Major Issues in Criminology - Essay Example

Criminology In last two decades criminology has experienced a remarkable growth complemented by change.Criminology is essentially an interdisciplinary field and this relationship with other fields is a key reason for the changes it has undergone. There is an infinitely long list of disciplinary perceptions from which crime and the institutions dealing with crime could be studied. It is why there are so many doctoral programs and special journals in criminology nowadays which used to be a rarity. This enormous growth has a lot of positive attached to it, specially the increased sophistication in this field. However, as Siegel (2005) argues that there maybe concern regarding potential costs, insularity being one of them. A potential kind of insularity that specialised criminology studies can face is isolation from other areas of study from which it originated. Twenty years ago almost every criminologist had a Ph.D. level education in traditional areas such as sociology, psychology, political science or economics. Current breed of crime experts however, have doctorates in departments that are solely dedicated to crime and justice. Although this provides good grounds for specialised training in criminology yet it may not be a place to learn about anything besides it. In order to avoid this potential isolation, we need to maintain a steady flow of ideas to and from other disciplines. One way of doing that is through involvement of criminologists in those disciplines (Siegel, 2005). In order to understand perspectives of different disciplines, various aspects of criminal theories are evaluated against an example of some prevalent crime. These theories were developed on the basis of human nature consisting of classical and positive school. Moreover, increased maturity in criminology has sprung on sociological theories on formative and social development platforms. Bierne & Messerschmidt (1994) argue that examining a specific crime can help us understand the theories and adapt them in a way to help us recognize the nature of crimes. Hence, we can analyse a common crime of cell phone theft in our society to help us combine these theories. Experts present many causes as reasons for people to show criminal behaviour. Misguided arguments like criminal behaviour is a matter of choices and that people commit crimes because that is what the want to do has serious impact upon crime control measures. Direct intrusion techniques have been the classical approach towards crime control strategies. Since Bierne & Messerschmidt (1994) suggest that delayed approach of a reactionary stance is omitted to the misapprehension of rehabilitation. According to this approach, law enforcement takes an offensive action towards criminal acts. Committing a crime means that a person wants something that another person possesses. Criminals look for the shortest possible distance between two points. This mindset follows that managing a measured amount of pain is the right societal reaction to crime. The general idea of the classical school is to attribute pain in response of unwanted acts of crime. Punishment is considered vital for making an impact on attitude. Similarly, the purpose of punishment is to educate criminals through painful experiences that such behaviour is counterproductive (Bierne & Messerschmidt, 1994). In an attempt to analyse classical school of criminology, consider example of a cell phone thief, Mr. Rogers. To understand this concept we should understand what an individual criminal is like; Mr. Rogers is not much different from us. Also, it is important to establish that inspiration to commit crime is related to basic human desires of control, dominance, anger, revenge and self perceived insufficiency. Desire, opportunity, ability and gain merge to formulate the strategy of motivation. The natural stimulus is the suppression of an other person for personal motive. Bierne & Messerschmidt (1994) suggest that criminals face similar stimuli like we do, except that they choose “the short cut” rather than following lawful ways of responding to them. “Private logic” followed by the criminals blames “suffering” at hands of unfair and cruel circumstances. Criminals work under a strong selfish desire to attain something for little effort. They desire to exploit opportunities and assert their abilities on basis of their actions that they believe are righteous. Mr. Rogers is not victimised by circumstances, nor is he forced into a disadvantaged position. When caught, he comes up commonly agreeable reasons that media, social scientists and politicians have already outlined for him. He simply refuses to takes responsibility of his ill acts and those preconceived reasons prove to be an easy way out for him (Bierne & Messerschmidt, 1994). Criminals process decisions on the basis of “being owed” something and their actions are attached to their belief of “entitlement”. It is argued that personal desires map our course of actions. We imagine and create our own paths according to our internal belief system. A conscious thinking process guides us through a series of possible actions till we choose something on the basis of temptations. Irrespective of external information, we prefer what we want to do. We rely upon our learning history to do things we conjure in our own minds. Taylor (1973) suggests that in a kind of “economic view” of the world, people balance the risks, or the costs, involved in doing a certain act. Upon validation that the “benefit” outweighs the cost, they decide to act. It is this rational process by which every individual including criminals decides to take a particular course of action. While human nature school of thought suggests that Mr. Rogers is a criminal because he chose to be one it fails to satisfy sociologists’ question of why people commit crime. In contrast, control theory would indicate that Mr. Rogers became criminal because of failure of his conformism with the society. Albert J. Reiss, also of the Chicago school, stated that felon behaviour occurs due to lack of internalized norms and rules governing behaviour in consistency with the norms of the social system to which legal penalties are attached, a breakdown in previously established controls, and/or a relative absence of or conflict in social rules or techniques for enforcing such behaviour in the social groups or institutions of which the person is a member (Taylor, 1973). In a society where less fortunate people lack equal opportunity, people adapt to the reality of their lives. They feel societal pressure to conform to certain ideas and thus adopt illegal ways in reply, thereby choosing drug dealing, stealing and gangs. Strain theorists indicate that one major pressure of that sort is to achieve a “fairy tale dream life” of success and power. Although, it is believed that innovationists use legitimate ways to achieve this universal dream yet they may switch to illegal means if they find their opportunities to be blocked for whatever reason. On the other hand, in similar events, ritualists lower down their aspirations than societal norms and avoid taking risks (Taylor, 1973). Retreatists avoid the societal norms through acts like drinking and drugs while stealing cell phones to generate funds. Rebels are the type that set up their own rules of life, regardless of norms. Control theory was initiated in the 1950’s when family and parenting was a trend in focus. It suggested that above behavioral deviations were controllable through proper upbringing. Reiss was of the view that a child’s family and upbringing was heavily dependent on his delinquent attitude. Self-Control theory by Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi suggests that criminality can be avoided if an individual is strongly bonded with family, school, work, everyday activities, and beliefs. Tierney (2005) argues that a child can become a criminal as a result of parental negligence, since he would turn to less conventional places to learn their values. A good learning at young age acts as an internal sanctioning system to include morals, values, conscience and respect in every action, to maintain societal norms. Individuals seek ways to please themselves and if they are not brought up well to learn the right ways, they find happiness through illegal means. The idea of intervention for this criminality should be applied at a community level through education and reintegration (Tierney, 2005). Society can play a major role in fighting criminology. Criminal lives up to the label of being worthless as he starts believing it upon being told so consistently. If society initiates programs to reintegrate former criminals, this prophecy could be prevented. In the light of both Strain and Control theories, it can be noticed that they are originated from same idea of conformism. Strain believes that conformism prevents people from being equally triumphant in life while Control states that conformism to societal norms acts as a barrier for people to perform illegitimate actions. It is therefore important to be clear about the idea of conformism since too much of it will create a monotony in the society and too little will result in people following illegal ways to succeed. Although, parents and teachers are important to learn to do things the right way, yet it is just as imperative to be able to think freely and act as individuals and be wrong sometimes. After all, mistakes are how people learn to be successful (Tierney, 2005). Works Cited Siegel, L. Criminology. Wadsworth Publishing. 2005. Bierne, P. & Messerschmidt, J. Criminology. Wadsworth Publishing. 1994. Taylor, I. The New Criminology: For a Social Theory of Deviance. Routledge, 1973. Tierney, J. Criminology: Theory & Context. Longman Publishing Group. 2005. Read More