Criminology
Criminology is the study of the etiology of crime – what
causes crime and why. To answer that question, we seek to
detect crime and then accurately measure it in all its dimensions:
Based on an assessment of that information, a response or a
treatment is prescribed in both a preventative and curative
context if possible. Criminology seeks epistemological
understanding so as to better prevent and respond to crime
in a social/communal context and to minimize its negative
Impacts.
Criminology:�Preliminary Thoughts
a. causality v. spurious correlations
b. causality v. accentuating, aggravating� impacts
Criminology: �Preliminary Thoughts
1. There are no accurate diagnostic instruments (no� criminological thermometers, no criminological x-rays or� CAT scans)
2. No body of diagnostic knowledge
3. No evidence-based, generally consistent, uniformly� applicable and effective treatment modalities
Type 1 (Alpha Error)
It is impossible to speak of one specific
cause for the wide range of behavior
classified as criminal
Type II (Beta Error)
You cannot call something a cause of an
event if it rarely produces the event. Many
factors impact in a non-causal context, and
would more appropriately be called:
Type III Error
Criminology, like medicine, assumes
conformity and seeks to explain deviance.
Perhaps we should assume deviance and
explain conformity.
- Why do nearly all people, nearly all the
time, refrain from crime?
- What is the cause of virtue?
- How does society build a citizenry of
character?
Kohlberg Typology
Level 1 – Fear of Punishment
Level 2 – Promise of Reward
Level 3 – Altruistic Motivation
Justice will be realized only when people are
intrinsically willing to obey the unenforceable.
Scientific Criminology
An interdisciplinary social science-based
field of study that seeks a core, etiological
understanding of the preventative and
curative aspects of crime that seeks to develop
and continually enhance a body of scientific
knowledge relative to preventative and curative
strategies; the seeks to create better
measurement instruments, better diagnostic
capabilities, and ultimately, better
preventative, control and treatment options.
Public Criminology
Science in general is constrained due to deep
rooted social, economic, and political factors.
There are scientific truths and there are
political truths. In the end, political “leaders”
look not to science, but to the political
palatability coefficient, to the political truths,
to survive. So rather than criticize, we need to
recognize that this is simply the nature of the
job, and we need to adjust accordingly.
Role of Criminologists
Criminologists and justice professionals must:
* Uncover scientific truths/grow the body of knowledge.�
* Be alert as to when the best time would be to bring the
results forward (be attuned to the zeitgeist).�
*Engage in activities that create a politically palatable
environment/create a setting where truths can be aired
and implemented.
We must be both scientific and public criminologists for our research to have any value.
�Theories of Deviance �
I.) Demonological Theories
1.) Traditional ‑ Augustine, Gregory I, Gregory VII, Jerome
2.) Pre‑Classical ‑ Aquinas, Luther, Machiavelli
3.) Social Contract ‑ Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Voltaire
�Theories of Deviance �
I.) Demonological Theories
A.) Traditional ‑ Augustine, Gregory I, Gregory VII, Jerome
Behavior is caused by other world factors – sin, Satan, trial by ordeal,
will of God, predestination, people basically bad, church punishes,
frequent and harsh punishments
B.) Pre‑Classical ‑ Aquinas, Luther, Machiavelli
The Pre-Classical writers press the margin per the above principles,
some things are not sin (mala in se) but wrong from a civic context
(mala prohibitum), some acts punished by the State
�Theories of Deviance �
I.) Demonological Theories…continued
C.) Social Contract ‑ Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Voltaire
instincts, you agree to abide by the laws and the State agrees to
maintain order, the State punishes when that contract is violated
because the state does not punish with sufficient frequency and
severity
head of the state is the servant of the people, rule of law (no one, not� even the King is above the law), it is better to free a guilty man than to
condemn an innocent one
Hobbes wins out initially, but Lockean et al philosophies
eventually emerge in the Western world
�Theories of Deviance �
I.) Demonological Theories
1.) Traditional ‑ Augustine, Gregory I, Gregory VII, Jerome
2.) Pre‑Classical ‑ Aquinas, Luther, Machiavelli
3.) Social Contract ‑ Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Voltaire
II.) Naturalistic Theories
1.) Classical ‑ Cicero, Beccaria, Bentham, Burke
Classical Theory
There is crime because the state lacks certainty and
severity in its punishment delivery systems, and it is the
state’s job to punish, not the church. To stop crime, we
need more police, prosecutors, and prisons. Punish lots
of people, punish them regularly and harshly.
Classical theory is based on deterrence theory. Crime is
to be prevented through fear of receiving sanctions
(Rational Man Theory). The state needs to make the
costs of engaging in crime higher than the benefits, and
communicate that to the public.
