Why Is Criminalization Significant to Victims - Research Paper Example

Criminalisation, Research & Evaluation Criminalisation refers to the process through which individuals and behaviours are changed into criminals and crime. Earlier legal acts might be changed into crimes through judicial decision or legislation (Baker 2011, p. 8). Nevertheless, there is normally a formal assumption in the regulations of legal understanding against the fair application of laws and simply the application of express phrases by the legislature might disprove this assumption. The supremacy of judges to formulate fresh law and criminalise behaviour with hindsight is discouraged, as well. In a less explicit manner, where laws have not been firmly implemented, the acts barred by those laws might also endure de facto criminalisation by more efficient or committed legal implementation (Baker 2011, p. 8). There has been some doubt as to the extent and nature of the role to be played by the victims of crime. However, as critics argue, the relationship between criminology and victimology has become more challenging. The main issue is that, in the dialectic of Left Realism and Right Realism, a spotlight on the victim encourages rights selectively for specific victims, and promotes the theory that some victim rights and freedom are more significant compared to competing values or rights in society. Keeping in line with this topic, this paper will evaluate criminalisation with regards to the new criminology, Howard Becker's claim that 'there is no such thing as a deviant act, it is merely behaviour that people so label', the main arguments relating to crime and race and finally present the key arguments within critical criminology. The New Criminology According to critics, modern (new) criminology is under threat of being confined by its own liberation (Radical Criminology n.d, p. 1). These critics’ despairing prediction was occasioned by what they considered to be insufficient developments in the way where criminologists were choosing and approaching their job. The liberation they talked about is that which had restricted criminology to behavioural thoughts; the confinement is that which at the moment limits a new account of criminology only to political thoughts (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 45). By picking out power devoid of analysing its class basis, as well as the state nature, labelling theorists, together with the sociologists of deviance, changed the behaviours of the influential into a random flexing of ethical muscle (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 45). In general, the labelling process was to be identified as class biased, but the failure to do this granted the state free power to control people from counter cultures and lower classes through labelling them as deviants (Radical Criminology n.d, p. 1). Therefore, what was needed was a study of all the processes concerned in the development of deviant action comprising of the structural and political dimensions that earlier theories had not considered. The arguments incorporated in the new criminology were derived from a Marxist study of social associations being rooted in class. Marx proposed that society was structurally split between the middle class people who own the factories, land and machines, as well as the wage owning classes, referred to as the proletariat (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 46). The middle class are able to use the lower classes thus securing power and material wealth for themselves. Marx's study of exploitation and power was applied by the new criminologists to reveal the truth about the institutional organisations of a capitalist society (Radical Criminology n.d, p. 1). Through applying a Marxist scrutiny of class, new criminologists provide a majestic theory, a theory, which is globally used as a study of crime, law and the state (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 46). Certainly, they try to provide fully social theory of deviance that concerns analysing deviant actions, as well as its reaction together, putting them in a political economy of crime (Radical Criminology n.d, p. 1). This use of the Marxist premise by the new criminologists proposes that leaders exploit the law to their benefit, to direct people who may otherwise confront their economically or financially advantaged position (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 47). This is because the criminal justice system is known to provide capitalism with ideological support. It covers the structural disparities which are institutionalised in the operation of the law along with the broader works of the state (Radical Criminology n.d, p. 1). Generally, this approach perceives crime as the upshot of socio-political conditions that are persuaded by the political concerns of those who want to uphold their position through drawing the actions of their subjects into focus while obscuring their capacity to make use of their own advantaged position. Instead of accepting the state definitions of systems of control and crime, the objective of new criminologists was to craft a society where the truths of human diversity are not conditional on the power to criminalise (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 47). Instead of being interpreted as nonstandard, deviance is considered to reflect miscellany of human action (Radical Criminology n.d, p. 1). Through confiscating from the ruling class the power to change the deviance of lower classes people into crimes that, in turn, draws the concern of authorities and develops the structural gap between the classes would lead to a much fairer and just society (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 47). Provided this understanding is of a society where men assert themselves in a completely social manner where there would be no economically, politically and socially-induced urge to criminalise deviance (Radical Criminology n.d, p. 1). This needs a pledge to the closure of inequalities of power and wealth (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 47). Social Constructionist Arguments (Howard Becker) Howard Becker argues that social groups lead to deviance through making the rules whose breach lead to deviant behaviour and through applying such rules to specific individuals and labelling the individuals as strangers (Baker 2011, p. 56). From this view point, deviance is not an act that one commits, but instead a result of application by others of the sanctions and rules to an ‘offender’ (Baker 2011, p. 56). The deviant is the person to whom the label has fruitfully been used; deviant action is action, which people so label. Becker is proposing that, in one view, there is nothing such as a deviant behaviour (Baker 2011, p. 56). A particular behaviour only becomes deviant when people distinguish and describe it as such (Bryant 2013, p. 77). Becker explained his perceptions with the case of a fight including young individuals. In a low waged neighbourhood, it might be described by the law enforcement as proof of criminal behaviour, but in a wealthy neighbourhood, on the other hand, as proof of elevated spirits (Baker 2011, p. 57). If the players of social control describe the youngsters as criminals and they are accused and charged of violating the law, then those teenagers have become deviant (Bryant 2013, p. 77). Therefore, Becker claimed that deviance is not a value that resides in behaviour itself, but in the contact between the likely deviant, as well as the players of social control. A disapproval of the interactionist view is that it is excessively deterministic. It presumes that the moment an individual has been labelled, their deviance will unavoidably worsen – the labelled individual has no choice but to get increasingly concerned in deviant behaviours. An individual, at times, gets the feeling from understanding the literature, which humans go about by respecting others’ privacy, and then – ‘wham’ – dreadful society tags along and smacks them with a stigmatised label. Enforced into the position of deviant, the person has modest alternative but to be deviant (Baker 2011, p. 57). Some critics have accused Interactionists of being overly mesmerised with deviance and they even proposed that they got pleasure from viewing deviants whom were considered ‘cool’ and interacting with the criminal world of society and they are not concerned about transforming the society (Bryant 2013, p. 78). Marxist critics blamed Interactionists of overlooking the position of power when discussing deviance and crime because specific groups of people have power to persuade what is categorised as socially criminal behaviour or intolerable (Baker 2011, p. 57). Some critics criticised Becker for describing humans as helpless to formulate decisions to control their own identity because deviance is not a matter, which occurs to individual, but a choice that people make (Bryant 2013, p. 78). Crime and Race Behaviours turn into crimes through social construction. The same behaviours might be regarded as criminal in a particular society, but an honouring act in another society and/or in the previous society at a diverse time (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 103). The lawful position of a particular behaviour—whether or not it is described as a crime—resides not in the particulars of the behaviour, but in the social reaction to the behaviour or to the individuals who take part in it (Gabbidon 2007, p. 80). Transformations in the legal status of a particular behaviour are usually caused by social movements and might involve significant social conflict (Gabbidon 2007, p. 80). As a theoretical orientation, social constructionism claims that the meaning of behaviours, acts, and proceedings is not an objective value of those happenings, but is allocated to them by other humans in social interaction (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 103). In other words, meaning that it is socially defined and planned, and; thus inclined to social change. The main sociological declaration in the constructionist custom is Berger (1967) (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 103). From this, it is claimed that, in those parts of the populace where such inspiration is missing, crime will be more widespread (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 104). Also, as a premise of criminal behaviour, social construction theory argues that specific subcultures