Posted: July 7th, 2022

Different causes of crimes

Criminology
Name
Institution

Criminology
Different causes of crimes, including the methods used to control them, are explained by the classical school of criminology. Paternoster and Fisher (2017) assert that crimes are mainly controlled based on their rationalization. In the 17th and 18th centuries, the classical school of criminology came up as a different reasoning approach. The ideology rejected some of the methods used earlier during the pre-classical era and was considered barbaric. The demonological thought dictated these methods. Idealism was changed by the classical school utilizing the theory of rational choice. The theory of rational choice dictates that people are free to decide on their actions or omissions in intelligent behavior.
There was so much cruelty in the 18th century manifested in the form of the punishments meted on errant individuals. The introduction of the classical school of criminology brought a solution to the situation. Montesquieu and Voltaire, who were writers, encouraged the emergence of the new classical thinking. It occurred through their involvement in campaigns that enlightened and paved the way for new approaches taken towards the punishment given by the justice system regarding crimes (Berry, 2017). The society also needed a way that would be predictability in the justice system where new forms of legal regulations were to be developed. There was a need for properties and technology to be protected. The workers, too, had to be punished consistently.
The people who contributed to the rational choice theory were Jeremy Bentham and Cesare de Beccaria. They are also the founders of the classical school of criminology. According to Schofield (2019), the two are regarded as enlightenment thinkers in classical thinking. Their main goal was to reduce the harshness of the judicial systems of the 18th century, although they both came from different philosophical stances. Bentham was practical, so his contribution to classical theory was based on the happiness and wellbeing of the population. He believed that punishment was for a greater good, and so it was a form of just inflicting pain.
Bentham had the idea that human behavior depends on increasing pleasure and decreasing pain. It was under the pleasure-pain principle. The principle explains that a crime was committed by people who wanted to gain satisfaction through sex, money, and other types of excitement. Beccaria thought that the prevention of crimes is better than punishing them, and also, there was a need to put in place permanent laws that made punishment consistent and in line with the crime (Schofield, 2019). According to him, for crime prevention to be effective, there would be the certainty of the corruption, the celerity of the crime, and how fast the reaction towards it, in terms of punishment would be inflicted and the amount of pain to be inflicted.
Classical thinking defines criminals as those people that make a rational choice. These criminals also choose to do criminal acts following the theory based on maximum pleasure and minimum pain. According to the classical school, criminals are rational. The death penalty is pointless, considering how both Beccaria and Bentham viewed it (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2018). Criminology thinking and the criminal justice practice, in general, have significantly been impacted by classical thinking. The foundation for the modern criminal justice systems in America and Europe is based on the idea of punishments being in line with the nature of the crime committed. There was a decrease in the use of capital punishment, which includes torture and corporal punishment (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2018). It happened when the classical school of criminology and classical thinking was introduced.
During the second half of the 18th and 19th centuries, there was significant progress in terms of the stability and growth of the prison, where the prison was a considerable system of punishment. The concept behind prisons was to eliminate penalties that involved the body and instead punish the soul and mind of the criminal. The modern society still uses the classical theory. It has made significant changes to the justice system. Prisons have significantly reduced the number of crimes, therefore used as substantial deterrents. The classical school of criminology has a significant weakness that is influenced by the idea of classical thinking.
The classical thinking views all criminals as rational, which cannot be generalized to all criminals and also, cannot be quoted as entirely accurate or valid. Many biological factors may trigger or not, a person from acting rationally. According to Schofield (2019), it is not wise to generalize criminals since some act irrationally due to a mental illness such as schizophrenia. Some of them may have been drugged, therefore affecting the normal functioning of the brain. It can cause irrational behavior in a criminal. Due to the principles of rationality and free will, people will tend to act. The less fortunate people are the ones flooding in the criminal justice system (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2018). Therefore, classical thought doesn’t include factors of necessity to live.
According to Paternoster and Fisher (2017), to identify a criminal as one acting rationally or irrationally, one has to undergo through prosecution in court through a system that is just and with equality. For criminal justice bureaucracies, for example, the police, it may not always be easy to apply the rule of equal justice when expecting the results of decreasing the rates of crimes. The power issue rationalizes the legal system. It means that if the power of the justice system were reduced, there would be a potential backfire regarding the deterrent. The defender was characterized as being rational, free will, and typical according to the kind of classism.
The weakness and strength portrayed in the classical school of criminology and the school of criminology are the only difference between them. The biological facts in the classical school that backs up its views are lesser, but it has proved successful in reducing the rates of crimes and deterring the people against that system. The positivism does not have a form of punishment. According to Paternoster and Fisher (2017), they only treat offenders in a particular manner. The classical school of criminological thinking has a weakness in that despite having a mental disorder, all criminals are considered rational and are free to make decisions by free will.
In conclusion, different causes of crimes, including the methods that are used to control them, are explained by the classical school of criminology. The pain-pleasure principle explains that a crime was committed by people who wanted to gain pleasure through sex, money, and other types of excitement. The classical thinking views all criminals as rational, which cannot be generalized to all criminals and also, cannot be quoted as entirely correct or valid. To identify a criminal as one acting rationally or irrationally, one has to undergo through prosecution in court through a system that is just and with equality.

References
Berry, C. J. (2017). Dennis C. Rasmussen, The pragmatic enlightenment: recovering the liberalism of Hume, Smith, Montesquieu, and Voltaire: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014, vii+ 349pp. In the Adam Smith Review: Volume 10 (pp. 111- 118). Routledge.
Cole, G. F., Smith, C. E., & DeJong, C. (2018). The American system of criminal justice. Cengage Learning.
Paternoster, R., & Fisher, D. (2017). The foundation and re‐emergence of classical thought in criminological theory: A brief philosophical history. The Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Criminology, 173-188.
Schofield, P. (2019). «The first steps rightly directed in the track of legislation»: Jeremy Bentham on Cesare Beccaria’s Essay on Crimes and Punishments. Diciottesimo Secolo, 4, 65-74.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Criminology, Different causes of crimes