While watching this crime documentary over the craigslist killer a few thoughts came into my mind about the deterrence theory. I believe certain things can be implemented to deter criminals like Philip Markoff from conducting heinous crimes in our society. The first idea is making it certain that if committing those crimes the criminal will be caught. In my opinion this is a way better deterrence than punishment because it makes individuals think twice about their actions. For instance, the criminal’s goal is never be caught and continue to commit crimes so making very clear that you will be caught changes their thought is my opinion. Another way of deterring crimes like these is making a statement when someone conducts a crime like Markoff. …show more content…
In many cases this hasn’t shown to be extremely effective but it does show it works. It may not work one hundred percent of the time but will decrease the number of individuals committing these offenses in many cases. It’s very hard to deter all criminals in our society from committing crimes like Markoff in his 7-day rage. Many of these individuals can carless of the consequences and enjoy the thrill, which makes very hard for criminologist to find a way to stop all of them. Furthermore, for victimization in this case was the lifestyle these women were living. They were putting themselves out there for other man, which made it very easy for Markoff to attack each of them. The life style theory best fits these attacks because if it weren’t for them advertising themselves the likely hood of them being victims would be slim. These types of jobs these women are doing are very dangerous like shown in the documentary. These jobs lead to death like Julissa Brisman, which was shot and killed by Philip Markoff one night in a hotel …show more content…
It was a little hard identifying if he was or wasn’t but I feel like he was being rational. Throughout his 7 day rage Markoff was doing certain things to not be caught. For instance, when conducting his attacks he was using gloves and zift ties to cover any evidence left behind. During one of his attacks he also cut the telephone lines so the woman wouldn’t be able to call for help. Markoff was definitely conscience of what he doing in the time of his attacks. He was acting very rational throughout his attacks thinking of ways to not be caught. Another tactic he used was going in and quickly committing the crime and walking about very casually. This however didn’t help him when investigators started to look at cameras. Investigators immediately identified him due to him not covering his face. This made me think how can someone be so smart but make simply mistakes like these. Furthermore, in my opinion as time went on Markoff knew what he was getting himself into but decided to continue on his attacks. He was just too smart not to know what the consequences were for his crimes, but felt he was too slick to be caught. Who would of ever thought a young medical student would be getting involved in these types of crimes, which led to the killing of Julissa Brisman. This allowed him to blend in very well until investigators identified him. As the documentary went on I do not believe
He is a delinquent just like Raskolnikov except the majority of his crimes are in the past besides for the most recent one of him trying to rape Dunya and getting turned away. (Which later causes him to commit suicide from heartbreak because she will never love him back. Which allows him to keep his pride in who he is.) Svidrigailov like Raskolnikov is very prideful but he is able to hide his true colors as if he has an on off switch to flip-flop between the two. On the outside he seems as a man that knows how to carry him and very suave, but on the inside he is utterly depraved. Since he believes in the same theory of Ubermenche and being Superman as Raskolnikov does, he feels no remorse for the murders he has committed in the past. Upon meeting, Svidrigailov declares that him and Raskolnikov have something in common because he has eavesdropped and heard about the murders but Raskolnikov does not like the idea and declares it not true although later he realizes that it was. After being with Svidrigailov for so long and coming to understanding of why he is who he is, Raskolnikov ends up looking to Svidrigailov as a validation for his crimes. Although Raskolnikov looks to Svidrigailov for validation he believes that he is morally wrong with his theory of the Ubermenche and does not like him for it, but what he does not realize that he too is wrong as well. He believes that he is still somewhat
Raskolnikov responds, “Arrest me, search me, but kindly act in due form and don’t play with me!” This is intended to force Raskolnikov into a state of “Uncertainty” as Petrovich remarks. Still, Raskolnikov is smart and understands Porfiry's tactics. During one intense interview between the men, Raskolnikov yells, “I was not delirious. I knew what I was doing,’ he cried, straining every faculty to penetrate Porfiry’s game.” Raskolnikov has to work hard to hide his guilt in the murder and defeat Porfiry’s deceptions. Yet, Raskolnikov is determined and Porfiry understands that it will be hard to catch him on circumstantial evidence and limited witnesses. The novel alludes, “ The more cunning a man is the less he suspects he will be caught in a simple thing.” This is exactly the case with Raskolnikov. He is a witty, intelligent man, but Petrovich knows this and works hard to talk to him, friend him, fool him, and ultimately catch him in his own web of lies and guilt. Given the same situation, I believe Petrovich’s cat and mouse game would work; however, I would have put the person in custody. This would ensure less danger with no obstacles in the
This is how Raskolnikov is able to commit his crime: his intellectual side ignores his conscience and is able to commit the crime in a rational and orderly way. It is his dual character that serves as his punishment. One side of him is able to commit the murders, so the other must bear the punishment. He is tortured by the cruelty in mankind, and yet he himself is able to repeat it.
