Crime, Criminalists, Criminal Theories in the United States - Research Paper Example

Crime, Criminalists, Criminal Theories in the United States Abstract This course is a comprehensive study of crime through class discussions, assignments as well as readings. This course enabled students to understand the different dimensions of crime and how best to curb it. This paper looks at the dimensions of crime to determine what causes crime in society today. It then closely studies theories of different criminalists on the topic all in effort to understand crime. In conclusion ways to curb crime in the community are tackled. Keywords: Crime, Criminalists, Criminal Theories In today’s highly regulated society, crime is more rampant and is an issue that affects the society at large. Crime in the United States in particular is no new phenomenon; according to recent statistics 0.7% of the population is in a correctional facility (Siegel 2008). Legally, crime is defined as the breach of laws or rules that govern a particular state and is punishable by statutes or common law (Siegel 2008). Murder, rape, aggravated assault, burglary, arson, work place violence and internet crime all fall under the broader category of crime. This course is a comprehensive study of crime through class discussions, assignments as well as readings. Several topics have been covered in this course but only three topics namely; biological and psychological explanations of crime, the Dimensions of crime as well as community reactions to crime shall be looked into in this paper. Society has the greatest effect on the crimes committed in it. Socially, crime has four major dimensions which determine the crime rate in America which are; age, class, gender and race. Amongst all social characteristics associated with crime, age is the most powerful and perhaps the greatest factor. According to Thornberry (2004), age is inversely proportional to criminality in the sense that younger people commit crime more often than their older counterparts while 50% of all arrests occur among young people. The relationship between age and crime is remarkably similar across gender, crime types, location and even crime types. Although a certain amount of misbehavior is seen as natural among the youth since most take it as a stage in growing up, it is not the sole reason for this. Teenagers between the ages of 14 to 19 years are the most chronic offenders while as they approach their late teenage life the habit starts to decline (Siegel 2008). The fact that they are young, agile and strong and have more stamina has also been used to explain their tendencies but these physical factors have also failed to explain this. This explanation is not valid because one’s peak functionality is reached between the ages of 25 and 30 years. Graph 1 Teenagers also tend to commit crimes in packs but as they approach adulthood the attitude towards group dynamics changes. Groups tend to give a feeling of security as well known friends and peers have most effect on a person in their teenage years. After looking at all these variables, it is safe to decide that teenagers are more notorious for committing crimes than adults because they are looking for fun, excitement and as a way of relieving boredom. Another way of looking at it is to base their criminality on the fact that they do not have any bonds or social responsibilities to shoulder (Palmiotto 2000). Most teenagers quit crime once that part of their lives is over but may tend to continue with it past that especially because of social events and informal social bonds to family. Generally, there are more male criminals than there are female ones and consequently there are fewer females in prison. Females’ crimes are not only less but also less serious, less professional and less likely to be repeated. In contrast, more females are victims of female criminals since they are more vulnerable. Society is programmed in such a way that females are the weaker sex hence socialization plays the biggest role in explaining the relationship between gender and crime (Findley 2000). However, with the onset of gender equality women and men are becoming equal in many spheres and crime is no exception. Crimes are more rampant in high poverty areas than suburban areas and at the same time more prison mates are members of the lower class. In the same way, crime is more rampant in black and Latino neighborhoods than it is in areas dominated by the whites. The high rate of crime in these areas is hardly because of utilitarian reasons. Palmiotto (2000) suggests that poverty instills feelings of poor self esteem, low self control and the need for instant gratification. The cultivation of these behavior patterns arising from ineffective socialization is what leads to eventual commitment of crime. The social structure of any society largely determines its rate of crime. For centuries, various psychologists, sociologists and biologists have been trying to understand criminals and link their traits to any particular theory or explanation. As a result, many criminologists have come up and many different explanations as to why criminals behave as they do. Cesare Lombrosso, who is acknowledged as the founder of positive criminology believed that criminals and deviant individuals are the way they are because of their biological composition. He classified atavists as born criminals who were ‘born’ as they are and not ‘made’. He classified the atavists into three; the first being the criminals that can be distinguished by their physical characteristics, the second category included insane criminals and those committed a crime because they have the opportunity to do so (Siegel 2008). The third category is based on those crimes committed out of anger, love or honor: what is referred to as criminals of passion. William Sheldon’s theory that a criminal can be determined based on the three soma types; endomorphs, mesomorphs and ectomorphs which he connected body types to temperament and eventually behavior. He based his research on Kretschmer's constitutional personality. The endomorph type is fat and their biggest concern is about food, ectomorphs are skinny and tall while the mesomorphs are muscular and athletic. Thornberry (2004) explains that the endomorphs are fun loving and sociable; the ectomorphs are intelligent, introverted and sensitive while the mesomorphs are aggressive and bold. Sheldon was of the belief that mesomorphs were more likely to become criminals and are prone to committing crime. Recent research has gone on to show some relationship