Crime as a Symptom of Wider Malaise - Essay Example

?‘Crime is a Symptom of Wider Malaise’. Critically Analyze this ment from the Perspective of Positivism and One Other Criminological Theory Crime is an issue of perennial interest, and in current years it has once again turned out to be a popular subject for public debate. In fact, it has been approved by majority of criminologists that, no single aspect can be mentioned as the final reason of criminal behavior. A vast majority of researchers claim that, crime is a symptom of wider malaise. It is upon this faith that most of the studies have evolved with specific time, trying to establish the root causes of crime, and to find the reliable solution for the control and prevention of crimes. Crime is described in a sociological aspect, the behavior that infringes criminal law. It can be described in the course of laws, through official police reports of crime, or in the course of victimization surveys of people who are concerned about it, but possibly not involved with the department of police. In addition to this, “Crime consists of three principle divisions, 1. the sociology of law, which is an attempt to systematically analysis the conditions under which criminal laws develop and also an explanation of variations in the policies and procedures used in the administration of criminal justice. 2. Criminal etiology, which is an attempt at scientific analysis of the causes of crime; and 3. Penology, which is concerned with the control of crime” (Sycamnias n.d., para. 4). In general, crime has many definitions. One definition is crime is that, an act or an occurrence of inattention that is considered harmful to the wellbeing of the community, or to the principles, or welfare of the circumstances, and is lawfully banned. Criminal activities keep increasing day by day in this world. The reason behind this could be various, but the crimes should be prevented at any cost, for the wellbeing of the mankind. Crimes happen due to certain reasons. It may be due to family problems, circumstances, need of money, selfishness and greed etc. But criminal act cannot be justified in any way. “Several factors could be related to the reasons for crime, such as poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, violence at home, mental disturbances, emotional stress, lack of Mostly, Criminal activities are happen because of emotional stress and mental motivation. ‘Crime is a symptom of wider malaise’, I would agree with this statement because malaise is a stage of mental depression, “a feeling of unease or depression” (Malaise 2012). A state of discomfort or stress leads to criminal activities generally. This could be treated and cured by increasing mental health and through anti crime awareness. If the reasons behind crimes are revealed, then the criminals should get appropriate punishment. Punishments are given to them in accordance to what they have done, and with the aim of preventing them for doing more crimes. But what I feel is, prevention is better than cure. Policies for preventing any forms of crime should be used awareness should be created in the society, so that criminal activities could be minimized. Punishments should be rigorous, so that those who have the tendency to the criminals should rethink. If the laws and punishments are not severe, it would increase the rate of crimes and would produce more criminals. Reasons such as family background, poverty, lack of education etc play a major role in creating criminals. In my opinion, criminals are not born; the circumstances create them as such. Circumstances mean family background, lifestyle, poverty, lack of education etc. There are many causes for crimes. Here I include 10 causes of crimes. “Lack of faith, imbalance, poor judgement, lack of love, poverty, deprived neighbourhoods, being a victim in a chain of events, poor parenting skills, ecological reasons etc” (Top 10 Causes of Crime 2007). The government has the responsibility to prevent crimes and secure the society. So it is the government’s responsibility to prevent crimes by implementing various policies. Increase in population and of urbanization may be reasons for increasing crimes. Economic circumstances, medium earnings, deficiency in ranking, and employment accessibility are also reasons for the increase in crimes. Educational features traditional, view points, excess leisure time, and even religious factors could influence motivation for crimes. It doesn’t mean that not for every educational, traditional, could be the reason and religious factors. It depends the mindset and character of the people. I completely agree with the statement ‘Crime is a symptom of wider malaise’. Criminals are not born; criminals are created due to the external and internal circumstances and mindset of individuals”. Criminal activities keep increasing day by day in this world. The cause behind this could be various, but the crimes should be prohibited at any cost, for the happiness of the mankind. Crimes occur due to certain reasons. Two main theories taken to complete this study are Positivist Theory and sub cultural theory of crime. Theories of Crime: Regions of research in criminology consist of the occurrence, forms, reasons and effects of crime, in addition to communal and governmental policy and reaction to crime. Over the ancient times, theories of crime and sentence have blossomed in their variety. Not only has the learn of crime and sentence broadened all through the behavioral and social sciences, but, progressively more criminologists have adopted viewpoints that are no longer grounded in "positivist" versus “classical" viewpoint of human character and social interaction. The dispute over the root causes of various criminal activities, and the adequate