Literature Advanced Criminology
Week 1
1.1 Lanier, M., Stuart, H. & Anastasia, J.M. (2015) Essential Criminology (4e
editie). Colorado: WestviewPress. Chapter 1
Six fundamental changes can be identified that demonstrate the changed nature of our world. They
are:
1. Globalization;
a. = the process whereby people react to issues in terms of reference points that
transcend their own locality, society, or region.
b. Globalization is a process of unification in which differences in economic,
technological, political, and social institutions are transformed from a local or
national network into a single system.
c. International universalism (=events happening in one part of the world affect those
in another)
d. Related to globalization and global unemployment are two trends: a decline in
collective social action and increased economic polarization.
2. The communications revolution, particularly the Internet;
3. Privatization and individualization;
4. The global spread of disease;
5. Changing perceptions of conflict and national security;
6. The internationalization of terrorism.
Criminology is mostly straightforwardly defined as the systematic study of the nature, extent, cause,
and control of law-breaking behavior. Although criminology’s subject matter is elastic, or flexible, the
categorical core components include:
1. The definition and nature of crime as harm-causing behavior;
2. Different types of criminal activity, ranging from individual spontaneous off ending to
collective organized criminal enterprises;
3. Profiles of typical off enders and victims, including organizational and corporate law
violators;
4. Statistical analysis of the extent, incidence, patterning, and cost of crimes, including
estimates of the “dark figure” of hidden or unreported crime, based on surveys of victims
and self-report studies of off enders;
5. Analysis of crime causation
Theory testing can be done using either qualitative or quantitative methods. Qualitative methods
may involve systematic ethnographic techniques, such as participant observation and in-depth
interviews. Quantitative methods involve numbers, counts, and measures that are arrived at via a
variety of research techniques, e.g. survey research or the analysis of secondary data.
Comparative and global criminology
Comparative criminology has been defined as the systematic study of crime, law, and social control
of two or more cultures. “The global approach to the study of crimes recognizes its growing
international nature and, in time, may become the primary focus of criminology in a world rapidly
being unified by technological improvements in transportation and communication”.
,Victimology
Victimology is the study of who becomes a victim, how victims are victimized, how much harm they
suffer, and their role in the criminal act. This is the reverse of criminology. It also looks at victims’
rights and their role in the criminal justice system.
Criminology and public policy
Regardless of one’s theoretical inclinations, preferred research tools, or policy preferences,
dissension demands a clear articulation of one’s position. Such articulation requires considerable
thought in order to make convincing arguments and the insight to appreciate other positions. Th e
end result is that criminology as a whole is strengthened.
1.2 Lanier, M., Stuart, H. & Anastasia, J.M. (2015) Essential Criminology (4e
editie). Colorado: Westview Press. Chapter 3
History of classical theory
In the sixteenth century, people were born into statuses of wealth and power, positions that they
claimed as their natural light. The law was the will of the powerful applied to the subordinate
members of society. In the seventeenth century this changed. Humans were now seen as capable of
making a difference in their lives and situations through acts of will (concept of “the individual” was
born). Concern for the poor soon became mixed with fear of a threat to public order. The
combination of both a rising landowning middle class as well as an escalating crime rate led the
philosophical leaders of the classical movement to demand double security for their newfound
wealth. They needed protection against the threat from the “dangerous” classes, symbolized by the
growing crime rates. . Universal rights demanded predictability and calculatedness, neither of which
was present in the existing system of arbitrary justice. Thus, the primary focus of utilitarian
philosophers was to transform arbitrary criminal justice into a fair, equal, and humanitarian system.
Cesare Beccaria claimed that humans are born as free, equal, and rational individuals having both
natural rights, as well as natural qualities, such as the freedom to reason and the ability to choose
actions that are in their own best interests. He saw the government as something that was created
through a social contract in which free, rational individuals sacrified part of their freedom to the state
to maintain peace and security on behalf of the common good. “Individual sovereignty” is important
here, which means that individual rights have priority over the interests of society or the state.
According to Beccaria, the severity of the harm determines the level of punishment (“just deserts”).
Three things must occur in order for deterrence to work: certainty, severity, and celerity.
