Cultural Theft

It was suspected during the time period that overcrowding was the cause of the increased crime rate. People saw that the population growth—must like the popularity of gin—coincided with the rise crime. As London became an industrial city it needed a more unskilled workers to power its “textile, iron, metal goods, and pottery production” factories (“Crime and Punishment” par 2). This caused unskilled workers from “small rural towns” and “villages” into the city in hopes of finding work ("Crime and Punishment," par 1). This may seem like a good idea, but unfortunately the population of the city rose quicker than expected and thus hadn’t had an adequate amount of time to adjust to the booming population growth—over 400 percent in just 50 years ("Crime and Punishment," par 1).

To try to prevent crime from occurring some believed that making the punishments severe would slow the growth of crime. The punishments you would receive, varied on how bad the crime was that you committed. If you were accused for adultery or manslaughter, you were more than likely punished with a whipping or branding. When punished with a whipping the number of hits usually varied between 10 to 30. When committing adultery, you usually were required 30 hits with the whip and a hot iron brand to the forehead. You were also made to wear something around your neck showing the crime you committed. These punishments were usually for men, women were normally sent to workhouses. Hanging was also a big punishment in the 1800s. Hangings were found to be entertainment and multiple people received a job during a hanging. (Source 2, Page 101) When hanging got out of hand, they began to send the criminals to other colonies to serve their sentences. They found that it was much cheaper than holding them in the English prisons where they were overcrowded and the traveling had to be paid for. The 1800s is known to be the worst of crime because of the increase of population and the issues with wealth. Escapes were very common because the jails were overflowing and it was too much for the people to keep up with. Not only were adults at risk but children of any age were too because society was so bad. As time moved along some of the

The delivery of punishment has changed significantly over the centuries. Up until the 19th century in England, imprisonment was not regarded as a punishment, it was merely used while the offender waited to be sentenced to their ‘real’ punishment (Bull, 2010; Hirst, 1998). Corporal punishment such as flogging, branding and mutilation, death by hanging, and transportation to other continents such as America and Australia were common punitive measures through the ages, until well into the 1800’s (Newburn, 2003). Although these extreme penalties are no longer acceptable or practised by criminal courts in England or Australia, in some ways, the past has

Crime punishment in the 17th century in London was not any better than the methods such as the death penalty used in the 16th century. Matter of fact, one could say that the punishments in the 17th century was exactly as it was in the 16th century London. During this time period, people were still being punished for committing small crimes like stealing things. “There was still support for the execution of the most serious offenders, however, and in certain contexts, such as the 1720s and 1780s, which both experienced crime waves and political instability, the proportion of convicts executed increased.” (London Lives 1690 to 1800 crimes, poverty and social policy in the metropolis). Men and women were punished almost in the same way, however, if a pregnant woman is found guilty of any crime, she was given time to deliver the baby before she faced her punishment for her crimes. In the 17th, most the famous crime punishment method was hanging, criminals who were convicted were hanged instead of given other types of punishment.

During the 17 and 18th century the British legal system was incredibly harsh, distributing death penalties for often minor offences, the aim of this was to deter individuals from committing crime. There was very

Since the 19th century, law enforcement and punishment has developed rapidly into the justice system we rely on today. Obscure laws that had become irrelevant in an industrial and post-industrial era were fast being replaced, and despite its lack of existence at the beginning of the 1800’s, policing standards are, today, high. The necessity for this drastic change in approach to crime has stemmed from the needs of industrial Britain, and the increased awareness of the public, and government, and their perception of crime and punishment. Rather than individual cases having a direct impact on these changes, in general they provide an insight as to the reactions of the public at the time, and along with the myriad of other cases, allow us

In the 1800s during the time of prison reform, the use of capital punishment and conviction with the death penalty became increasingly stigmatized- less and less was this an acceptable form of punishment and grew to be seen in a much more negative light. Throughout American history, the death penalty through hangings and other execution styles was a part of public society and was often a form of entertainment. Gradually these executions moved out of the public limelight and into a more private sphere, often within the prison walls, and eventually made their way to death by electric chair and lethal injection. Increasing focus on morality led the states and country to tend toward these more ethical ways execution, yet the death penalty has still

One of the many things that has been highly controversial and still is to this very day is how to properly punish and treat criminals. Here in America we now have the Eighth Amendment to protect us from cruel and unusual punishment. This was based off of a Parliament Act of 1689 that created England’s Bill of Rights. Before England had come up with the idea that humans should have guaranteed basic rights, it wasn’t a matter of whether or not a criminal would die, as much as it was a matter of how they would die. Torture devices such as the guillotine, the stake, the brazen bull, and the rack were used to spread the idea of fear and punishment that was ineffectually used by leaders to try and control their people throughout the history of Europe.