Classical Theory
There are some aggregate costs (innocent
punished/guilty punished more severely than they
should be – read Liberty v. Order), but these costs
are the necessary and totally acceptable secondary
collateral consequences as we must avert chaos
and maintain order and stability as the
primary/overriding goal.
Classical Theory
1. People are basically evil
2. Self determinism
3. Order the over-riding focus; liberty is but a secondary concern
4. Deterrence Theory/Rational Man Theory
5. Focus on the crime�6. State punishes (not the church)
7. Utilitarian perspective
General Deterrence Theory
Severity is not a substitute for certainty.
Certainty is the key element.
Classical Theory
This was the prominent theory from the mid-1700s until the
late 1800s. The Kings loved it for it justified their harsh and
arbitrary use of power, as did another holdover notion from
the Demonological era, the Divine Right of Kings. There ideas
taken in tandem justified the Kings’ punitive ways, and loved
Bentham for justifying their murders and frauds.
Under Demonological theory, the Pope was the judge. Under
Classical theory (and its Divine Right of Kings notion), the
Kings were the ultimate judge. Under Positivism (our next
topic), it is the people who rule and reign (popular
sovereignty), and there are many perspectives that have
grown from this orientation.
�Theories of Deviance �
I.) Demonological Theories
1.) Traditional ‑ Augustine, Gregory I, Gregory VII, Jerome
2.) Pre‑Classical ‑ Aquinas, Luther, Machiavelli
3.) Social Contract ‑ Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Voltaire
II.) Naturalistic Theories
1.) Classical ‑ Cicero, Beccaria, Bentham, Burke
2.) Positivist ‑ Lombroso, Quetelet, Comte
A. Biological Determinism ‑ Galton, Lombroso
1. Constitutional ‑ Gall, Goring, Hooton, Jacobs, Sheldon
2. Bio Social ‑ Hippchen, Jeffrey, Edward O. Wilson
Positivist Theory
Classical theory slowly slipped underground with the
success of the industrial revolution and the
emergence of a middle class who no longer accepted
the harsh and arbitrary use of power by Kings. In
the place of Classical theory came a new paradigm, a
new school of thought called Positivism that also
interestingly grew out of the Social Contract
paradigm, stealing not from Hobbes of course as
Classical theory did, but from Voltaire, Locke and
Rousseau and is based on the notion that people are
basically good – positivism.
Positivist Theory
1. People are basically good.
2. The king is the servant of the people
3. The rule of law is dominant, and no one is above� the law (not even the king)
4. Rules and regulations are in place to regulate the� power of the Kings/the Regents/the elites
5. Power to the people/popular sovereignty
6. Liberty, not state controlled order, reigns� supreme
7. Evidence-based, data driven orientation
Bio-Criminology
There are born criminals with definite physical anomalies, sub-humans who will never change (criminaloids), unless we intervene biologically. We divide this school of thought into two categories:
* Constitutional: Crime is due to definitive and� identifiable physical abnormalities in people. � Criminals are biologically/organically inferior,� physically and mentally.
* Bio-Social/Bio-Crim: Behavior is a result of � bio-chemical imbalances and genetic abnormalities,� but also the environment. The focus of the bio-� criminologists, is on the genetic and bio-chemical.
Bio-Criminology…continued
Three areas of focus:
Bio-Criminology…continued
Genetic Origins of Crime:
Bio-Criminology…continued
Caspi study
Bio-Criminology…continued
�Behavior Impacted By
(Trembly thesis is that the 66% figure will drop even further as time passes)
| Genetic | Environment |
18 months old | 82% | 18% |
60 months old | 66% | 34% |
Bio-Criminology…continued
Internally Sourced Origins of Crime -
A. Hormone and enzyme imbalances:
Bio-Criminology…continued
Internally Sourced Origins of Crime:
B. Insufficient brain development/brain abnormalities:
Bio-Criminology…continued
B. Insufficient brain development/brain abnormalities � …continued:
Bio-Criminology…continued
Externally Sourced Origins of Crime:
A. Exposure to toxic substances:
Bio-Criminology…continued
Externally Sourced Origins of Crime:
B. Nutritional/Orthomolecular Deficiencies
�Schoenthaeler study
Bio-Criminology…continued
Bio-Criminology Summary
deficiencies)
Bio-Criminology Problems
There is a future for bio-criminology as there is much empirically valid work being done in this area. Science is proverbially ahead of culture, bio-criminology in particular, so it will take some time for this perspective to be integrated into the mainstream (Max Plank theorem).