Jeremy Bentham offered the notion of the “hedonistic, or felicity, calculus” as an explanation for
people’s actions. It states that people act to increase positive results through their pursuit of
pleasure and to reduce negative outcomes through the avoidance of pain. Laws should ban harmful
behavior, provided there is a victim involved, otherwise this should not be included in criminal law.
But since punishments are themselves evil mischief, the utility principle (the idea that the greatest
good should be sought for the greatest number) justifies their use only to exclude a greater evil, and
then only in sufficient measure to outweigh the profit of crime and to bring the offender into
conformity with the law. Bentham introduced the notion that different offenses required different
types of punishment.
Limitations of classical theory:
1. Assumption that people were equal but everyone has different backgrounds.
, 2. How could a system designed to allow some people to create more wealth than others, and
therefore become materially unequal, maintain that in law all persons are equal?
3. Why do some people commit more crimes than others, if they are all equally endowed with
reason?
Neoclassical revisions
The basic underlying assumptions – that humans are rational, calculating, and hedonistic – remained
the cornerstone of criminal justice policy. The growth of scientific criminology in the nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries led to a considerable slippage, since the focus of criminal justice shifted
away from the criminal act and how equal individuals chose it toward what kinds of individuals would
choose such acts and why other kinds would not. These post classicists were calling for a return to
equality standards, protesting that discretion based on the dubious claims of science and social
science had gone too far. Two developments in this regard were particularly important. The first is
justice theory and related developments toward a conservative “law-and-order” approach to crime
control; the second is rational-choice theory and its extension, routine-activities theory.
Justice theory: Because of a reliance on the scientific method, diagnosis, and rehabilitation,
the emphasis shifted from deterrence to treatment under what was termed “rehabilitative justice.”
The outcome was the same as before, where offenders received different sentences for similar
crimes and different treatments depending on the diagnosis of cause.
Charges:
- Did it prevent recidivism? answer: nothing works.
- Rehabilitative justice is unfair.
Because of these problems it moved to the “just deserts” model.
1. Limited discretion at all procedural stages of the criminal justice system
2. Greater openness and accountability
3. Punishment justified by the last crime or series of crimes
4. Punishment commensurate with the seriousness of the crime, based on actual harm done
ant he offender’s culpability
Law and order approach (related to justice theory): Combined with a conservative or “law-and-
order approach” to crime control, the prevailing just deserts model holds that crime is freely
chosen and rewarding, and, therefore, it demands both deterrent and retributive responses.
Elements:
1. Determinate sentencing:
a. Are designed to make justice ‘fair’ and to make potential offenders aware of what
sentences they can expect.
b. But do sentences minimalize crime? According to evidence it does, but there is still
discussion about this.
c. Another problem is plea bargaining, where they get lesser charges in exchange for
pleating guilty.
2. Incapacitation: removing an offender’s ability to commit further offenses
3. Three-strikes laws
a. Is consistent with Bentham’s idea that repeat offenders should receive higher
sentences.
b. Problem is that the sentences do not match the amount of harm that is done
, c. One of the main justifications is their incapacitation effect (cannot commit crime
again)
4. Death penalty
a. Classical theorists are against the death penalty. Evidence shows that execution does
not have a deterrent effect on crime or murder
b. Brutalization thesis: the more violence people see by legitimate government, the
more numbed they become to its pain, and the more acceptable it becomes to
commit violent acts, including murder.
c. Not only is the deterrence effect of capital punishment highly questioned, and its
brutalization effect agreed upon, but, like incapacitation, capital punishment
disproportionately impacts races and sexes, with African Americans comprising 42
percent and males comprising 98 percent of those on death row
Rational-choice/routine activity theory: Rational-choice theories explain how some people
consciously and rationally choose to commit criminal acts. These are based on situational
circumstances, including their mood. Routine-activity theory considers how everyday life
brings together at a particular place and moment potential offenders, crime targets, and
vulnerability (presence of motivated offender and suitable targets in the absence of capable
guardians).
Both rational or situational choice theory and routine-activities theory emphasize the limits of
rational thought in the decision to commit crime. They claim that criminal decisions are neither fully
rational nor thoroughly considered.
Policy implications:
- Rational-choice theory: manipulate the opportunity structure
- Routine-activity theory: increasing presence of guardians of potential victims/change or vary
routine activities, behavior, and lifestyle.
