Criminology Project

Introduction

Criminology refers to the simple criminality study as a more social incidence that incorporates the outcomes, prevention, sources, respective penalties and types of criminality and criminal conduct in addition to the effect and growth of policies (Miller, 2014). Criminology gained popularity in the 19th century when the social growth aspect in the public sector tried to establish the personality of offenders to create more effective approaches to crime prevention and discouragement (Miller, 2014). In this perspective, several different thoughts schools within the criminology study arose that incorporated two of the well-established and acknowledge schools of thoughts in the contemporary society being positivist school that is center on the offender and the classical school which centers on the committed crime (Miller, 2014). In my opinion, amid the classical and positivist criminal theory, the positivist school of thought is closer to my personal crime causation theory. My choice explains the incidents of crime by focusing on the external and internal forces that pressure one to settle for criminal activities beyond their control.

While the classical philosophy adopts that crime is the result of a free will based on the science of human conduct, the positivist theory asserts that crime is caused by inner and outer forces that determine behavioral options and that criminal tendency of not within the control of an individual (Anderson, 2014). Both theories effectively justify the incidents of crime but I feel that positivist theory is closer to my experience and knowledge regarding crimes. In that, for some individuals, criminal behaviors are within them due to inheritance or family links that might have been involved in such behaviors. On the other hand, the social and the economic setting as external forces are responsible for most of criminal behaviors (Anderson, 2014). In that individuals learn such behaviors from the settings that they are raised in. For instance most individuals from the low socio-economic setting which are characterized by poverty and high rate of unemployment survival are only for the fit and in most times crime is their only option. This, therefore, makes it clear on how the external and the biological forces influence criminality which is beyond the control of the individuals (Anderson, 2014).

Positivist crime theory explains all crimes occurrences by focusing on the offenders rather than the offenses that have been committed (Bohm, 2010). This theory argues that the behavior of humans is prepared in advance and is completely driven by individual’s distinctions and biological characteristics. In other words, the thing that influences an individual towards a given crime is not a subject of free will since it is a force that they cannot control. The theory attempted to prove the thesis by noting that criminal offenders are different from those that are not criminals (Bohm, 2010). On the other hand, the classical theory assumes that individuals have voluntary will in making decisions and that penalty has the potential of discouraging crime as long as it is committed without any postponement and is suit and in quantity to the conducted crime (Bohm, 2010). This theory notes that despite the fact that humans are involved in crimes while seeking pleasure they are rational in nature. In addition, despite the fact that people act for their personal gain they have the potential to judging and utilizing more suitable strategies in regard to a given scenario. In other words, people are in general guided by morals and have the freedom to select well or wrong (Bohm, 2010).

Since positivist theory asserts that some behaviors are out of the will of the offenders it is rather apparent that some behaviors cannot be avoided or prevented (Vito & Maahs, 2017). This thought school acquires a rather distinct position since it seeks to create a more reasonable independence to quantify the choices and criminal behavior. This school assumes particularly that criminality behavior is mainly caused by social as well as psychological forces that tend to make some people to be more connected and focused on criminality as compared to others. It cannot be objected that people differ in regard to the crimes that they settle for and this is attributed to the social and psychological differences (Miller, 2014). In other words individuals are naturally good, however, as a result of their surroundings and social background, they ultimately become bad within this social settings. This is because such behaviors can also be learned in the surrounding and assumed to be good. This demonstrates that the classical theory that asserts that morals are the basis of judgment is faulty since morals differ from a single setting to the other (Anderson, 2014). For this reason, the positivist theory disapproved the classical perspective that holds that all crimes are a result of choices and cautious assessment of the disadvantages and benefits.

In conclusion, the positivist theory is more close to my personal theory of crime causes. In that, I believe that criminality behaviors are shaped by both the psychological and social settings that one is exposed to. Unlike the classical theory which asserts that individuals have the option of judging situations and settling for the best choice in most cases, such decisions are beyond the general control of an individual.

 

 

 

 

 

References

Anderson, J. F. (2014). Criminological Theories. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC.

Bohm, R. M. (2010). A primer on crime and delinquency theory. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth.

Miller, J. M. (2014). The encyclopedia of theoretical criminology. Wiley Blackwell.

Vito, G. F., & Maahs, J. R. (2017). Criminology: Theory, research, and policy. Jones & Bartlett.