�Theories of Deviance �
I.) Demonological Theories
1.) Traditional ‑ Augustine, Gregory I, Gregory VII, Jerome
2.) Pre‑Classical ‑ Aquinas, Luther, Machiavelli
3.) Social Contract ‑ Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Voltaire
II.) Naturalistic Theories
1.) Classical ‑ Cicero, Beccaria, Bentham, Burke
2.) Positivist ‑ Lombroso, Quetelet, Comte
A. Biological Determinism ‑ Galton, Lombroso
1. Constitutional ‑ Gall, Goring, Hooton, Jacobs, Sheldon
2. Bio Social ‑ Hippchen, Jeffrey, Edward O. Wilson
B. Cultural Determinism ‑ Quetelet
1. Psychological ‑ Tarde
a. Cognitive Theory ‑ James, Menninger, Piaget
b. Freudian Theory/Psychoanalysis ‑ Freud, Jung
c. Learning Theory ‑ Bandura, Skinner
Cultural Determinism
Cultural Determinism comes down on the nurture side in the classic
nurture vs. nature debate. Acts committed by individuals are the result
of social/cultural/environmental experiences. Two general schools of
thought – psychological and sociological.
Psychological school – Deviant behavior due to individual personality
deviations. When the person is psychologically and emotionally balanced
they will no longer commit crime. This is an individual-focused
orientation.
Psychological School
Freudian psychology - Crime is a product of inner psychic conflict.
Crime is due to childhood trauma, repressed feelings of anxiety, conflict
between the id (pleasure-seeking center) the ego (reality component)
and the superego (punishment component). Because of conflict between
the id, the ego and the superego, people repress feelings into the realm
of unconsciousness, and those feelings surface from time to time in the
form of undesirable behavior. The unconscious is a source of conscious
motivation, and thus a party of psychotherapy. People are classified as
psychotic, neurotic, dissocial, schizophrenic, with inferiority complexes
and identity crises, and psychopathic (the classic “criminal” label). All of
these mental abnormalities can lead to antisocial behavior.
Psychological School
Learning theory – Behavior is learned, often subconsciously, but
learned (ie. Pavlov). The world, the environment, shapes people.
This theory de-emphasizes the conscience, the id/ego/superego
internal conflict notions of Freudian psychology and instead
emphasis the principles of positive and negative reinforcement.
So change people by rewarding conventional behavior and
punishing abnormal/undesirable behavior. Often called
Skinnerian psychology, or rat psychology.
Psychological School
Cognitive theory – Crime is due to thwarted individual moral development.
This theory emphases the individual’s need to take responsibility for
their own actions. It is a conscious learning orientation that stresses the
need for a deliberate internal conversion to a more responsible lifestyle.
As individuals reach moral high ground, they are less inclined to engage
in criminal behavior. Behavior should be motivated by altruistic factors
Rather than by fear of punishment (Kohlberg typology).
Psychology is the quintessential soft science. It is based, not on evidence,
but on educated guesswork, tempered with intuition and personal
experience. Psychiatric testimony regarding criminal behavior only distorts
the fact-finding process (see Margaret Hagen, Whores of the Court).
Counterpoint- become a forensic psychologist and advance the field!
Theories of Deviance…continued
2. Sociological ‑ Durkheim, Ferri
a. Social Structure Theories ‑ Burgess
1. Culture Conflict ‑ Miller, Sellin
2. Differential Opportunity ‑ Cloward, Ohlin
3. Relative Deprivation ‑ Blau and Blau
4. Social Disorganization ‑ McKay, Shaw, Thrasher
5. Strain ‑ Agnew, Merton
6. Subculture Conflict ‑ Cohen
Sociological School
Sociological School – Emphasizes the socio-economic impacts on behavior.
It has little micro value, but great macro or aggregate value in explaining
crime. There are two general theoretical constructs that fall under this
orientation - social structural theories and social process theories.
Social structural theories – There are several theories that fall under this
broad category. They all use as the basis, the fact that we live in socio-
economically stratified settings and that there is an unequal distribution and
access to wealth, power, and opportunity in society. An inability to attain the
desired levels of wealth, power and/or opportunity often results in criminal
activity…and that can be in any social class. Even the rich, when not feeling
rich enough, will resort to crime. The general focus in this school however is
upon poverty and disadvantaged class position as a basic cause of crime.�
Social Structural Theories…continued
There is definitive socio-economic stratification. The wealthiest 62 people in
the world own as much as the poorest half of the world. In other words, the
net worth of 62 people is equivalent to the net worth of 3.9 billion people.
The net worth of the wealthiest 1% in American is equivalent to the net worth
of the bottom 90% combined. The Oscar-winning movie “Parasite” plays out
the struggle between rich and poor, as does the film, “Slum Dog Millionaire.”
�The inequalities of our economic system are grotesque – Poverty is violence,
unemployment is violence, lack of education and hope is violence.