Week 1
1.1 Lanier, M., Stuart, H. & Anastasia, J.M. (2015) Essential Criminology (4e
editie). Colorado: WestviewPress. Chapter 1
Six fundamental changes can be identified that demonstrate the changed nature of our world. They
are:
1. Globalization;
a. = the process whereby people react to issues in terms of reference points that
transcend their own locality, society, or region.
b. Globalization is a process of unification in which differences in economic,
technological, political, and social institutions are transformed from a local or
national network into a single system.
c. International universalism (=events happening in one part of the world affect those
in another)
d. Related to globalization and global unemployment are two trends: a decline in
collective social action and increased economic polarization.
2. The communications revolution, particularly the Internet;
3. Privatization and individualization;
4. The global spread of disease;
5. Changing perceptions of conflict and national security;
6. The internationalization of terrorism.
Criminology is mostly straightforwardly defined as the systematic study of the nature, extent, cause,
and control of law-breaking behavior. Although criminology’s subject matter is elastic, or flexible, the
categorical core components include:
1. The definition and nature of crime as harm-causing behavior;
2. Different types of criminal activity, ranging from individual spontaneous off ending to
collective organized criminal enterprises;
3. Profiles of typical off enders and victims, including organizational and corporate law
violators;
4. Statistical analysis of the extent, incidence, patterning, and cost of crimes, including
estimates of the “dark figure” of hidden or unreported crime, based on surveys of victims
and self-report studies of off enders;
5. Analysis of crime causation
Theory testing can be done using either qualitative or quantitative methods. Qualitative methods
may involve systematic ethnographic techniques, such as participant observation and in-depth
interviews. Quantitative methods involve numbers, counts, and measures that are arrived at via a
variety of research techniques, e.g. survey research or the analysis of secondary data.
Comparative and global criminology
Comparative criminology has been defined as the systematic study of crime, law, and social control
of two or more cultures. “The global approach to the study of crimes recognizes its growing
international nature and, in time, may become the primary focus of criminology in a world rapidly
being unified by technological improvements in transportation and communication”.
,Victimology
Victimology is the study of who becomes a victim, how victims are victimized, how much harm they
suffer, and their role in the criminal act. This is the reverse of criminology. It also looks at victims’
rights and their role in the criminal justice system.
Criminology and public policy
Regardless of one’s theoretical inclinations, preferred research tools, or policy preferences,
dissension demands a clear articulation of one’s position. Such articulation requires considerable
thought in order to make convincing arguments and the insight to appreciate other positions. Th e
end result is that criminology as a whole is strengthened.
1.2 Lanier, M., Stuart, H. & Anastasia, J.M. (2015) Essential Criminology (4e
editie). Colorado: Westview Press. Chapter 3
History of classical theory
In the sixteenth century, people were born into statuses of wealth and power, positions that they
claimed as their natural light. The law was the will of the powerful applied to the subordinate
members of society. In the seventeenth century this changed. Humans were now seen as capable of
making a difference in their lives and situations through acts of will (concept of “the individual” was
born). Concern for the poor soon became mixed with fear of a threat to public order. The
combination of both a rising landowning middle class as well as an escalating crime rate led the
philosophical leaders of the classical movement to demand double security for their newfound
wealth. They needed protection against the threat from the “dangerous” classes, symbolized by the
growing crime rates. . Universal rights demanded predictability and calculatedness, neither of which
was present in the existing system of arbitrary justice. Thus, the primary focus of utilitarian
philosophers was to transform arbitrary criminal justice into a fair, equal, and humanitarian system.
Cesare Beccaria claimed that humans are born as free, equal, and rational individuals having both
natural rights, as well as natural qualities, such as the freedom to reason and the ability to choose
actions that are in their own best interests. He saw the government as something that was created
through a social contract in which free, rational individuals sacrified part of their freedom to the state
to maintain peace and security on behalf of the common good. “Individual sovereignty” is important
here, which means that individual rights have priority over the interests of society or the state.
According to Beccaria, the severity of the harm determines the level of punishment (“just deserts”).
Three things must occur in order for deterrence to work: certainty, severity, and celerity.