between physique and criminal behavior although this is to be proved. The XYY syndrome theory as an explanation for crimes tries to explain why there are more male criminals than there are females. According to this theory, men are more susceptible to criminal behavior because of the presence of an extra Y chromosome in their DNA. This same theory is associated with the low IQ theory of these males which also goes on to explain their inclination to crime. Their low IQ causes them to be unable to adjust in the contemporary social world where constant activity and flexibility is of utmost importance (Siegel 2008). Members in the XYY class are regarded to be more male and are hence more prone to more aggressive behavior. These males are also more likely to be foolish and mentally retarded. Some reports even claimed that the prevalence of XYY men in prison was more than 25 times as high as the XY males. Research in this area is not solid and hence basing any solid reasoning on it would be an error. Psychologists just like sociologists based their theories on the social part of life and all agreed that criminality is more of a learned behavior as opposed to an inherited one. According to the psycho dynamic theory by Sigmund Freud, a human being’s personality is based on three basic concepts Id, ego and super ego (Findley, 2000). The balancing of these three components is what makes up a ‘perfect’ human while imbalance of these three could lead to development of negative behavior, with criminality being among them. Eric Erikson particularly emphasized on child development as the basis for explaining this theory. Findley (2000) pointed out that a problem of identity diffusion resulted in over conscious people who are too concerned about their sexuality. Unfulfilled expectations result in the formation of a negative identity which in turn leads to rebelliousness. Rebelling against social norms will eventually result in criminal behavior, a trait that can be easily corrected if detected in the early stages of life. Operant conditioning theory by Skinner is another explanation for criminal behavior. According to B.F Skinner people’s behaviors are pre-determined by the consequences of the same actions that they have seen before. Skinner advocated that the best way to prevent criminality in society is through the use of this theory. He further stated that reward based actions can form the desired behavior of a person. According to Findley (2000) the brain unconsciously processes a constant stream of stimuli while evaluating each one of them and relating each with behavior. According to him, if criminals learn the consequences of their behavior which may be long term imprisonment then they may not commit the crime. This theory is disagreed upon by many because there are many other factors that determine behavior and consequence rarely takes a central role. Social-learning theory by Albert Bandura is probably the most sensible and logical one as pertains explaining criminal behavior. Albert Bandura in his theory states “Learning would be exceedingly laborious…if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them what to do… from observing others one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action’’ Siegel, J. L. (2008). He was therefore claiming that modeling plays the most important role in the formation of behavior. According to him that which one learns at home and through the media turns out to be the same thing they will practice in future. He states that human behavior is as a result of learning through observing others. Bandura’s theory can be proved as most criminals have violent backgrounds; coming from broken homes or having been involved in gangs. Generally, the police and other law enforcers can not be depended on for protection against crime. This is because for centuries people continue to be victims of crime and yet law enforcers are active. Law enforcers usually appear after the crime has already been committed and their work entails arresting the criminal and bringing him to justice. Their presence also offers extra security and ward off possible criminals. However, they can not be with each citizen at all times hence the possibility of being a victim of crime has still not been nullified. Palmiotto (2000), states the state’s inability to protect the life and property of all citizens results in the formation of private alternatives towards the prevention and control of crime. One of the ways of doing this is through the building of gated communities. These enclosed neighborhoods have controlled access with the use of gates or booms across existing roads. These enclosed communities have all the social amenities at their disposal including schools, hospitals offices, shops and even entertainment faculties. These people share a fence and a gate and by extension a sense of security among themselves. In case of an attack they can defend one another but at the same time criminals find it hard to attack large numbers preferring to prey on lone individuals (Findley 2000). Community policing consists of community partnerships, organizational transformation and problem solving. Community policing is all about law enforcement agencies collaborating with individuals to formulate solutions to problems as well as increase trust in police officers. Through community policing, members of the public feel that they have helped in preventing crime and customizes crime prevention to best suit their needs. Martial arts lessons and neighborhood watch are other ways formed by individuals to curb crime through self defense. Crime in the United Sates is here to stay and although it has been on the decrease, it can never really go away as it is as natural as life itself. No conclusive research on crime has been done therefore the best a society can do is to create a morally conducive environment to avoid criminals in the bud as well as lock up the ones already there in correctional facilities and concentrate on rehabilitation. This way, the world will be a much safer and better place to live in. References Findley, M. (2000). Criminology. Read Books Publish. Findlay, M. (2000). The globalisation of crime: Understanding transitional relationships in context. Cambridge University Press. Palmiotto, M. (2000). Community policing: A policing strategy for the 21st century. Jones & Bartlett Learning Publishers. Siegel, J. L. (2008). Criminology. (10 th Ed.). Cengage Learning Publishers. Thornberry, P. T. (2004). Developmental theories of crime and delinquency. Transaction Publishers. Read More