Contemporary Criminology - Term Paper Example

Abstract Criminology, a theoretical and empirical discipline, draws on a broad range of human and social science disciplines and is constantly evolving in its theoretical and methodological development in reflection of the speedy social changes witnessed in society. Criminology engages formal and critical analysis of crime prevention, security and crime control policies, besides exploring responses to crime and deviance. The paper explores the complex social problems and how they inform theory and practice; concepts and theoretical approaches in criminology; philosophical and political values guiding agencies responding to crime and deviance, and the social and political processes of criminalization and victimization. Compare and contrast the classical and the positivist school of criminology # 1 Complex Social Problem Inform Criminological Theory and Evidence? Contemporary criminology is at the heart of the rapidly changing world. The speed and the profundity of the changes manifest in the world, inform and shape the character of criminology’s subject matter in aspects such as crime rates, crime policy, practices of policing, prevention, and punishment of the crime. Criminologists are mainly interested in the immediate data on crime and punishment coupled with the processes that underlie them: customs of social life and control, the organization of families and households, the nature of work and labour markets, and the spatial ecology of cities (Tierney, 2010). Criminology’s subject matter remains highly implicated in the significant transformations of the society. It thus follows that complex social problems inform and shape criminology theory and evidence. Occasionally, criminology confronts a collection of challenges centring on the economic, cultural, and political transformations affecting social life (Newburn, 2009). For instance, the characteristics apparent in the late modernity, such as the reorganization of the social and economic relations, the rate of technological change, the variability of social processes, and cultural heterogeneity, have insistently presented intellectual challenges and opportunities alike for criminology. Social causation infers the notion that regularities of human behaviour can be analytically linked to the cultural and economic organization of societies and, subsequently, to crime and deviance. Some of the examples of causation approaches include attachment theories, ecological approaches, gender theories of crime causation, and strain and sub- cultural theories (Vito & Maahs, 2012). As outlined by social causation approach, complex social problems shape the basis of criminology theory and evidence. For instance, a breakdown of social interactions in the family may be manifested by aspects such as parental neglect (inadequate parental supervision and poor parent-child interaction); parental conflict and discipline; deviant behaviours and attitudes; and family disruption. Factors linked to it or indicative of inadequate parenting are some of the strongest predictors of juvenile delinquency. Certain forms of parenting behaviour or family environment enhance the chances of juvenile delinquency. This assertion is supported by crime prevention research. Other complex social problems informing criminology theory and evidence include poverty and unemployment (Vito & Maahs, 2012). The participation in crime is high in areas marked by these aspects. Individuals at the lower end of the socioeconomic status remain predisposed to engage in crime. Poverty and unemployment are linked to crime since they motivate individuals to offend as a way of defeating their disadvantage. Other social problems linked to criminal violence include substance abuse linked to increased aggression and the risk of criminal behaviour. #2 Key Concepts and Theoretical Approaches in Criminology. The contemporary criminology can be regarded as a product of two core schools of thought: the classical school and the positivist school. Prior to the 18th century, explanations for a diverse range of phenomena, inclusive of criminology, were mainly religious or spiritual in nature. The explanations of violence differ considerably from common explanations featuring individual and risk factors, social, and economic factors, and situational factors (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2011). The classical school is mainly associated with Cesare Beccaria and reform. Beccaria did not necessarily question the urge for punishment, but he stipulated that laws should be fashioned to safeguard public safety and order rather than avenging crime. Majority of the ideas advanced by Beccaria, such as liberty from brutal or bizarre punishment, the right to a quick trial, and equality under the law, feature in the Bill of Rights central to the majority of legal systems. The term ‘positivism’ delineates the extension of the scientific method to social life. The overriding view among criminologists during this period featured that crime emanated from internal and/or external forces imposing on individuals, biasing, or even dictating their behaviour choices (determinism) (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2011). Positivism comprises three subdivisions, namely: biological, psychological, and social positivism. Biological positivism attributes criminal behaviour to physical or mental characteristics while psychological positivism explores psychological dynamics predisposing individuals to involve in criminal acts. Social positivism, on the other hand, outlines the role of socioeconomic attributes such as poverty, subculture, and illiteracy in predisposing individuals to a life of crime (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010). Neoclassicism approach entails routine activity theory, deterrence and choice approach, and rational choice theory. The rational choice approach infers that criminality align with the overriding principle that all human behaviour mirrors the rational pursuit of maximizing utility. The choice in this case stems from personal and situational constraints and the accessibility of opportunities. Criminals act rationally from their individual’s models of reality although their rationality remains constrained by capability, knowledge, emotional input, and time (Guarino-Ghezzi & Trevino, 2005). Routine activity theory, on the other hand, advances that disorganized communities practically invite crime (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2011). The theory stipulates that crime stems from (a) motivated wrongdoers meeting (b) fitting targets that lack (c) able guardians. Deterrence and choice approach assert that there must be reasonably high degree of certainty of punishment as per the criminal act, the punishment should be administered soon subsequent after the act, and it must relatively harsh. Comparison of Classical and the Positivist School of Criminology The legacy of positivism detailed the shift from the armchair philosophizing regarding human behavior to employing the concepts and methods of science. Similarly, positivism did not refute or tear down classical principles; the approach altered emphasis from crime and penology to the individual offender. Classical and positivist theories manifest some disparities in regard to their stance of crime (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010). Classical school asserts that the purpose of punishment hinges of deterring individuals from the commission of a crime. Positivism, on the other hand, rejects punishment and replaces it with treatment based on a medical model. Positivistic criminologists were mainly concerned with ascertaining the biological, psychological, or social determinants of criminal behaviour rather than the classical school concerns of legal and penal reforms. Classical theory fails to consider compulsions, obsessions, and irrational behaviour and that everyone possess a matching reasoning ability. Positivism, on the other hand, ascribes situations beyond an individual’s control that contribute to shaping criminals (Ball, Cullen & Lilly, 2011). In essence, positivism advances that criminals are not responsible or accountable for their actions since they are victims of circumstances. # 3The Philosophical and Political Values Influencing the Key Agencies that Respond to Crime and Deviance Most agencies responding to crime and antisocial behaviour are engaged in describing, analyzing, and explaining behaviour, as well exploring effective methods of crime control, sentencing, and treatment. There are a number of philosophical and political values that guide and shape the direction of agencies responding to crime and deviance. These include aspects such as fair treatment of all persons irrespective of race, language, gender, religions, disability, and sexual orientation; respect for human rights, values and ethics within the practice as outlined by the code of practice. Philosophical and political values such as human rights and ethics inform and shape the manner in which key agencies respond and deal with crime and deviance. The principles on respect for human rights and dignity, professional conduct, and ethical awareness forms a fundamental part of the professional practice of agencies (whether policing agencies, social work services, or criminal justice system) responding to crime and deviance (Hemmens & Walsh, 2011). In some cases, individuals engaging in deviant and criminal activities are perceived as wrongdoers deserving to bear the full weight of legal powers. When this force is employed, some of the precepts of philosophical and political values may be challenged and in some instances negated. As a result, the discord between ethics and legal principles guiding the agencies may be exposed, which in turn threatens the principles of justice and victims’ rights. Irrespective of the ethical conflicts that agencies responding to crime and deviance may confront, the agencies must act in line with the established moral and legal standards. The philosophical values avail protections for offenders, especially regarding due process such as presumption of innocence, the right to have legal assistance, the right to be tried devoid of delay by a competent legal authority, and the requirement to set a reasonable minimum age of criminal responsibility. Agencies that respond to crime and deviance should  safeguard and promote service user’s individuality, dignity, rights, responsibilities, and identity, inclusive of respect of the beliefs, values, culture, needs, preferences, relationships, and affiliations of clients (in this case, wrongdoers) (Ball, Cullen & Lilly, 2011). The vast array of standards, codes and legal frameworks provide the basis on which agencies responding to crime and anti- social behaviour can work effectively and efficiently. # 4 Political and Social Processes of Victimisation and Criminalisation Criminalization infers the process via which behaviours are transformed into crime and individuals are transformed into criminals. The process of criminalization involves legal and societal conditions through which groups of persons are excluded from the society as criminals. Victimization, on the other hand, infers the tendency to spotlight crimes committed by a specific groups such as the homeless or immigrant populations in a biased way, notwithstanding the fact the subjects themselves are victims of crimes (Miller, 1998). Victimization, in this