Jeremy Bentham offered the notion of the “hedonistic, or felicity, calculus” as an explanation for
people’s actions. It states that people act to increase positive results through their pursuit of
pleasure and to reduce negative outcomes through the avoidance of pain. Laws should ban harmful
behavior, provided there is a victim involved, otherwise this should not be included in criminal law.
But since punishments are themselves evil mischief, the utility principle (the idea that the greatest
good should be sought for the greatest number) justifies their use only to exclude a greater evil, and
then only in sufficient measure to outweigh the profit of crime and to bring the offender into
conformity with the law. Bentham introduced the notion that different offenses required different
types of punishment.
Limitations of classical theory:
1. Assumption that people were equal but everyone has different backgrounds.
, 2. How could a system designed to allow some people to create more wealth than others, and
therefore become materially unequal, maintain that in law all persons are equal?
3. Why do some people commit more crimes than others, if they are all equally endowed with
reason?
Neoclassical revisions
The basic underlying assumptions – that humans are rational, calculating, and hedonistic – remained
the cornerstone of criminal justice policy. The growth of scientific criminology in the nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries led to a considerable slippage, since the focus of criminal justice shifted
away from the criminal act and how equal individuals chose it toward what kinds of individuals would
choose such acts and why other kinds would not. These post classicists were calling for a return to
equality standards, protesting that discretion based on the dubious claims of science and social
science had gone too far. Two developments in this regard were particularly important. The first is
justice theory and related developments toward a conservative “law-and-order” approach to crime
control; the second is rational-choice theory and its extension, routine-activities theory.
Justice theory: Because of a reliance on the scientific method, diagnosis, and rehabilitation,
the emphasis shifted from deterrence to treatment under what was termed “rehabilitative justice.”
The outcome was the same as before, where offenders received different sentences for similar
crimes and different treatments depending on the diagnosis of cause.
Charges:
- Did it prevent recidivism? answer: nothing works.
- Rehabilitative justice is unfair.
Because of these problems it moved to the “just deserts” model.
1. Limited discretion at all procedural stages of the criminal justice system
2. Greater openness and accountability
3. Punishment justified by the last crime or series of crimes
4. Punishment commensurate with the seriousness of the crime, based on actual harm done
ant he offender’s culpability
Law and order approach (related to justice theory): Combined with a conservative or “law-and-
order approach” to crime control, the prevailing just deserts model holds that crime is freely
chosen and rewarding, and, therefore, it demands both deterrent and retributive responses.
Elements:
1. Determinate sentencing:
a. Are designed to make justice ‘fair’ and to make potential offenders aware of what
sentences they can expect.
b. But do sentences minimalize crime? According to evidence it does, but there is still
discussion about this.
c. Another problem is plea bargaining, where they get lesser charges in exchange for
pleating guilty.
2. Incapacitation: removing an offender’s ability to commit further offenses
3. Three-strikes laws
a. Is consistent with Bentham’s idea that repeat offenders should receive higher
sentences.
b. Problem is that the sentences do not match the amount of harm that is done
, c. One of the main justifications is their incapacitation effect (cannot commit crime
again)
4. Death penalty
a. Classical theorists are against the death penalty. Evidence shows that execution does
not have a deterrent effect on crime or murder
b. Brutalization thesis: the more violence people see by legitimate government, the
more numbed they become to its pain, and the more acceptable it becomes to
commit violent acts, including murder.
c. Not only is the deterrence effect of capital punishment highly questioned, and its
brutalization effect agreed upon, but, like incapacitation, capital punishment
disproportionately impacts races and sexes, with African Americans comprising 42
percent and males comprising 98 percent of those on death row
Rational-choice/routine activity theory: Rational-choice theories explain how some people
consciously and rationally choose to commit criminal acts. These are based on situational
circumstances, including their mood. Routine-activity theory considers how everyday life
brings together at a particular place and moment potential offenders, crime targets, and
vulnerability (presence of motivated offender and suitable targets in the absence of capable
guardians).
Both rational or situational choice theory and routine-activities theory emphasize the limits of
rational thought in the decision to commit crime. They claim that criminal decisions are neither fully
rational nor thoroughly considered.
Policy implications:
- Rational-choice theory: manipulate the opportunity structure
- Routine-activity theory: increasing presence of guardians of potential victims/change or vary
routine activities, behavior, and lifestyle.