solutions for them has been continuing for decades. All these studies have arisen with various dissimilar theories, planned to explicate the causes of crime, and to provide the solution to crimes. Various studies show that, no single element can elucidate the root cause of the crime a person comments and that no single factor can provide a complete solution to control and prevent crimes. In reality, various theories of crime elucidate contradictory views to events causing crimes, and propose different solution, to control and prevent crimes. Several theories try to explicate criminal behavior. “Criminology is the study of why individuals commit crimes and why they behave in certain situations. By understanding why a person commits a crime, one can develop ways to control crime or rehabilitate the criminal. There are many theories in criminology. Some attribute crime to the individual; they believe that an individual weights the pros and cons and makes a conscious choice whether or not to commit a crime” (Criminology: Understanding Criminology Theories 2012). Others think it is the community’s duty to guarantee that their people do not commit crimes, by providing them security of existance. Some ascertain that some persons have latent personality that decides how they respond when put in certain negative circumstances. Some of the theories presume that crime is a part of human nature. Some other says that, crime is based on fiscal, psychological, biological, and sociological aspects. Nowadays, most of the criminologists think that the criminal activity of a person is the product of a multifaceted interaction among biological, ecological or social circumstances. Positivist Theory: One of the most popular criminological theories which look for the explanation of the reasons of crime is the Positivist theory of Criminology. This theory creates certain assumption on character or nature human, with reference to rationality, freewill, and behavior. According to this theory, biology or heriditory reason provides a person, a predisposition to act in a certain method. Whether an individual really behaves in that mode, and whether that behavior of the person is described as a crime, depends on ecological or social circumstances. Furthermore, it paints an image of the character of crime, why the crime is committed, and possibly more prominently, what major motivational aspects lie behind the crime. Positivists sought to elucidate the earth around them. They viewed manners and behaviors of the human being as determined by emotional, organic, and social traits. They put weight on a deterministic vision of the earth, on the acts of crime rather than lawful issues, and avoiding crime in the course of treatment of criminal. The positivists used systematic methods and pressure was placed on this. They gathered data with the intention of elucidate different kinds of people and social phenomena. Naturalists and Anthropologists created the development theory, which was a significant element to the study of criminal behavior of the individual by the positivists. Positivism values technical reasoning and cleverness, as ways of understanding and abolishing crime, and as a means of guaranteeing that the general activities of public run smoothly. Positivist theories intend to look for, elucidate and forecast future patterns of crime, using natal or individual disciplines, in an attempt to recognize the key reasons of crime. They have been condemned for failing to find out the reasons of crime and to develop effective strategies for managing crime.  “Positivist theories discount the role of free will, instead, it takes into account factors such as genetic transmission, personality, learning and moral development.  The sociological perspective is also taken into account. Emphasis is placed on anomie (a lack of moral standards in society) and strain resulting from poverty imposed by a rigid class structure” (Theories of Crime n.d.). Strategies to diminish crime would entail treatment at a personal level, or interference at a social level. The task of Positivist theory was to demonstrate that behavior of the human was comprehensible by the same scientific rules that governed every living activity. This ‘Positivist revolution’ has been seen as an ongoing fight in opposition to ‘metaphysical’, ‘pre-scientific’ concept of human behaviour particularly as symbolized by classicism and its ideas based on rationality, parity and free will. This theory, amidst those physiological, emotional, biological and communal influences, donate to the formation of the criminal, but that, it is in the person, the basic predisposition to crime is positioned. “Positivist theory of crime implemented the idea of social Darwinism that individuals or groups develop certain physical and psychological attributes, which allow them to function more efficiently in the social and natural environment” (Positivist Theory of Crime n.d.). The key suppositions of the positivist theory of thought are; 1. Human being behavior is decided and not a matter of free will. 2. Criminals are basically diverse from noncriminals. 