Essay about The Latent Traint Theory and Violent Crime

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).

The starting point of violence takes place in communities and at home--not at school. Youth take what they hear and see at home and in their communities to school. The environment in some communities and households are positive and the presences of protective factors outweigh the high risk factors. However, there are communities and households where there is a lack of informal social control and high risk factors exist more than protective factors--, which affect youth in a negative manner.

It was not a topic that was brought up earlier, because there was tainted history of using biology to figure logistics of criminal behavior. Instead, criminologists look at social and environmental factors such as poverty rates, drug/weapon accessibility, and socialization. Over 100 studies have shown genes play a role in crime. Kevin Beaver, an associate professor at Florida State University’s College of Criminology and Criminal Justice states approximately 50 percent of a human’s aggressive behavior is comprised of the thousands of expressed genes affected by the environment (Cohen). The other half of a human’s aggressive behavior is usually environmental or social factors such as, neighborhood, wealth, and education. It is important to also know the other factors that “make” someone a criminal because it will also help researcher see what else contributes to criminal activity (Eysenck).

This documentary specifies that there is no easy answer to what is going on inside the mind of killers, and we cannot simply place these individuals into “neat diagnostic boxes” that explain why their actions turned so violent. However, the investigators present research studying different avenues regarding ways to “predict” the likelihood that an individual will commit violent crime, will maintaining that no method is perfect. Throughout the presentation, viewers are offered mountains of research highlighting a mix of nature and nurture ranging from neurologists from Harvard studying brain patterns affected by genetics, to psychologists studying maternal care and attachment during infancy.

Teen Violence is a big dilemma in today’s society. Violent behaviors usually start from family and peers, as well as teens observing it at there neighborhoods or communities. These behaviors are reinforced by what youth see on television, on the Internet, in video games, movies, music videos, and what they hear in their music. When children are disciplined with severe corporal punishment or verbal abuse, or when they are physically or sexually abused, or when they witness such behavior in their home, it is not surprising that they behave violently toward others. Teen Violence has had such an impact in our youth today that it leads many destructive things and that’s why we have so much violence today.

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

Juveniles are constantly being exposed to violence through movies, television, and video games. Young children, those age 13 and under, may find it natural to mimic these sources. Teenagers, fourteen and older, however, are beyond the stage of imitation. They no longer imitate actions they see on television or in the movies. They have reached a level of maturity that allows them to think and act for themselves. They are at an age where they can make up their own minds and decide for themselves to do things, such as bathe or prepare basic food items. These teenagers still need guidance in life, but no longer need someone to hold their hand.

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).

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.

Statistics indicate many aggressors at some point or another have witnessed acts of violence. During childhood, these observed behaviors can have a major impact and influence on adolescent and adult attitudes, perception of self and others. "Children become more susceptible and prone to negative and dangerous behaviors which can

When in context with violent crime, these stressors become even more intense, and irrational prejudices lead to failure of control over one’s own impulses. People are more insecure around members of different demographics, with the subconscious tension creating moral ambiguity within the mind, leading to a higher propensity of violent crime. Since these innate biases cannot be consciously controlled, the deterrence theory cannot be considered as a factor for curbing violent crime. Other subconscious factors manipulate people to act out impulsively without premeditated thoughts of the consequences.

Terrie E. Moffitt’s theory argues that antisocial behavior can be 1) life-course persistent offenders who spend the majority of their life exhibiting antisocial behavior and 2) adolescence-limited offenders who grow out of the antisocial behavior as they age. (Cullen & Agnew, 2011, Pg. 477) While it may be disputed that there are only two categories of antisocial individuals, Moffitt’s theory is supported by our other course readings. For example, Patricia Brennans study concluded that a lack of cognitive abilities due to

What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality

            From a scientific standpoint, however, defined causes for youth violence simply have not been found. In fact, a study of youth violence held in 2014, focusing around candid conversation with youths between the ages 14 and 22 who had been involved in violent behavior and fights about the causes of youth violence, found “...no predominant cause of violence emerged from the discussion” (Cheng, et al. 288). Simply put, evidence pointing out any primary cause of youth violence does not exist. With mental illness, poor lifestyle choices, hostile environments, ineffective parenting, and peer pressure all playing roles, one must consider whether violent media and entertainment are primary causes of youth violence. Even if sufficient evidence existed to prove violent media was a significant factor in causing youth violence, one cannot claim that it causes more youth violence than other