Martin Luther King
Social Structural Theories…continued
Poverty is not just the lack of money, but of diminished human rights and
opportunities – educational opportunities, health care, quality housing in
good neighborhoods, legal assistance, recreational opportunities, travel,
quality nutrition, employment opportunities, limited networks/connections
with positive role models, social/cultural opportunities. The compound
impact is an environment of hopeless (anomie).
The Gini coefficient measures economic inequality in a nation, in a
community, and there is a high correlation between the Gini coefficient and
crime – the higher the socio-economic inequality coefficient in a community
(rift between rich and poor), the higher crime rates. This is an empirical
validation of the general Social Structural theory premise, that
poverty/disadvantaged class position is a basic cause of crime.
Social Structural Theories…continued
When you break down the social forces at work,
none of them taken alone are all that
overwhelming per se, when taken together, these
factors have a pronounced, accumulative,
synergistic impact, a compounding, multiplicative
impact on crime propensity. In the aggregate,
disadvantaged social position, unbalanced,
inequitable social structures, are a cause of crime.
Social Disorganization (Chicago school)
Hot spots, broken windows theory. Society is an organism that is sick. We
must locate the sickness, the cancerous tumors per an X-ray, and treat it/cut
it out. Chicago area projects – map the city and find areas that are disfigured
by poverty and crime, and then upgrade the socio-economic environment in
those areas. Treat the socially handicapped, help those in the hot-sport areas
to overcome feelings of anomie by providing more opportunities. Put in Rec
Centers and parks, start neighborhood associations, have concerts in the park,
career fairs at the schools, local civic and business leaders personally serve as
one-on one mentors, draw upon local talent to serve as teacher aids in the
schools, police adopt a problem solving paradigm
Police success measured not by crime reduction alone, but by the teenage
pregnancy rates in a neighborhood, high school graduation rates, the number
of abandoned homes and business in the neighborhood (with their broken
windows), the number of abandoned vehicles, un-employment rate.
Strain Theory (Merton)
Strain theory is micro or individual based vs. Social Disorganization with is macro based.
There are barriers to reaching goals that are class-based. No matter what we do, it is impossible to get ahead. There is a sense of anomie (hopelessness) and futility. There is no chance of getting ahead using legitimate means so we resort to illegitimate means. Crime can be reduced by enhancing socio-economic opportunities, particularly educational opportunities as there is a profound educational attainment to crime correlation.
Eugene Lang, Kauffman Foundation, Project Head Start, Job Corps, old GI Bill
Flaws – educated people still commit crimes, just different types
- even when given the opportunities, all will not take advantage
(penicillin does not work for everyone)
Strain Theory (Merton)
Proponents of the Chicago School and Strain Theory thought that if given economic, social, general development opportunities there would be no crime. and that not the case
Flaws –
Strain Theory (Merton)…continued
So while providing opportunity may not be THE answer to all our social problems, it does provide some answers. But as we try to reach out in this context, these efforts are thwarted by a lack of understanding by many in the upper classes who have no clue regarding poverty and its de-habilitating impacts. See the cartoon by Engelhardt (re-drawn by my wife!) that depicts some of these points.
Strain Theory (Merton)…conclusion
Give kids a chance, and most will achieve. Not all, penicillin does not
work for everyone, but by in large, in a relatively consistent, uniform
sense, provide hope and opportunity and great things will happen.
Applying Strain Theory to real life – offer free tuition to a state
university or a tech school for all who graduate from high school, and
if a solid GPA is maintained, the tuition waiver remains. Offer hope
and opportunity, defeat anomie and there will be less crime, less
violence and more social peace. It is also economically sound as over a
20 year period, such a policy pays off somewhere around 5:1 (better
jobs means more taxes paid and a less welfare-dependent society).
Differential Opportunity
Strain theory, but now applied more broadly. It’s not just the poor, but
anyone who lacks legitimate opportunities to achieve success, will
resort to illegitimate means. You could be “rich” per the definition of
many, but you want more. It’s a relative deprivation, a “keep up with
the Jones” mentality in the face of limited legitimate opportunities that
sparks crime. This is very useful in explaining white collar crime as
well as upper and middle-class delinquency.
Ivan Boesky, Kenneth Lay
How much is enough is the quintessential relativity that drives this
theory.
Cultural Conflict
Crime is caused by the clash of two or more cultural groups who both
desire to retain their identities. An act may be normal for one culture,
but a crime in another. If your cultural perspectives win out in this
social Darwinian struggle, then you set the norms and the rules, and
the losers are the deviants and criminals.
