Contract Between Criminological Theories - Essay Example

? Contract between criminological theories Introduction Criminology has over time focussed on the reasons thatmotivate people to commit a crime. The debate on why people choose to commit crimes has been central to the issue regarding the best way to prevent and handle crime. Numerous theories have come up with the main aim of explaining the causes of crime. Over the years, these theories have been modified to explain the causes of crime comprehensively. Criminologists aim at reducing the incidences, as well as the level of crime taking place. Some of the most common approaches that explain crime include the classicism and the positivism approaches. Under the classicism approach, there are control theories, which explain the causes of crime. With regard to the positivism approach, there is biological positivism, which can be regarded as instrumental in explaining the causes of crime. This paper will explore the usefulness of biological positivism and control theory in explaining assault as offense. The usefulness of control theory in explaining assault as a crime Unlike other theories of crime, which aim at exploring why people commit crime, control theories aim at examining the reasons why many people do not commit a crime. According to control theorists, the reasons why people commit crime should not be explained because people tend to suffer from some weaknesses that make them commit crime. Control theories focus on controlling factors, which can be considered as absent in people’s personality. While explaining crime, the control theory focuses on the interplay between sociological, psychological, and psychiatric factors. The most notable theorist who expounded the control theory is Travis Hirschi who developed the theory in 1969 (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). Control theory can be termed as instrumental in explaining assault as an offence. While explaining assault as an offense, the social control theory places a lot of emphasis on the processes that make people effective, as well as the external factors at play. In the case of assault, social control theories would contend that this offense occurs due to the presence of constraints that can be termed as inadequate. The human nature is that they have the free will to do what they wish. As such, those who choose to carry out assault are motivated to do so by the choices they make. This shows that the social control theory can be said to be connected more with the classical school that the positivist school (Gottfredson & Hirschi 2001, p.70). The social control theory holds that there tends to be shared beliefs, norms, as well as values in the society. Criminals who engage in assault share the belief that there is a need to follow the rules in society. Moreover, based on the social control theory, offense such as assault can be regarded as behaviour that can be predicted, but the society cannot control it. The social control theory contends that although every person is taught to conform to the norms of society, offenders find it hard to cope to these norms. Rather, they break down the rules even if they know the sanctions and consequences that result from breaking the rules. Based on the social control theory, crime can be seen to result from the lack of relationships with other people in society. Therefore, delinquency such as assault results from the failure to engage in these relationships, which leads to the freeing of individuals from social constraints (Siegel 2012, p.45). The social control theory is useful in understanding crime with its explanation of the role of parenting in the acquisition of delinquent behaviour. Based on the theory, family bonds and social bonds play a crucial role in determining whether people will become offenders. At a young age, children’s social control emanates from interactions with their parents. Poor parental attachment can be regarded as a cause of delinquent behaviour. In this regard, children who are overly attached to their parents have the possibility of not engaging in criminal activities such as assault. Therefore, the offense of assault can be seen to emanate from little attachment of the child to the parent. Children who have close ties with their parents may not engage in crime that children who have little ties with their parents (Einstadter & Henry 2006, p.46). In explaining assault as an offense, the social control theory also focuses on the role that the community plays in social control. The community plays a crucial role in instilling beliefs and values, which determine the behaviour of children. Aggressive behaviour is common in children who come from communities where morals are not regarded as a crucial part of life. Children who come from societies that have strict norms are less likely to engage in deviant behaviour. Moreover, assault may not take place when all people obey the rules laid down by society. On the contrary, there is a high possibility that assault will happen when people disobey the rules that the society has put in place. Forming friendships with peers who engage in violent behaviour mean that one will also become violent and engage in behaviours such as assault (Siegel 2012, p.45). Thus, the social control theory can be regarded as useful in explaining assault as an offence. However, some critics have argued that the theory can be regarded as inadequate based on a number of factors. Critics