This is where the abolitionist approach comes in. The term ‘crime’ when used with reference to the abolitionist position should be understood as ‘social conflict’, an ‘accident’ or a ‘problematic event’ from this point in the essay, as abolitionist believe in the reconceptualising of the notion of crime. Abolitionism emerged in the 1960s as an anti-prison movement, it was viewed as a way of reconstructing the social control of crime and deviance (Cohen, 1985). It holds that the role of the criminal justice system should be reduced drastically, and other methods of dealing with deviant behaviour should be adopted. The aim of this approach was to reduce the level of suffering offenders face, pushing for the state and society to rethink punishment and consider the human involved. They see crime as the result of social order and fail to see how punishment is an appropriate reaction. The view here is that there should be minimal involvement in personal lives of individual, but a central focus on care for all members of society. Seeing more importance in reconciliations, as a way to restore both the criminal and the victims of crime within society. Concerning themselves with the integrity and dignity of these individuals in society. The belief within the abolitionist approach is that threatening or punishing criminals is ineffective, sanctions clearly do not work and reoffending rates support this, making offenders feel oppressed and marginalising them within the community only

In this essay I will be looking at the key developments of the British penal system since the early nineteenth century. I will also discuss how the main objectives of the prison system have changed over this period of time.

In late seventeenth century leading into the eighteenth century the aristocratic elite ruled British society. Several historians believed that the upper class were brutally robbing the rural labour and agricultural population of their fundamental necessities by enclosures, driving most of them to theft and poaching with the intention of providing food for their families. The middle class in Britain and Australia did not often doubt the corrupt character representation of the convicts and convict heritage was generally frowned upon. This assumption of convicts was contested in 1922 by George Arnold Wood who argued that convicts were “hapless and hungry victims of economic poverty and legal oppression” (Roberts, D. 2008 p. 122), not crime. Roberts believed that convicts were poor peasants and labourers who turned to crime in order to feed themselves, or who protested for basic economic and human rights that we now take for granted (Roberts, D. 2008 p. 122).

From the late Middle Ages to the end of the nineteenth century punishments changed quite greatly although some things, of course, remained the same. A few things that changed were the policing, the use of gaols and the ideas based around capital punishment.

Thieves were slightly odd in the medieval times as far as they’re punishments went. Thieves could get their first sentences reduced if they had learned of the benefits of becoming a member of the clergy. These benefits were lost if these people were repeat offenders. The theft of farm animals, which was considered a smaller crime, they would have their left hand burned as a permanent mark of shame. This also would occur if they had broken into another man’s home, but this man didn’t feel as if his life was in danger from the break in. Repeat offenders were sentenced to death. In addition to all of these, people who took their own lives were to buried with a stake shoved through their graves.

Social class and crime and punishment has always been an issue in the UK if not globally. For the elite, the criminal justice system serves a purpose to deter and prevent crime, but the reality is that the poor are punished for crimes they commit more so than those of a upper class who commit the same crime. The question is who is to blame for this image of the poor being criminals and the working class crime phenomenon, is it the moral Panic created by the media to distract from the reality of the white collar corporate crime being carried out by the most powerful of society or is it down to Poverty, Labelling, economic and social positioning which all contribute to deviant behaviour. The aim of this essay is to provide a critical criminological view of the punishment of the poor with a wide range of theories and ideas to contribute to the understanding of the poor being punished from the 18th century to today 's contemporary society. It will aim to develop an understanding how criminals and deviant behaviour were defined and perceived from historical periods to now.

More discusses the absurdity in humanity attempting to impose order on it's society. More's stern criticism of the unnecessary severity of the criminal code used in England is modelled to ridicule this concept. By focusing on the precedent of the death penalty, More utilises character, Raphael Hythloday, to voice the objection he holds against this method for punishing thievery. “As a punishment it’s too severe, and as a deterrent it’s quite ineffective.” Through juxtaposition, More provides a logical connection between the death penalty's two primary goals (of it being a punishment and a deterrent), yet highlights how both are absurd in achieving anything beneficial for society. More states that if murder and thievery were to be punished identically,