Vietnamese coining example
Sub-Cultural Conflict
Crime is caused by the clash of two or more sub-cultural groups within communities who both desire to retain their identities. There are dozens of subcultures that function within our communities, and crime is one result of the competition between these forces. Some compete more less civilly, but some more strident. This theory is very useful in explaining inner city crime.
Monster (by Kody Scott) – This book graphically articulates the subculture of the streets, not as seen by an academic, but by an insiders, an active member of the LA gang known as the Crips.
Theories of Deviance…continued
2. Sociological ‑ Durkheim, Ferri
a. Social Structure Theories ‑ Burgess
b. Social Process Theories ‑ Sutherland
1. Bonding ‑ Hindelang, Hirschi
2. Control - Durkheim, Reckless
3. Developmental/Life Course – Laub, Moffitt, Sampson
4. Differential Anticipation ‑ Glazer
5. Differential Association ‑ Cressy, Sutherland
6. Differential Reinforcement ‑ Akers
7. Drift ‑ Matza, Sykes
8. Labeling ‑ Allport, Braithwaite, Lemert, Rosenthal
9. Self-control – Gottfredson, Hirschi
10. Social Development ‑ Weis
11. Turning Point/Tipping Point – Laub, Sampson
Social Process Theories (Sutherland)
The theme of the several Social Process theories, is that we are not
born as a criminal, but become one through a process. It’s nurture not
nature. We are impacted in a negative way when exposed to a negative
environment.
Differential Association (Sutherland) – We become criminals due to the
process of interaction and association with others. We have reference
groups who we associate with, whose love, esteem and acceptance is
sought. Over time, we become like them We become like those with
whom we associate, depending upon the frequency, duration, intensity
And priority of those relationships. Behavior is learned; social osmosis.
Edwin Sutherland was born in 1883 in Gibbon, Nebraska.
Social Process Theories…continued
Drift Theory – We may associate with “bad people” but:
Most are not at the two ends – immune or permanently impacted. Most of us,
and per the name of the theory, drift in and then out, in and out of deviant modes of behavior in a sporadic fashion, at different times, and at different
levels in our lives as a result of our associations with others/peer pressures.
This theory is useful in explaining teenage joyriding, drinking and petty
vandalism.
Alcohol analogy
Social Process Theories…continued
Bonding Theory (Hirschi) – We have bonds to those in conventional society (church,
school, family, work). The stronger the bonds (attachment, involvement, commitment,
belief), the less crime prone we are. The weaker those bonds, the more crime prone we
become.
Bare branches and youth bulges
This theory is very useful in explaining delinquency/crimes of the young. There is a
definitive age desistance factor, an aging out of crime phenomenon. As the young
develop more and stronger bonds with conventional society, as they develop a greater
stake in conventional society, they move out of criminal modes of behavior. They will no
longer embrace but will desist from crime. Desistence is the buzz word in this theory.
Youth in particular, but we all will desist from engaging in criminal activities as we
expand and strengthen our bonds with conventional society, but will persist in our
criminal activities if those bonds are few and weak.
Mexican police experiment
Social Process Theories…continued
Self-control Theory (also Hirschi) – This is a derivation of bonding theory that
ties in with cognitive psychology. This theory suggests that individuals with
low self-control have a greater propensity to committee crime when in the
presence of criminal opportunity. We can develop greater self-control as we
attain an internal conversion to a more responsible lifestyle (altruistic
motivation), which can be realized as we expand and strengthen our bonds
with conventional society, particularly in our youth.
�Stanford University marshmallow test
Social Process Theories…continued
Developmental/Life Court Theory (Sampson and Laub; Moffitt) – This is yet
another derivation of bonding theory – as individuals expand and strengthen
bonds with conventional society, they will desist from crime. This theory
stresses the time and bond-quality dimensions. We need quality bonds,
maintained longitudinally. We will desist in engaging in crime over time as
quality bonds are maintained longitudinally
This theory does not explain white collar crime at all, nor terrorism, but it is
useful in explaining traditional property crime and some violent crime.
Social Process Theories…continued
Turning Point or Tipping Point Theory (Sampson and Laub) – We experience
occasional singular episodes and events that permanently alter our life’s
trajectories and re-directs us down different paths, positive or negative. Crime
pathways theory. This theory de-emphasizes the time dimension and the
power of bonds which can be negated in a flash. It is used to explain virtue as
well as vice and violence.
A former Univ. of Nebraska criminology professor
Bonnie Parker
Kody Scott
Social Process Theories…continued
Labeling Theory (Braithwaite, Lemert, Rosenthal) – Behavior is a result of
internalized expectation. We tend to behave in ways we think others expect us to behave. This theory explains both positive and negative behaviors.