When Raskolnikov was a student he enjoyed the debate and human contact, but also strived for acceptance. He had a dual nature to himself, which could be characterized by his cold intelligence, which separated him from society, and his compassionate side. After Raskolnikov murdered Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna
In the beginning of the novel, the reader can see that for the most part, Raskolnikov was capable of forming human relationships full of love and compassion to help one another. For example, Raskolnikov helped Razumihin to stop drinking, allowing him to notice the issue he had of constantly drinking. Raskolnikov was a very genuine, caring human, before megalomania took over his personality. Raskolnikov also helped Marmeladov's family when Marmeladov became sick. “Raskolnikov gave his own name and address, and, he besought the police to carry the unconscious Marmeladov to his lodging at once” (Dostoyevsky 141), in the following sentence the readers sees Raskolnikov’s compassionate personality ensuring Marmeladov made it home safe.
Another reason to believe that this man is both crazy and smart is the whole scene from when he goes to the Alyona Ivanovna house. During this time Rasklonikov examines every detail inside of the pawnbroker’s rooms, and
Raskolnikov paints a bloody picture of the fight between his conscience and his drive to get away with his crimes. From the beginning, he was torn into two pieces, and it’s shown that Raskolnikov is already battling with himself, and it’s seen how he weighs the very idea of murdering the pawnbroker that he despises so much, and how eager he is to end her life; however, things go awry as he’s forced to kill his victim’s sister. Consequently, he’s struck with sudden illness as a result of the sheer anxiety and uneasiness that comes with the weight of his crime, and guilt bubbles up within him. Raskolnikov struggles desperately
Rubashov, though a committed Marxist, during his time in the prison seems vexed by the notion that the end justifies the means because he has himself seen that the final result is often not what is seen in the present moment but the truth that becomes apparent only in the light of retrospective thought. Rubashov realizes that it is only history that can pass judgment and thus, the shooting of B. and thirty others by No. 1 will be decided later “He who is in the wrong must pay; he who is in the right will be absolved. That is the law of historical credit;
Tatiana Tarasoff, a student at the University of California, was murdered by Prosenjit Poddar. They both met on campus and went on several dates, but Tarasoff decided to put an end to their relationship and rejected him afterward. Poddar soon became obsessed with her and could not accept their separation, he went through an emotional crisis which was the reason why he was brought to the psychological counseling where he met Dr. Lawrence Moore, his therapist. Later, Poddar confessed his desire to take revenge and kill Tarasoff. He kept this idea throughout the several sessions they had together and Dr. Lawrence Moore admitted that if he stayed consistent with the death threats, he would have no other choice than hospitalize
From declaring he wanted to become a Napoleon to wishing for financial independence to murdering for his own sake, he rattles off various motives, showing his obsessive rationalization (394-397). By presenting his conflicting intentions, Dostoevsky exhibits the chaos within Raskolnikov’s mind.
Roskolnikov's actual narration of the crime is definitely inconsistent with his preparation for the crime. From the pre-ceding pages of the novel, we continually see Roskolnikov's careful premeditation and disgust at criminals who lose their senses and commit a crime that can easily be traced to themselves. Roskolnikov dwells on the fact that the extraordinary criminals pay attention to the details that can eventually lead to their downfall. He often comments: "For this business one should be as little conspicuous as possible. . . . Trifles, trifles are what matter! Why, it's just such trifles that always ruin everything. . . ." He spends days counting the number of steps it takes to reach his victims apartment (exactly 730), and meticulously wraps a fake, wooden pledge in cloth, constructs a noose to conceal the ax in his coat, and spends time memorizing where Alyona keeps her keys- all for the sake of performing a perfect crime. Yet, when he does eventually place his plan into action: "He was in a terrible haste, and he kept making mistakes." Roskolnikov runs into many complications when trying to complete his crime
Deterrence theory of crime is a method in which punishment is used to dissuade people from committing crimes. There are two types of deterrence: general and specific. General deterrence is punishment to an individual to stop the society as a whole from committing crimes. In other word, it is using the punishment as an example to “scare” society from precipitating in criminal acts. Under general deterrence, publicity is a major part of deterrence. Crime and their punishments being showing in the media or being told person to person can be used to deter crime. Specific deterrence is punishment to the individual to stop that individual from committing other crimes in the future. This type of deterrence is used to teach the individual a
Raskolnikov’s meticulous analysis of his attire even before he commits the two murders shows how analytical of his surroundings he is. Raskolnikov is also very analytical of his actions. While out and
Raskolnikov murders an old pawnbroker woman for seemingly no reason at all. His sister and mother move to St. Petersburg following his sister's engagement to a man whom Raskolnikov was extremely displeased. Raskolnikov undergoes severe mental trauma, and falls ill after the
Svidrigailov is a character who demonstrates what a person will do to escape or avoid the grip of poverty. Svidrigailov makes decisions based on his own interests. His marriage to Marfa Petrovna is a prime example of this as it can be described as a simple "business transaction" (Busch 113). His desire to avoid poverty and increase his personal wealth, which he is successful at, drives him to commit crimes. He simply used Marfa to get out of debtor's prison; he was not interested in her for anything other than her money. When she was no longer was useful for him, he murdered her. Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov are similar characters, both willing to commit murder to avoid or escape poverty. However, Svidrigailov is superior to Raskolnikov becuase