argue that the theory cannot be adequate to explain serious crimes, but can only be used in explaining crimes that involve juvenile delinquency. According to the critics, the theory can only be adequate in explaining crimes committed by minor offenders. The usefulness of Biological Positivism theory in explaining assault as an offence In criminology, the positivist school aims at exploring some assumptions on the nature of humans in relation to behaviour, rationality, as well as freewill. Positivism aims at exploring why people commit crime, more so with regard to the factors that motivate people to commit a crime. The most popular approach in positivism is the biological positivism, which explains the causes of crime with regard to the biological factors that contribute to criminal behaviour. This approach can be instrumental in explaining assault as an offence. Based on this theory, crime emanates from psychological and biological factors, which can be said to be within an individual who commits a crime. The most influential figure in this theory is Cesare Lombroso who expounded on the notion of biological positivism. One of his most notable works that explain criminal behaviour includes “The Criminal Man”, which he wrote in 1911 (Walsh & Hemmens 2011, p.75). Lombroso was motivated by the theory of evolution, which was based on the works of Charles Darwin. He developed the theory of atavism in which he explained that criminals could be regarded as “throwbacks” to a period that could be regarded as evolutionary. Lombroso held that criminals can easily be identified by looking at certain physical appearances and characteristics, which they exhibit. The outward facial appearance of criminals distinguishes them from other people who do not commit a crime. In this regard, assault as an offence can be explained with regard to the physical appearances of persons who commit this crime (Hagan 2011, p. 117). Cesare Lombroso held that some of the common features that characterised criminals included high cheek-bones, enormous jaws, handle-shaped ears, wide shoulders, as well as insensibility to pain among other characteristics. Apart from his explanations of atavism, Lombroso later on developed some theoretical explanations of a crime. He developed the notions of the insane criminal, the epileptic criminal, as well as the occasional criminal (Tierney 2009, p. 114). He also came up with the notion of criminals of passion, which encompasses a category of people who are motivated to engage in crime as a result of some urges such as rage, honour, or love. In his study of Italian criminals, Lombroso contended that criminals may also exhibit some behaviour such as long arms, as well as excess hairiness (Hagan 2011, p. 117). Based Lombroso’s works, biological positivism also explains other factors that cannot be termed as biological, but can be used in explaining crime. The factors can be seen to be an interchange between psychological and biological factors. The factors include the lack of moral sense in criminals. This can be instrumental in explaining assault as a crime since criminals who engage in assault cannot be termed as people who have some sense of morals. Moreover, criminals espouse some biological characteristics such as keen sight, a lot of strength in the left side of their body, and some good sense of smell (Horn 2003, p.5). Criminals can also engage in unique behaviour such as tattooing. All the characteristics of criminals documented by Lombroso and other positivism theorists can be regarded as crucial in explaining assault as a crime. Criminals who engage in assault may possess such qualities since assault mainly encompasses the use of force. Thus, biological positivism can be credited for its usefulness in explaining assault as a crime. Conclusion Numerous theories have emerged with the aim of explaining crime, especially with regard to the explanations of the causes of crime. The classical and positivist approaches can be regarded as crucial theories in the explanation of crime. Under the classical approach, the most prominent theory that can be used to explain crime is the social control theory. The social control theory explains crime based on the social controls and sanctions, which the society has put in place. The biological positivism approach explains crime in relation to the role of biological factors in causing crime. In summary, the biological positivism approach and the social control theory can be regarded as useful in explaining assault as a crime. References List Einstadter, W. J., & Henry, S. (2006). Criminological theory: an analysis of its underlying assumptions, Lanham, Md, Rowman & Littlefield.pp. 46-47. Gottfredson, M. and Hirschi, T. (1990). A General Theory of Crime, CA, Stanford University Press. pp. 90-91. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (2001). A general theory of crime, Stanford, Calif, Stanford Univ. Press. pp. 70-71. Hagan, F. E. (2011). Introduction to criminology: theories, methods, and criminal behaviour, Los Angeles, Sage Publications. pp. 117. Horn, D. G. (2003). The criminal body: Lombroso and the anatomy of deviance, London, Routledge. p.5. Siegel, L. J. (2012). Criminology, Belmont, Wadsworth/Cengage Learning. p.245. Tierney, J. J. (2009). Key perspectives in criminology, Maidenhead, Open University Press. pp. 113-114. Walsh, A., & Hemmens, C. (2011). Introduction to criminology: a text/reader, Thousand Oaks, Calif, SAGE. pp.75-76. Read More