The empirical validation of Labeling Theory pragmatically undermines the
Positivist School’s emphasis on rehabilitation. To bring someone into a
rehabilitation program, we first must convict them/identify them as needing
help, but by so doing we label them as a deviant and we don’t have any
generally consistent/quantitively proven treatment modalities at our disposal
to overcome the impact of that labeling.
Sociological Theories, in sum
Some are called social structural theory, some are call social process
theories, but taken together they say much the same thing in an
aggregate context. Rehabilitate the neighborhoods, provide economic,
educational and social opportunities for all, help remove the sense of
anomie, strengthen bonds to conventional society and:
Decrease the exposure and impact of the risk factors, increase the
exposure and exposure and impact of the protective factors in all
areas, and the seriousness of crime will be diminished.
Rehabilitation – Positivist Cornerstone
The Positivist school has two general themes:
That seems contradictory, but consider this medical analogy. People are basically healthy but we all get sick from time to time. People are basically good, but all of us commit crime from time to time. From the medical side, we go to the doctor when we are ill, and they do things to help cure us. When moving in a criminal mode, we too need to become cured, rehabilitated. People are basically good but all go astray at times due to their environment and need to be rehabilitated. The problem is that while medicine has some generally consistent, uniformly effective treatment procedures and modalities, there are virtually none when it comes to rehabilitation. Its all guesswork.
Martinson study
Rehabilitation Orientation Limitations
* Labeling stigmatization
* The rehabilitation “medical model” lacks:
a. Diagnostic instruments
b. Body of diagnostic knowledge
c. Generally consistent, uniformly effective� treatment procedures and modalities
Though we like to mimic the medical model and
its micro orientation, criminology is macro in its
orientation and capabilities.
* External factors (Zimbardo, prisonization)
Rehabilitation orientation limitations …continued
* Re-habilitation terminology fraud
* Transferability issues
* Limited exposure
* Too late
* Constancy dictum
* Nihil Nocere
Rehabilitation's pragmatic bottom line - If you want middle
class behavior, provide middle class jobs, reward and
opportunity structures.
Palmer and Gendreau
There have been sincere, lifetime efforts undertaken by so many
in this field, but the more they extend their helping hands, the
worse the situation has become…but do we stop?
* Not enough research to date.�
* Same rate of success as oncologists.
�* A life-long cure not reasonable (not expected in medicine)
�* The need for inter-crime and intra-crime specificity is only now
beginning to be realized.
�* The problem is often not the program, but the implementation.
Rehabilitation Program�Implementation Needs
Even when you have a good program/a good seed, we still need (in a farming analogy):
* Internal conversion of the treated (fertile ground)
* Proper timing/Zeitgeist (palatable environment)
* Capable program personnel (knowledgeable/ skilled farmer)
* Dedicated/persistent program personnel (hard working farmer)
If any one of these is missing, the program fails/the crops fail.
Palmer and Gendreau…key point
For rehabilitation programs to be successful, the clients must
want to change (medical model does not apply here at all).
There is a need for a deliberate internal conversion to a more
responsible lifestyle on the part of the individuals (Kohlberg
Level 3). We can place people in every program imagined but
they will never change until they want to, and even when they
want to, its hard to change (ie., losing weight analogy). So, how
do we motivate people to internally, altruistically want to
change? There is the rub, as everyone is different, but that is the
key to becoming successful social workers, probation or parole
officers, parents, coaches, teachers, leaders in every arena –
motivate at the Kohlberg 3 level; help others make that internal
conversion to a more responsible lifestyle.
Theories of Deviance…continued
3.) Conflict ‑ Marx
A. Class Conflict ‑ Bonger, Vold
B. Economic Determinism ‑ Becker, Ehrlich, Mayr, Stigler
C. Radical ‑ Chambliss, Quinney, Turk, Young
Conflict Theory
Bonger was a Dutch criminologist from the who took the
Marxist ideal and pushed it into a criminogical context. He
wrote at the outset of the 20th century. Quinney is an American
criminologist who expanded upon Bonger’s work in the 2nd half
of the 20th century.
The conflict criminologist seek a type of Utopian, socialistic,
classless society. Capitalism is a major cause of crime, the
growing market economy is accentuating crime, laws carry no
absolute element about them but are merely the extension of
upper class wishes, the codification of their values and values,
and when others come to power, new laws and value structures
will be forthcoming.
Some Fundamental Concepts�Regarding Law and Crime
Every society is based on the coercion of some of its members by others.
Law is a function of political power. It is used by the more powerful to maintain control over the less powerful. The more threatened a ruling group feels, the more rigorously it tends to enforce the law.
Laws are the codification of ruling class interests. Laws become legitimate simply because the ruling class has the power to enforce them and the ability to create the ideology by which they are made to appear justified.
