Punishable by Law Free Essay Example

This essay is going to explain a crime definition, criminology development and two different crime theories: biological and psychological. Crimes have been an inseparable companion of humanity. It occures everywhere, from upper to lower class, but as long as there are people, there will always be crime. And due to this fact, along with the flow of time, the need of studying crime emerged. So what is crime? According to Oxford Dictionaries: an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law.

However the law is not the same in every country, thus a second definition, in my words, would be more accurate: socially constructed concept that changes over time and place and relates to many behaviours that go against the morals of society and actions that cause harm. Sources to look at that promote me theory would be the Sage Dictionary of Criminology and Introductory Criminology textbooks. Around the1870s the classical theory, was replaced with new one – the biological approach.

This approach stated that an individual might be driven to commite a crime by abnormalities he/she had been born with. Abnormalities such as involving body function/health and facial details could determine that an individual is a criminal or not. The idea itself was meant to isolate those qualified as “bad people” from the society beforehand. This particular approach excluded those whom were born different and made rational reasoning and free will unavailable to them- one was simply born a criminal or not. (Akers 2000: p.

42) Cesare Lombroso is most known for one of the biggest contributions to a biological approach.

In 1876 he published The Criminal Man where he described his conclusions after comparing body features of Italian prisoners and Italian soldiers. Lombroso called those matching the description of a criminal “atavisms” as they degenerated to a lower level. He has the physical makeup, mental capabilities, and instincts of primitive man. New born child can be indentified with stigmata (details stated by Lombroso) which are for example: an unsymmetry of the face or head, large monkey-like ears, large lips, receding chin, twisted nose, excessive cheek bones, long arms, excessive skin wrinkles and extra fingers or toes.

Female criminals are also born criminals however in their case, they have only three abnormalities available for determining them to be criminal. (Akers 2000: p. 42-43; Maguire, Morgan & Reiner 2002: p. 25) This approach did not last long. It’s met harsh criticism in 1913 when Charles Goring, an English medical officer published The English Convict. He hired well educated people in order to form a team and run certain observations based on Lombroso statements. They compared people from various layers of society with various backgrounds – from prisoners, through army and hospitals, all the way up to university students and professors.

The result of his research was that ultimatley, Lombroso was wrong. Goring arrived at the assumption that criminals were characterized by the defects in intelligence. His work met some criticism as well but from that point on people started slowly moving away from born-criminal theory. (Akers 2000: 43-44: Maguire, Morgan & Reiner 2002: p. 147) A second approach would be a psychological one. Let’s split it on two theories, psychoanalytic theory and personality theory. Starting off with psychoanalytic it can be said that it does not have much in common with the biological approach.

Both seek for the causes of crime within the makeup of an individual. However in this case we focus rather on mind and processes going inside a subject’s head. Classical Freudians explain that someone might’ve suffered emotional disturbances or experienced abnormalities in early childhood. Those events, if not overcomed properly, could lead to insufficient development of an individual’s id, ego and superego causing imbalance. Id is an unconscious element, it’s irrational and antisocial therefore must be controlled.

This can be done by properly maintaining properly ego and superego which develop around the age of three. Freudians state that a child wants to be in possession of the parent of the opposite sex and sees the other as a rival. Feelings can lead to the development of either an Oedipus or an Electra complex. The basic idea of this theory is that delinquent or criminal behaviour is caused by psychic conflict between id, ego and superego due to poor early relationship with either mother or father. It relies heavily on irrational and unconscious motivations as basic forces behind crime.

Everything has it’s pluses and minuses, this theory is no different. Actions of an individual, let’s say a murder, can be influenced by something hidden deep in his unconscious mind making it practically impossible to test and check it’s reliability. (Akers 2000: p. 59-61) Personality studies have long tradition in psychology. Hans Eysenck (1916-1990) came up with his own theory regarding personality. It bases on interaction of biological, social and individual factors. He asks: Why don’t more people go out and engage in criminal behaviour?

Rewards are instant, punishment if happens is temporally distant from the deed and chances of being punished in reality are quite slim. However our conscious plays a big role here, society in general pairs up an act with consequences – we have a fear of being punished. Eysenck defined three dimensions of personality during his research: extraversion (E), neuroticism (N), psychoticism (P). High ‘E’ level is meant for people who are under-aroused and thus will look for stimulation while high ‘N’ individuals are considered irritable and anxious.

The best set up would be with low ‘E’ and low ‘N’ while high ‘E’ and high ‘N’ would be the worst. The ‘P’ dimension was not well described, it could refer more to psycopathy rather than psychotism. This scale is concerned with aspects of behaviour such as preference for solitude or lack of a feeling for others. (http://www. docstoc. com/docs/2216719/Eysenck? s-Theory-of-Personality–Crime ; Maguire, Morgan & Reiner 2002: p. 152-154) In personality theory the problem lies not in unconscious motivation, but the content of the person’s personality.

It states that some people have specifically criminal focused personalities: impulsiveness, aggressiveness, rebelliousness, hostility and so on. These apply to self-centered individuals who have not been properly socialized into prosocial attitudes and values, they have no sense of right and wrong, lack of empathy. (Akers 2000: p. 62) Those two approaches are out of many. Cannot really say that one’s right and second’s wrong. Each has scientific points that either support or are against it.

The newer biological explanations of crime have found greater acceptance in criminology, but they happened to be criticized for their dependence on research and serious methodology problems – resulted in generally weak support. Psychoanalytic and personality theories also concentrate on the causes of crime arising from within the individual, but the causes are not seen as inherited or biologically predetermined. Personality theories are more testable than psychoanalytic theories, but research has produced mixed results.

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers.

Get your custom essay

Helping students since 2015