and what stood for. Not formulating to the style of diplomacy that their earlier ancestors had taken on by building the city the later immigrants and the earlier children of the poor immigrants joined to produce crime syndicates. This taking over the city of New York is still in effect today, each area was segregated by individuals from each country they used to live in, these block wars have calmed down but the cultural differences still remains. The subculture of violence theory was made by Wolfgang in 1958 this theory presents the logic of racism in the world especially black and white Americans. The equality of each citizen was measured by Wolfgang on each subculture this study explains what each subculture is able to get away with without being harmed by civilians in the communities they lived in. Wolfgang studied cases of homicide and found that in the subculture of his dwelling in Philadelphia in the nineteen fifties that whites were able to murder blacks but not the opposite way around. The proper gander was that in his time period blacks had no supporting groups that made it hard for whites to murder blacks. This is not true in today’s culture that follows laws in a strict manner but in the nineteen fifties if a black murdered a white this became a personal matter that was handled by the local citizens rather than the police and public authorities. Wolfgang found that the crime was measured differently between whites and blacks if a black was to steal from another black this was looked upon as being a none prosecutable offense but if a black was to steal from a white it was considered as a highly dangerous area for the black to be. In most cases, this is not as truthful today as it was sixty-five years ago. This theory had many problems with it because even though wolf gang explains cultural indifference he had little clerical value and no subjects to test his theory on. Later they revised Wolfgang’s theory and it was called the Subcultural theory code of the streets in, this theory Elijah Anderson 1994 discovered that instead of cultures being defined as skin color classification that grouping of people were at fault for discrimination against one another. Anderson found that the discriminative groups were not well-educated citizens but the ones that found their selves in hard times while they saw other groups in better situations than themselves. Discriminating against those who are not like themselves but may have a better educational background and a higher social class made the lower class who was socially known as the norm to become more or less discriminative of the higher class none citizens blaming them for taking away their rights to live comfortable. These analysis help explain about how the systematic process of Subcultural Theory came to being by groupings in the streets defining them as hate groups and people with antisocial skills. These groups are traditional opposed by the police and find ways to avoid policies and regulations that allow Americans to have equal rights. Anderson explains that hate groups do not simply exist between races but also sex, religion, and beliefs. There has been related instances between communities and police such as the Brown case that started when a police officer used over excessive force on a teenager that made the community riot and cause destruction in New Orleans where a Police officer shot and killed Michael Brown a high school student for stealing from a local convenience shop. These controversies will never cease to exist but our views, laws, rights, and protections can possibly stop racially inclined tension. The goal of police is to stop criminals from committing crime they have to be proactive in communities that accept crime and responsive in areas that have less crime.

References

Charles R. Tittle (2014). Criminal Justice Volume 1, The Nature of Crime: Continuity and Change Theoretical Development Criminology https://www.ncjrs.gov/criminal_justice2000/vol_1/02b.pdf

Lisa Landis Murphy, decoding crime Explanations for Criminal Behavior Chapter 3 Mcgraw Hill http://www.ablongman.com/html/productinfo/glick/images/61832_CH03_058-085-r.pdf

Bernard , Thomas J. & Engel, Robin S. (2013). ARTICLES CONCEPTUALIZING CRIMINAL JUSTICE THEORY http://www.uc.edu/content/dam/uc/ccjr/docs/articles/engel_articles/Conceptualizing_CJ_Theory.pdf