The police, the courts and the correctional systems are all instruments utilized by the ruling class to insure adherence to their laws.
People who are socio-economically close to the power group tend to develop normative behavioral systems that are similar to members of the power group. The further away a person is from the power group, the more likely they will possess different normative behavioral systems, and the greater the likelihood that those different behaviors will be defined as criminal.
Fundamental Concepts…continued
Crime is not an inherent quality of any act. All behavior patterns in fact
have the potential to be defined as criminal. Criminality is merely a
label given to certain behaviors by the ruling authorities.
The ability to confer criminal status is a privilege enjoyed by the
powerful classes, to the broad detriment of the less powerful.
Generally, criminal behavior is merely behavior that threatens the
interests of the powerful.
Law and definitions of crime may be modified from time to time, but
never to the extent that existing political and economic relationships
are jeopardized. As a rule, changes in the law are a reflection of
changes in the needs and interests of the powerful.
The rights and freedoms that laws confer grant a great deal more
freedom to some groups than to others. The rights and freedoms
allegedly protected by law, are only protected for those who can afford
it. In the end, legal efficacy reigns supreme, not the law.
Rather than being an independent arbitrator of conflict, the state is in
fact the prize for which different groups compete in order to gain
control.
Radical Criminological Theory
Radical Criminology Problems
1. Ignores Durkheim
a. after the revolution there will still be� deviance, just new definitions
b. there is a value to deviance
Values of Deviance
Values of Deviance
Without deviance, we would be a society of
clones, incapable of dealing with the
variation around us. Diversity is mandatory
to confront the tumultuous, ever changing
world in which we live. The question, is how
what types of deviance should be allowed,
and how much?
Radical Criminology Problems…continued
2. High cost of the revolution, and it would� ironically be born by the very people it is� suppose to help.
3. Capitalism is the root of much crime, and is� particularly helpful in explaining white-collar� crime and some property crime, but it is not� the root of most crime.
But, let us pause and emphasize Quinney’s� point - capitalism is the root of much crime.
Capitalism and Crime
Capitalism has much to offer and many have benefited, but crime is a natural by-
product of capitalism, like automobile exhaust. It is an inevitable artifact. Why?
A. Unemployment:
1. Capitalism by its very nature does not yield stability but rather volatility. We
often talk of business cycles in a very detached fashion, but business cycles
means, there are times when people will be out of work. The cyclical nature of
capitalism with its risk-based orientations, results in economic instability and
periodic unemployment.
2. Capitalism needs a core number of people to be unemployed for two reasons:
a. Some number of unemployed people are needed as a threat, to potentially
take over the jobs if workers threaten to quit due to low wage and working
condition concerns.
b. Some number of unemployed people are needed to turn to in times of peak
production needs.
The optimum unemployment rate from the capitalist point of view is thought to be
roughly 3% - 4%. In our nation of roughly 140 million workers, that is 4.2 million –
5.5million people unemployed, and with unemployment comes crime, for a variety of
reasons.
Capitalism and Crime
B. Capitalism results in a small number of people accumulating great
wealth and others, a large number, living in or near poverty levels.
Capitalism, and particularly minimally regulated capitalism, yields a
large socio-economic inequity coefficient. Nations with a high socio-
economic inequity coefficient (the Gini coefficient) have high property
and violent crime rates.
C. The basic econometrics of business requires workers to be paid
less than what is necessary for them to buy all of the goods and
services they need, let alone to be able buy the things they are
told to buy. Many resort to illegitimate means to make ends meet.
D. Planned obsolescence
E. Conspicuous consumption
F. Monopolistic tendencies (bid-rigging, price-fixing)
Capitalism and Crime
Capitalism seeks monopolies and exploits the
poor. By very definition, many lack the capital
needed to obtain basic needs and wants.
When wealth is equated with success, the
problem becomes more acute. Crime is
normal in a society that stresses wealth and
simultaneously restricts legitimate
opportunity to acquire it. The market culture
accentuates the crime problem.
Bureaucratic Gravitation Phenomenon…footnote point
Every program and proposal carries within it
a potential for failure and abuse, equal and
opposite to the program’s potential for
success.
Theories of Deviance…continued
3.) Conflict ‑ Marx
A. Class Conflict ‑ Bonger, Vold
B. Economic Determinism ‑ Becker, Ehrlich, Mayr, Stigler
C. Radical ‑ Chambliss, Quinney, Turk, Young
4.) Neo‑Classical ‑ Van den Haag, DiIulio, James Q. Wilson
Neo-Classical Theory…back to the future
Crime control, classical theory originally espoused by Bentham
(and others) has come back. James Q. Wilson is perhaps the
most prominent current proponent.
