Investigating The Truths Behind Violent Or Delinquent Behavior

(M1)-The perception that crime has become one of the most serious problems facing society has led to determined efforts by many researchers to find the causes of criminal behavior. Researchers have focused on biological causes, believing that a biological basis of criminality exists and that an understanding of the biology will be useful in predicting which people are predisposed to become criminals. Judging the case of Jonathan Tregar, we can use the Lombroso theory to determine his case accordingly. This theory assumes that criminal behavior is inborn, associated with physical body features, and that criminals have body features which are different from non-criminals. Among the many

Violence take multiple forms, many of which are covered in the nightly news. Murder, rape, familial abuse, bullying, workplace hostility, armed robbery—all of these are societal problems with far-reaching repercussions. There have long debates and discussions regarding whether nature or nurture influences individual violent behavior. People are concerned about what makes an individual to engage in violent behavior such murder or burglary among other types of crimes. They are also concerned about what makes people stop such behavior. However, there is no precise conception whether nature, nurture or both influence violence. Some people assume that, violent behavior results from individual’s life experiences or upbringing also known as nurture. Others feel that violent behavior is more complex and results from individual’s genetic character or nature. In other words, it is not clear whether violent behavior is inborn or occurs at some point in persons’ lives, but even it’s hard, emphasizing one and ignoring other influences is always an unwise way to go.

Modern biology is focused more on understanding behavior, like violence and crime, through research on indicators and influences. Rather than attempting to determine a single root cause, researchers are discovering markers of predisposition and identifying factors of risk. In a recent interview about his new book, The Anatomy of Violence: The Biological Roots of Crime, criminologist and professor at the University of Pennsylvania, Adrian Raine asserts that there is a “biology of violence” that should not be ignored; “Just as there’s a biological basis for schizophrenia and anxiety disorders and depression… there’s a biological basis also to recidivistic violent offending” (Gross, 2013).

No one can be certain whether nature or nurture is the cause for criminal behavior. However, research has stated that it is more often an interaction between genes and the environment that predicts criminal behavior (Jones, 2005). Through a biological perspective, it is determined that criminal behavior is due to genetics and/or neurological conducts. It concludes that criminals are born due to their criminal traits being passed down through genetic or chromosomal mutation. Another explanation of criminal behavior within the biological perspective are the neurochemicals within our brains and body. There many regulated chemicals in the brain that determines thought process, perception and action. Like the arguments for genetic and chromosomal mutation, any abnormal anomalies or chemical imbalance can heavily impact behavior (Schram, 2018). This goes for any damages to some parts of the brain that controls emotions, reason and logic. Problems with the biological perspective are the following: 1. It provide little explanations for a small of minority of offenders with specific conditions (Levitt, 2013). 2. Disregard the effect of environmental influences and life experiences that also impact behavior. 3. Since criminality is based on biology, it is unchangeable, therefore, no one is to be blamed for their actions. Lastly, 4. Famous studies on biological factors of criminality (ex: the twin, family and adoption studies) maintained an intertwined relationship with social

The world we live in, we like to depend on scientific findings to reason our claims. This reaction paper will analyze the findings by Mathew Jones and will critique specific sections on "Genetic Research Summarized" and "The Resulting Concern". Now if we solely depend on genetics to defend or accuse individuals of being a criminal it will not be an efficient strategy in the criminal justice system. Furthermore, although American Criminal Justice upholds the notion of free will, it has been discriminatory towards a marginalized population of the United States itself. So being dependent on such findings there will be a higher probability of wrong people being trialed because then the idea of free will and genetically findings will be in conflict.

Many vulnerable individuals perform or act according to the dominant norms of the society, however, biological positivism specifies unlawful acts to be the cause of inherited characteristics. The biological positivist theory of criminology consists of different concepts, mainly focusing on whether genetic factors are influences to criminals and anti-social behaviour. The first concept, ‘biochemical abnormality’, designates abnormalities inside the organs and the

The biological theories are essential to the criminal justice profession so that they won't assume that a person's genetic characteristics cause a person to commit a crime. However, there are born criminals and “these types of criminals are the most dangerous, and can be identified through his or her stigmata or identifying characteristics” (Akers, Sellers, See, & Kieser, 2013, p. 10). Biological theories are the bases for severe criminal behavior mostly found among people who are born with an innate impulse to commit a

Checking the genetics of a person can tell much about the person and who they are. Does where a person lives and the environment they are in constantly influence them to commit crime? Is it the genetic makeup of the person that makes a more probable chance for them to commit a crime? “Drilling into the skull of a young man he began to funnel a stream of sulfuric acid into the head of his unconscious victim to create a zombie to fulfill all of his fantasies. Dead within a day, he mummified the head of his victim placing it in the freezer beside the skulls of those who came before. Dismembering the remnants of the body he placed skin, blood, and bone into a fifty-gallon vat of acid dissolving what was left of the young man”(Center Crisis Management). Jeffrey Dahmer one of the most notorious serial killer did not murder for financial gain, rage, or vengeance, he murdered to feed a desire. Could Dahmer’s DNA be the reason for his impulses to kill? Many theories criticize the biological perspective, but the studies of those who commit murder suggest the biological theory could be accurate.