3. Social theorists can be objective in their job. 4. Crime is often caused by numerous factors. The theory aims at the abolition of crime in the course of methodical application of scientific technique. Investigation is based on lawful terms and connected statistics. This attempt is made to find out law-related generalities. Classicists think that citizens commit crime in the course of an exercise of their free-will, while time positivists refuse the concept of free-will. According to this theory, positivists argue that, behavior of the person is really pre-disposed and determined by personal and biological differences. “Individual positivism emphasizes differentiation and views criminals as different from law-abiding citizens. As a result, individual positivism seeks policies and practices which would involve the application of science. Having inherited or acquired their criminal tendencies, individual positivism stresses the need to prevent and treat criminals” (Pelovangu 2010). The positivist school assisted to escort in a study to was more of reformative than punitive. The conclusion that offenders are distinguished by unalterable mental or physical features guides to the summation that criminals should be caged indefinitely, eradicated, or altered physically by employ of intrusive actions. Crime avoidance so, was a substance of not permitting the multiplication of the imperfects. Other than his attempts of scientific application to elucidating the reasons of crime, Lombroso also dreamt of totally altering the criminal justice scheme to consist of his criminology and respond to offenders with regards to their degree of inborn dangerousness. The Sub Cultural Theory of Crime: In criminology, the theory of sub cultural comes forward from the job of the Chicago School on gangs, and builds up in the course of the figurative interactionism. This activates a set of theories which point out that certain sets or subcultures in society have principles and thoughts that are conducive to crime and aggression. The main focus is on juvenile delinquency, for the reason that, theorists think that if this outline of offending can be recognized and managed, it will fracture (near) the transition from teenaged criminal into habitual criminal. The sub cultural theory has been very important in advancing the learning and study of crime. Lanier (2004) opened, that as a way of viewing the culture of the youth and youthful crime particularly, it has had enormous influence. In trying to grant meaning to the lawbreaker, the theory of sub cultural has dominated the lessons on criminology in the last two decades, and has materialized as a staple reaction in the representation of the current journalists. Sub-cultural theory recommends that certain groups in certain cultures form their own different subculture that varies from the rest of the culture. As division of the procedure of socialization, certain types of behavior turn out to be the norm from one age group to the next. There are numerous examples of sub-cultures in culture. In spite of this fact, it requires to comprehend the impact of dissimilar sub-cultures upon wider civilization. “Subcultural theories of crime and deviance explain deviance in terms of the subculture of a social group. The theories argue that particular groups develop and maintain norms and values that differ from those held by the majority of modern day western society” (Evaluate the Subcultural Theories of Crime 1998). The theory of sub-cultural and deviance can be seen as growths on environmental theories even though, they maintain a physically powerful hypothetical undercurrent of functionalist suppositions, based on the subject of circumstances in the social world. Subcultural theory to crime has a long history. To converse on criminal subcultures, and to explain their activities and principles was commonplace among Victorian writers, for example Mayhew’s, “Illustrating the hazardous classes”, the underlife of 19th C London. The subcultural theory tries to deal with the basic troubles of social analysis: how to connect the subjective implications of actions, to an objective evaluation of their circumstances, how to connect the actions of the individual to the principles of his or her group, how to connect the macro-structure of humanity to the microcosm of person action, how to recognize the voluntarism of human actions in determinate conditions, how to tackle troubles of rationality and illogicality, of social business and disorganization, and how to connect the past to the current predicament. “A social structure theory is applied to a variety of approaches in criminology and attempts to rationalize the development of criminal behavior, within the dynamic social ecology of the time. Subcultural theories focus on small cultural groups that have fragmented away from mainstream society for various reasons, and formulate their own values, norms and beliefs” (Swart 2010). It gives attention to small cultural groups that have deviated from mainstream humanity for numerous reasons and create their own principles, norms and attitude. Criminal behavior is frequently the effect of these group customs and values. Morrison (1995) argued that inferior social classes have less opportunity due to their location in the social construction, which invariably influences feelings of anger and vengeance, followed by abnormal and criminal behavior. Even though subcultural theories have been condemned for the dependence on insufficient crime statistics, and the lack of experiential and hypothetical grounds, numerous writers, like Ferrell (1995) and Gastil (1975), have confirmed a “general ground among cultural and illegal practices in current social life” (Ferrell, 1995, p. 25). There are numerous intersections of traditions and crime. An examination of collective behavior connected with appearance, picture, style and figurative meaning, could offer precious insights into the meaning and growth of subcultural criminal behavior of the person. Subcultural theories also consider the function of the media and spectators of crime in the dynamic growth of criminal trends and behavior. There is huge potential to administer these procedures and the exposure that it symbolizes in order to influence environments away from circumstances is likely to encourage crimes. Bursik (1988) added that past settings and city dynamics have to be taken into account, to sufficiently interpret