case, is mainly a precipitating factor for the group’s engagement in crime and antisocial behaviour. Hence, political and social processes play an integral role in propelling victimization and criminalization of individuals. Criminalization and victimization paints problems in society in a polysemous context whereby the overall social phenomenon and the salient characteristics of the cultural and political situation are taken into account. For instance, in the criminalization of migrants, the police, judicial authorities, local authorities, the media, and some sections of the population play a part in holding immigrants/aliens accountable for a broad range of offences. Victimization can take diverse dimensions depending on the subject and may feature dimensions such as patriarchy, economic marginality, family violence, racism, and mis- education. Some of the factors propelling or leading to criminalization include structural dislocation, association of a certain group with deviant and criminal others, processing and labelling of subjects as status offenders, and re-creation of familial connections within the criminal world. The concept of structural dislocation denotes the removal of a person from the primary socialization units of family, occupation, and education. Crime mainly becomes a rational choice in the face of such dislocation (Walklate, 2007). The structural components of race and class play themselves out in the society for diverse groups, thus yielding distinct results (Arnold, 1990). The institutional race, class, and gender discrimination all impact differently on the population. For instance, studies indicate that women are frequently - first and foremost - victims of class, race, and gender oppression. The interconnected processes of victimization and criminalization mainly start with abuse (whether physical and/or sexual), racial, or economic. The criminalization and victimization of individuals or groups also incorporates political processes. For instance, the immigration laws and policies in both the U.S. and Europe have historically been phrased in rhetoric of race and crime. In the contemporary era, fears of racialized others has subsequently contributed to the “moral panic” regarding immigration and crime (Salvatore, 2009). In a study exploring the criminalization and victimization of immigrants, the process of criminalization and victimization of immigrants is part of a broad situation of the neo- liberal development that yields destruction of the former social structure, and subsequently, the practices of negotiated and peaceful management of social problems (Salvatore, 2009). The criminalization and victimization of immigrants is perceived from a wider perspective linking issues to political economy and global social structures. Fears and uncertainties regarding the destruction of political organization of society are exploited to reinforce a securitarism that falls short of reinforcing security and excels in reproducing insecurity. There is a strong connection between victimization of women via physical and sexual abuse and their criminalization. The failure of women to embrace and/or participate in the victimization, orchestrate and lead to women being labelled and processed as deviants, and later on - as criminals. In most episodes of criminalization and victimization, amid the process of resistance, the victim usually engages in status offences/low-level crime, besides becoming structurally dislocated. Conclusion The process of victimization sets into motion sustained criminal involvement as well as rational coping strategy. Labelling and associations with deviant/criminal others play a critical role in this process. For instance, gang participation predisposes youths to victimization risk, especially in gendered ways. Gangs are social groups revolving around criminal behaviour, and as such gang participation can be cited as a delinquent lifestyle that is notorious for involving high risks of victimization (Maguire, Morgan & Reiner, 2007). Gang involvement propels youth’s exposure to victimization risk with social attributes such as gender playing a critical role in shaping these processes. References Arnold, R. (1990). Processes of victimization and criminalization of black women. Social Justice, 17 (3), 153-166. Ball, R., Cullen, F. & Lilly, R. (2011). Criminological theory: Context and consequences. London, UK: Sage. Cullen, F. & Wilcox, P. (2010). Encyclopaedia of criminology theory, Volume 1. London, UK: Sage. Guarino-Ghezzi, S. & Trevino, J. (2005). Understanding crime: Multidisciplinary approach. Newark, NJ: Mathew Bender. Hemmens, C. & Walsh, A. (2011). Introduction to criminology: A text/reader. London, UK: Sage. Lilly, J.R., Cullen, F.T., and Ball, R.A. (2011). Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences, 5th ed. London, UK: Sage. Maguire, M., Morgan, R. & Reiner, R. (2007). The Oxford handbook of criminology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Miller, J. (1998). Gender and victimization risk among young women in gangs. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35, 4, 429-453. Newburn, T. (2009). Key Readings in Criminology. Cullompton, UK: Willan Salvatore, P. (2009). The criminalization and victimization of immigrants: a critical perspective, in William F. Mcdonald (ed.) Immigration, Crime and Justice. Sociology of Crime Law and Deviance, 1 (13), 313-326. Tierney, J. (2010). Criminology: Theory and Context, 3rd ed. Essex, UK: Pearson. Vito, G. & Maahs, J. (2012). Criminology: Theory, research, and policy. London, UK: Jones & Bartlett Learning International. Walklate, S. (2007). Understanding criminology: Current theoretical debates. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. Read More