The principles of the biological theories allow us the understanding that all biological theories should evaluate common factors that relate to each other from one biological theory to the other (Schmalleger, 2012). The first parts of the biological theory assess the importance for the theories to make a connection between criminal behavior and the human brain and a person’s personality and the studies of neurology and neurochemistry. This meaning that a person’s ability to control antisocial behavior stems from their environment and the and family genes gives the person directly into right and wrong. There is also a standard that should evaluate the connection between different groups such a sex and racial makeup that that of criminal behavior as well as human instinctive behavior (Dretske, 2014). The link between the evolutionary development of a person criminal behavior or ability to

Genetic influences on behavior can affect the criminal justice system. If a person is convicted of a crime with a mental disorder they have diminished responsibility for the crime and may not be held accountable because of their behavior and since this is the case should then genes affecting your behavior be treated the same way(“Genetics and Human Behaviour: The Ethical Context”).

However, while the overstimulation of the Id and the failure to acquire and develop the the Ego and SuperEgo leads to criminal tendencies, while aggression may be out of adaptive values, and while genetic studies have pointed towards the influence of genes and criminal behaviour, these theories alone are insufficient to account for crime. Evolutionary theory does not explain or predict for the extreme degrees of aggression in individuals nor has the genetic theory proven for 100% heritability; which raises the need for us to examine the Nurture camp of crime theories as well.

Researchers have also looked at criminal behavior from a genetic aspect. In fact, "behavioral genetic research has show that genes influence individual differences in a wide range of human behaviors -cognition, academic achievement, personality and temperament (including such traits as aggression and hostility), psychopathology, and even vocational interests and social attitudes" (Meadows, 2010, P.16). There may in fact be a connection between how an individual is wired and the behavior that results. This does not necessarily mean that some individuals are inevitably going to become a criminal. However, some individuals may simply have a greater tendency "to be more aggressive and thus less likely to control emotions absent some type of positive interventions" (Meadows, 2010, P. 16). Furthermore, genetic research looks at the heritability of certain disorders and specific genes that

Is behavior learned? It is inborn? What of aggression, intelligence, and madness? There is a crucial relationship between the behavior of humans toward their own kind and the view of life they hold. Interest in behavioral genetics depends on wanting to know why people differ. According to Jack R. Vale, in Genes, Environment, and Behavior, recognition of the importance of hereditary influence on behavior represents one of the most dramatic changes in the social and behavioral sciences during the past two decades. A shift began toward the more balanced contemporary view that recognizes genetic as well as environmental influences on behavior. Behavioral genetics lies in its theory and methods, which consider both genetic and

In Comparison one other biological idea that has been used by criminologist to prove that criminality is inherited rather than learnt is the human genetic code. The human DNA is made up of 46 chromosomes in 23 pairs, men have XY ad women XX (Newburn, 2013). It is widely believed that chromosomes can sometimes have a negative affect on people with anomalies within their genetics, men with a extra Y chromosome are believed to have the tendency to become involved in criminal activity. For example, Price et al (1966) research on male offenders on individuals with anomalies in their DNA found that they were “responsible for some serious, crimes a picture developed of hyper masculine offender . . . . who was especially aggressive and some what lacking in intelligence” (Newburn, 2013: 137). However, Hirschi and Gotfredson found the research on genetic anomalies to be ineffective in explaining all the reasons why some people commit crime due to the fact that the extra chromosome is not found in everyone who commits a crime therefore this theory fails to prove that people are born with criminal characteristics.

The research findings of Herrnstein & Wilson are not only conclusive to the claims of Lombroso, but also correlate with Sheldon's (1949) declaration of somatotypes relating to criminality. In an attempt to authenticate the notion of hereditary criminal predisposition, Lange's (1931) study of twins concluded identical twins share innate criminal tendencies, however; the results were less conclusive with fraternal twins; whereby evidencing the possibility of hereditary criminality.