or groups are present in society where violence is perceived as a suitable reaction to what, in the framework of that subculture, are considered as intimidating situations (Delgado & Stafancic 2001, p. 33). Building on the work of many cultural anthropologists, who centered on the social systems behind criminal behaviour in adolescents, sociologists argued that the disproportionally elevated rate of crime amid African Americans might be clarified by their possession of an exceptional racial subculture where violence is faced and supposed in a way diverse from that usually seen in typical American culture (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 104). There are generally more categories of criminal offense at the federal level, which will lead to compulsory jail sentences. However, on the state level, a majority of offenders will either have done a violent offense or have numerous former convictions prior to getting lengthy imprisonment sentences (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 104). State criminals are also more expected to be entitled to parole. Any findings associated with federal prosecution incriminating decisions might or might not be born out by comparable studies of local or state prosecutors (Delgado & Stafancic 2001, p. 34). Likewise, a study associated with the relative parole rates of non-white and white offenders might assist in settling on the effect of any ethnic bias in the system of criminal justice (Jewkes & Letherby 2002, p. 104). Interplay between Production, Reproduction, Neocolonialism and Criminology Every society has its politics of truth, its rule of truth, that is, the kinds of disclosure that it accepts and makes work as true; the instances and mechanisms that enable people to differentiate false and true statements, the means through which people are sanctioned; the procedures and techniques accorded worth in the gaining of truth; the status of people who are charged with uttering what counts as truth (Amster 2008, p. 67). Whereas power is structurally based in the material circumstances of production, neocolonialism and reproduction, it is realised in the state, its interventions and its institutions (Macionis & Gerber 2010, p. 13). However, concern with the latter has explicit impacts for the overlooked association between race and crime: which is to argue crime that is connected to culture, the person and behaviour of the racial other (Amster 2008, p. 68). Also, this concern, using the state’s meaning of harm – constructed as person to person - as the importance of injury has effects for not including systems of oppression (colonialism, capitalism, imperialism, patriarchy, as well as heterosexism) as outside its purview (Amster 2008, p. 69). Even if there were previous statements on the matter, 1982 was a great year for theorising the connection between criminology and production, reproduction and neocolonialism (Macionis & Gerber 2010, p. 14). On one view, criminology’s tripartite focal point was used to land misuse and the rule of colonial administrations, the barricading of lately independent nation into the worldwide Western conquered global political economy, as well as the issue of land distribution social and justice (Macionis & Gerber 2010, p. 14). On the other hand, there was a clear issue with the task of criminological hypothesis, the export of Western crime regulation to the Third World, as well as the optional status of Western criminologists as powers of neocolonialism (Amster 2008, p. 69). This was a reflexive question in the practice of researchers such as Ivan Illich who fully studied the built-in issues of Western crime regulation practice together with the positivistic crime theorising through revealing their iatrogenic implication in overlooking traditional legal systems plus commanding Western neoliberal state examples. Conclusion Criminalisation refers to the process through which individuals and behaviours are changed into criminals and crime. Earlier legal acts might be changed into crimes through judicial decision or legislation. Nevertheless, there is normally a formal assumption in the regulations of legal understanding against the fair application of laws and simply the application of express phrases by the legislature might disprove this assumption. This paper has evaluated the new criminology, Howard Becker's claim that 'there is no such thing as a deviant act, the main arguments that relate to crime and race and the key arguments within critical criminology. Only objective harms should be prima facie criminalisable. By other bad consequences, privacy violations that do not result in tangible harm should not be of significance. Privacy violations, which result from being persuaded to get unwanted information in public places, would lead to an adequate bad implication for the aims of provoking the criminal law, but proportionate punishment implies that such conduct must only be penalised with fines instead of jail terms. Part 2 Research and Evaluation 1.1.1. Area of Research The area of research that was selected for this paper is criminalisation unit because there has been a lot of uncertainty as to the extent and nature of the role played by the crime victims. Criminalisation is