criminal behavior rates and tendencies over time. These moves in social constructions and associated behavior are influenced by various factors, consisting of public rule, community support, socio-economic position, housing, etc., and have to be measured in the suitable context. Society is not a “fixed, steady construction” and public rule has to go side by side with the new tendencies in subcultural crime, particularly in urban centers. It is apparent that a new and fresh approach is required to rehabilitate productively those who have deficiencies in cultural support. “Sub-cultural theories of crime and deviance focus on cultural transmission, thus immediately involving a structuralist thread with interactionist ideas. Their development also seems to have roots in ecological theories, while retaining a strong undercurrent of functionalist assumptions. Reactive and Independent are the two main theoretical refinements of the sub cultural theory” (Narayan 2007). Reactive: In a reactive sub-culture, the members in the particular group build up norms and morals that are both a reply to and opposition to the prevailing standards and principles, existing in a larger or “conservative” culture. This viewpoint obtains numerous forms in practice. One of its facets elucidates the formation of gangs, and the prevalence of young males in criminal behavior figures. Furthermore, this viewpoint also deliberates upon the cause of “non-economic” forms of crime. “Subcultural theories assert that individuals typically do not feel strained or frustrated, and therefore strain is not the likely source of the delinquent behavior. Therefore subcultural theories assert that criminal behavior is learned in interaction with others who approve of crime or who hold values conductive to crime” (Cote 2002, p. 66). Independent: In this type of sub-cultural grouping, the affiliates of the group are held to adopt a set of customs and principles, which are successfully “self-contained” and precise to the group. While these principles, particularly, vary from those of the wider culture in which the sub-culture lives, they may not necessarily or deliberately be against such values. On the other hand, what such sub-cultural principles symbolizes is an “autonomous” product and solution to the troubles, faced by citizens in their everyday lives. “The sub-cultural theories of Cohen and Cloward and Ohlin linked these two perspectives together. In these theories, strain causes the formation of the delinquent sub-cultures which are then maintained through a process of cultural transmission of values” (Vitos & Maahs 2012, p. 161). Conclusion: I totally agree with this given statement. ‘Crime is a symptom of wider malaise’. Criminals are not born; criminals are created due to external and internal circumstances, and also in relation with mindset of individuals. The theory of positivism and the theory of sub-culture help to identify the various circumstances under which the person commits crime. Classical criminology was planned to offer a rational, lucid, and theoretical option to what was frequently a rude, cruel, inhumane, and subjective scheme of justice. Criminal activities keep increasing day by day in this world, because of so many reasons. The reason behind this could be various, but the crimes should be prevented, for the well being of mankind. The government has the responsibility to prevent crimes and secure the society. So it is the government’s responsibility to prevent crimes by implementing various policies. Increase in population and urbanization may be reasons for increasing crimes. Criminals are just the product of our society and they need definite rectification. Once we label these persons as criminals, it generates a stigma for those who may undergo mental problems. Criminality can show the way to being taken to custody, conviction, or imprisonment for adults, as delinquency is associated to adolescents committing illegal acts. Criminal activities keep rising day by day in this humanity. The reason behind this could be diverse, but the crimes should be prohibited at any cost, for the happiness of the mankind. The government has the duty to avert crimes and protected the society. So it is the government’s duty to prevent crimes by executing various policies. Reference List Cote, S 2002. Criminological Theories: Bridging the Past to the Future. Sage Publications, Inc. Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Criminology: Understanding Criminology Theories. 2012. Criminology. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Evaluate the Subcultural Theories of Crime. 1998. Digital Term Papers. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Malaise. 2012. Farlex, Inc. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Narayan, VV 2007. Medico-Legal Update: Implications of the Anomie and Sub-Cultural Theories of Deviance in Criminology. IndMedica. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Pelovangu, R 2010. Positivist Criminology: Cesare Lombroso and Individual Positivism. Law, Crime, and Justice. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Positivist Theory of Crime. n.d. Theoritical Criminology. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 11 Feb. 2012]. Swart, J 2010. Subcultural Theory and Criminal Behavior. Socyberty. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Sycamnias, E n.d. Criminology. Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Theories of Crime. n.d. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Top 10 Causes of Crime. 2007. Talidari. [Online] Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Vitos, GF & Maahs, JR 2012. Criminology: Theory, Research, and Policy. 3rd Edn. Jones & Bartlett Learning, Inc. Available at [Accessed on 12 Feb. 2012]. Read More