Four Theories of Criminology Kendy Menelas Seminole State College Author Note Kendy Menelas, Department of English, Seminole State College This research was supported in part by the Federal Pell grant Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kendy Menelas, Department of English, Seminole State College, Sanford, FL 32773. Contact: kendym@live.seminolestate.edu Abstract This paper summarizes four theories of criminology.
There are numerous different types of strategies for crime reduction. These include crime prevention tactics which are suitable for whole societies, and also forms of punishment which are suitable for individuals. Crime prevention strategies include situational crime prevention, environmental crime prevention, and social and community crime prevention.
Crime influences and factors are present in some degree in every community, usually crimes factors are based on conditions such has
Explain the arguments for and against strict liability offences A strict liability offence is one where it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove any mens rea. In most cases of strict liability even if one did not have the intent to commit a crime, however reasonable, in relation to a particular element of the actus reus of an offence, they can still be convicted. This can be shown in reference to Prince and Hibbert. Prince (1875) the girl was taken by Prince even though he knew she was in the possession of her father as he believed she was 18. Mens rea was needed for him to be sentenced and this was recognized as he had the necessary intention to remove her. Hibbert (1869) the defendant had sexual intercourse with a 14 year old
Theories A number of factors take place regarding incidents of crimes and why they may have been committed that might explain the difference between the two. In determining these factors, theories of crime must be considered since there is more than one factor present when one commits a crime. These theories include learning theory, labeling theory, social disorganization, trait theory, social conflict, choice theory, and life course theory.
The Case: R v Silva [2015] NSWSC 148 The Elements of Crime in relation to the case: Crimes all have two fundamental elements that must be present in order for an act or omission of duty to be classified as a criminal act. This involves the concept of actus reus or ‘guilty act’ in Latin and mens reus or ‘guilty mind’ in Latin. It is the role of the prosecution to prove that these elements are present to charge a person with a criminal act.
Situational Crime Prevention Situational crime prevention constitutes primary crime prevention measure. This is to say that it is aimed at deterring crime before it occurs. Situational prevention, like other similar primary prevention measures, focuses on subduing crime opportunities instead of the attributes of criminals or even potential criminals. It seeks to curtail opportunities for certain groups of crime by increasing the risks and difficulties associated with them and significantly reducing the rewards. Situational prevention is made up of three key elements: a sound theoretical framework, an authoritative methodology for dealing with specific crimes, and a collection of opportunity-reducing approaches (Felson & Clarke, 1997).
The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.
There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include:
Theories of Crime Causation: Trait Theory and Rational Choice Theory Introduction Theories of crime causation get to the fundamental characteristics of human nature. Theories of crime causation can be separated into trait theories and choice theories. Both types of theories make valid points about the causes of crime, yet they are have different implications for preventing the causes of crime. Thesis: Trait theories and choice theories both assume that humans are self-interested, but their conceptions of self-interest limit the applicability of each to certain types of crime. Trait theories appear more suited for explaining the causes of violent crime, whereas choice theories are more appropriate to property crimes or economic crimes.
Contents Page Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………...............4 Research Question (or hypothesis)...………………………………………………………...………….4 Research (including methodology)……………………………………………………………...............4 Literature Review………………………………………………………………………………………..4 Findings…………………………………………………………………………………………..............6 Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………………...7 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 Reference List……………………………………………………………………………………………9 Executive Summary The focus of this paper will be based upon different crime prevention strategies implemented by members of the communities, local and government authorities.
Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior. Psychologists have come up with various theories and reasons as to why individuals commit crimes. These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behavior, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory,.
When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).
People commit crimes for various reasons. These various reasons got to do with social, economic, and cultural reason. These factors trigger an individual to do criminal activities. Social reasons are peer pressure, and school failure. Economic reasons are poverty. Cultural reasons are hatred. The combination of these factors is behind a person who commits crimes.
The Supreme Court case, R v Murray[4], states that the appellant pleaded not guilty to one charge of murder – where the appellant was found guilty of manslaughter – where, although the appellant intended to kill the deceased, he was only criminally responsible for manslaughter because of provocation under section 304[5] - where the appellant was sentenced to nine years imprisonment under section 161B[6] - where there was a declaration that the applicant had been convicted of a serious violence offence. Where the case R v McDougall and Collas[7] was applied as a precedent to the final decision of the case.