Traditional and Modern Classical Theories of Crime - Assignment Example

Traditional and Modern Classical Theories of Crime Jeremy Bentham made a significant contribution in the development of traditional classical theories that are related to criminology. He also made the initial steps and advocated for the rights of different entities which include women, children and animals. Bentham is most remembered for the foundation of the University College London though his direct contribution to the same is not definite. Beccaria on the other hand developed a number of principles that were applied to the criminology sector and understanding the concept of criminology. His influential and applied principles include the prevention of a punishment, the proportionality of the punishment given to the crime that had been committed, using the probability of being punished as a method of preventing a crime and giving prompt punishment to enhance its effectiveness. The two contributed significantly to understanding crime and how deterrence can be understood (Frank, 2004). This part will look and the way they address the issue and whether they have succeeded in showing that it works. Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham represent the traditional classical theory of punishment as will be discussed in this chapter. The two theorists had a closely similar approach to the issue making them to be classified together and their contributions addressed in this topic. These theorists were against the different oppressive policies that had rocked Europe at the time (16th Century to 19th Century) when they projected the theories that will be addressed in this work. They are also significant in providing the foundation of the modern deterrence theory which has been used to lay the major studies done in criminology. Though each had a unique way of addressing the issues and pushing for what they felt was right, they are common in that they were fearless and used philosophical approaches while advocating for the changes that were applied in the field. One of the similarities between the traditional and the modern classical approaches is that they try to advocate for the prevention of criminal activities. Through biological and social understanding coupled with the psychological theories, it is possible to establish the causes of deviant behaviour and come up with possible solutions that can be applied to change it. The main difference is that while traditional classical approach to crime did not rely much on biological understanding of the human being and the factors that lead to deviance, modern approach couples all the understanding, both in psychology, biology and sociology and through that it is possible to come up with the best way to prevent the behaviours and also punish the ones that are against the set codes of a given environment. Bentham for instance was against the punishment done on people including children claiming that it served little if any purpose. Through the understanding and considering such an approach modern theorists have tried to establish whether the idea is concrete and whether other studies can be used to support it. Another major difference between the two is that the traditional classical approach tries to show that criminals’ decisions are rational and so they should account for them fully. This has been proven to be wrong since in the modern times it has been established that criminals can be under the influence of certain drugs or have a compromised mental state of mind which can be a contributing factor when they engage in deviant behaviours. This understanding has been used successfully but not independent of the earlier theories that had been projected in the same field. These theorists have succeeded to show that deterrence works. In promoting morality which can be used to curb deviance in a society, Bentham believes that morality is that that can promote happiness to the most people. He defines the role of the state as to promote happiness of the society by rewarding and punishing those who do right and wrong respectively (Tania, 2014). How Liberals and Conservatives differ in their Approach to Crime Control The conservative approach which supports the application and implementation and preservation of the already installed system of crime control differs with the liberal one which believes that the legal and judicial systems should play a minimal role in defining the social life of the people. The conservative approach tries to preserve the already available system and only minimal changes are allowed by the conservatisms (Tetlock & Mitchell, 1993). On the other hand, the liberals are not limited to changing the whole system in order to implement or put into application an idea that they feel will be good to bring a positive change or solve a problem that is already there (Tania, 2014). Another notable difference between the two is that the conservatisms usually make irrational decisions as they try to preserve the concepts that have already been laid down. This way they stand to block the people who are determined to make the real changes to a system that is not satisfying. The liberal thinkers are people who make rational decisions and move a step ahead to actualize them. They are not cowed by the barriers that stand between them and the goal as long as they will achieve it in the long run. They are better advocated for in implementing changes as compared to the conservatisms. In the field of criminology, it is good to update the upcoming ideas with the already set doctrines. This requires people who can make rational decisions without fear or favour. These differences are important when addressing the changes that can be done in criminology. The ideas that we have today are a result of the changes that have been made over the years and new ideas that were incorporated into the already existing ones. In these processes one meets the two types of peoples who define the final product that yields from the same. Influence of the Deterrence Theory on the Characters in ‘Fire in the Ashes’ ‘Fire in the Ashes’ is a book by Jonathan Kozol which highlights the lives of blacks in a neighbourhood with whites. This part will address the way the deterrence has been successfully used at reducing crime. Deterrence is the use of punishment as a way of curbing crime. It has been used in the chapter to change the way different characters behave (Frank, 2004). In the chapter, Jonathan addresses the plight the children face while the seniors are trying to get them back to the morals that they purport to be right. In the entire book and chapter, Jonathan discourages deterrence in a number of times. He shows that it should not be the only resort sought for before all other avenues are exhausted. It is common to get the children back to the right ways especially if they are expressing deviant behaviours (Kozol, 2012).. However, it is not right to always punish them as the only way to bring them back to ways that are chosen. Children suffer many inequalities where as it is not their fault to have been born in an environment entangled in poverty. In such a case it would be prudent for the law enforcers to address the trends that an individual may follow while growing up as this may be the cause to his/her deviant behaviour (Kozol, 2012). Jonathan tries to introduce sociological understanding in criminology which is very important to understand the dynamics of a given society. References Kozol, J. (2012). Fire in the Ashes. London: Broadway Books. Chapter 4. Frank, C. Z. (2004). Reconciling Rationality with Deterrence: A Re-Examination of the Logical Foundations of Deterrence Theory, Journal of Theoretical Politics, 16(2). Page 120-131. Tania. (2014). Criminology Theories: The Varied Reasons why people Commit Crimes. Available at. Tetlock, P. E. & Mitchell, G. (1993). Liberal and Conservative Approaches to Justice: Conflicting Psychological Portraits. Available at. Read More