extremely significant to numerous victims. Nearly all victims concur that criminalisation will release a strong public message that crime is legally and socially intolerable; this, on the other hand, will lead to a change in beliefs and attitudes, something like the law with regard to marital rape. 1.1.2. Use of Time and Resources Due to the vast number of sources needed for this assignment, I plan to research new criminology in a week. I will search the internet for any significant print publications for this topic and go locate them in my local library. I will allocate two weeks to Howard Becker’s social constructionist arguments by doing a thorough background check on the individual to see why he had to come up with such arguments and what other significant scholars think of them. I will also grant two weeks to the association of crime and race by conducting a thorough research of different races and their crime levels. Finally, I will grant one week to the interplay between production, reproduction, neocolonialism and criminology by going back to the roots of each and seeing what could lead to the affect on each other. 1.1.3. Monitoring of Progress My Research Diary Candidate Name: Candidate Number: Centre name: Center Number: Research on Criminalisation Unit Date Notes Week 1 This week I plan to conduct an internet research on to significant books available for new criminology and then take a trip to my local library to see whether I can find the actual books. I will also ask my peers the significant sources that I can use. Week 2 This week I plan to go to the library and also conduct an internet research of the main arguments of social constructionist. I will then find significant sources for Becker’s background to see what lead him to his social constructionist arguments. Week 3 During the third week, I plan to conduct a library research of what other scholars think of Becker’s social constructionist arguments. Week 4 During the fourth week, I plan to talk to people from different races and seek insight of what seems to motive crime with regards to their race. I will also visit their library and read police reports on the occurrence of crime in particular races. Week 5 On the final week, I will do a background research and goals of production, reproduction, neocolonialism and criminology in order to see who they affect each other. I will visit the library and also speak to key people in these fields to get insight. 1.1.4. Evaluation The research went well. I can rate it at 7/10 of success. The difficult bit was the interplay between production, reproduction, neocolonialism and criminology. The sources were harder to find than others, like for example new criminology and the relationship between race and crime. The sources to new criminology, the relationship between race and crime and also Becker’s social constructionist arguments were relatively easy to find. It seems that these topics have also caught the interest of many. The only way that this affected me is that I used more funds than I had planned to because I walked through a couple of libraries to finds liable sources on the interplay between production, reproduction, neocolonialism and criminology. Also, I had to hasten my research because these libraries opened at odd hours so it clashed with my personal time. At times also, the internet speed was too slow that it derailed my schedule. However, after all these, I still managed to meet my five-week deadline. 1.1.5. Library Research I went to three libraries in total all around my home. However, to get to two of them, I had to use the bus. While at the libraries, I used to walk around with the librarians while they were free so that they could help me locate the sources I needed. After this, I used to sit around in my own far-off corner and quietly go through the sources. These helped me a lot especially after I had done some background check on the sources which I had needed on the internet. Some automated systems that I used in this research include, academic search complete, gale virtual reference library, BIOSIS citation index, GeoRef, JSTOR, Google Scholar, LexisNexis Academic, PsycINFO, Project Muse, PubMed, Sociological Abstracts, SAGE Reference Online and Web of Science. These database systems were significant I giving me examples of the sources I needed. 1.1.6. See Criminalisation Assignment References Amster, R 2008, Lost in space: the criminalization, globalization, and urban ecology of homelessness, LFB Scholarly, New York. Baker, D 2011, The right not to be criminalized: demarcating criminal law’s authority, Ashgate, London. Bryant, L 2013, Deviance, Anglo-European School, Ingatestone, Essex. Delgado, R & Stafancic, J 2001, Critical race theory: an introduction, New York University Press, New York. Gabbidon, S L 2007, Criminological perspectives on race and crime, Routledge, New York. Jewkes, Y & Letherby, G 2002, Criminology: a reader, Sage Publications, London. Macionis, J & Gerber, L 2010, The criminal justice system, 7th edn, Oxford University Press. Radical Criminology n.d, The new criminology, viewed 31st March, 2014, at http://compass.port.ac.uk/UoP/file/1cd2095e-ab40-4c4e-9459-0afa3b11b2c7/1/Radical%20Criminologies_IMSLRN.zip/page_03.htm Read More