There is crime because the state lacks certainty and severity
in its punishment delivery systems. We need more police,
prosecutors, and prisons to respond to crime. Deterrence
principles reign.
Crime is to be prevented through fear of receiving sanctions.
There are some costs (innocent punished/guilty punished
more than they should be), but we must avert chaos and
maintain security, and these are the necessary and acceptable
collateral consequences.
Classical Theory Principles
* Self determinism – guilt and responsibility lie with the� individual
* Avoid chaos/maintain stability – these are the over-riding� concerns and the costs of achieving these ends are� acceptable collateral consequences
* Invoke the social contract to protect the state�* Utilitarianism/trickle down theory – protect not just the� state but the most powerful
* Deterrence theory – crime prevented thought fear of� receiving harsh sanctions
* Rational Man theory – people consider the costs and� benefits of engaging in any activity; if the states creates a� high cost for engaging in crime, fewer people will engage � in such activity.
General Deterrence Theory
Crime Control vs. Due Process
Crime Control Model Due Process Model
Aggravates long-term stability Aggravates short term contingencies
Apprehend the guilty Protect the innocent
Assumes deviance and explains conformity Assumes conformity and explains deviance
Authoritarian, trained police Social service, educated police
Burden of proof on defense to demonstrate Burden of proof on prosecutor to demonstrate
innocence at beyond reasonable doubt guilt at reasonable doubt
Closed bureaucratic justice structures Open, linking-pin justice structures
Corporal punishment Non-interventionist treatment
Criminal intent of little concern Criminal intent of an overriding concern
Discretionary power to police and Discretionary power to judicial and
prosecutorial officials correctional officials
Emphasis on efficiency Emphasis on effectiveness
Emphasis on training Emphasis on education
Few confession extraction guidelines Completely voluntary confessions
Few search and seizure rules Strict search and seizure rules
Frequent use of the death penalty Abolition of the death penalty
Harm, frighten, scare, intimidate Encourage, help, aid, assist
Harms innocent persons Allows known guilty to go free
Harsh sentences Lenient sentences
High certainty of apprehension/justice system Low certainty of apprehension/justice system
processing processing
Large, demeaning prisons Community-based corrections
Crime Control vs. Due Process
Crime Control Model Due Process Model
Large private sector police force Small private sector police force
Legal counsel provided on rare occasions Legal counsel provided as a right at all stages
Maintain the status quo Respond to social inequities
Mandatory, determinate sentencing Indeterminate sentencing
Many law enforcement officers Few law enforcement officers
Many penalties Few penalties
Maximize level of offender intrusion into system Minimize level of offender intrusion into system
National, centrally organized police force Local, autonomous, decentralized police force
No pretrial discovery for defense Unlimited pretrial discovery for defense
Plea bargaining emphasis Complete adjudication
Presumption of guilt Presumption of innocence
Preventive deterrence policy Curative rehabilitation policy
Protect society from evolutionary change Protect society from revolutionary change
Protect society in the short run Protect society in the long run
Punish the guilty Protect the innocent
Punishment fits the crime Punishment fits the criminal
Quick, informal justice Formalized, individualized justice
Rational, economic man theory Crime a psycho-sociological entity
Social order Individual liberty
Supervision of offenders Advocate of offenders
Swift, certain punishment Treatment, but only when needed
Neo-Classical Problems
1. Pragmatic logistic limitation of low certainty.
2. Human rights concerns - macro.
3. Human rights concerns – micro
4. Certainty/Severity Reciprocity Phenomenon
5. Inherent irrationality of some behavior
a. Temporary insanity/acts of ration vs. acts of
passion
b. Permanent Mental illness
c. Aware of the odds of capture/punishment
1. worth the cost
2. have a death wish
3. excited by the challenge
Neo-Classical Problems
6. Displacement:
a. geographic location
b. nature/substantive offense
c. offender
7. Pragmatic operational limitation
8. Overkill phenomenon
9. Overthrust irony
10. Potential for abuse
Neo-Classical Problems…counterpoint
There are issues with deterrence theory, but
there is no question that specific deterrence can
work and does work regularly. When a cop
pulls up behind you on the freeway, you slow
down. Sanction threats can and do influence
our behavior, but, those threats influence the
behavior of different people in different ways
at different times.
Theories of Deviance…continued
3.) Conflict ‑ Marx
A. Class Conflict ‑ Bonger, Vold
B. Economic Determinism ‑ Becker, Ehrlich, Mayr, Stigler
C. Radical ‑ Chambliss, Quinney, Turk, Young
4.) Neo‑Classical ‑ Van den Haag, DiIulio, James Q. Wilson
5.) Chaos - Lorenz, Poincare, Walker
Chaos Theory
Concluding Points