Return to JT's homepage
CHAPTER 4: Schmalleger - Classical/Neo-classical though
We've seen how we measure it; it's a problem; Now-HOW DO WE EXPLAIN IT?
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
--We're trying to explain "deviance," or the straying from a normative
system (values, mores/folkways, laws, norms)
1) Mala in se / mala prohibita
2) Early law (Hammurabi, roman law, common law, magna carta)
3) Enlightenment (Hobbes, Benthan, Rousseau/social contract)
4) Natural law/Positive law
Although focus on crime relatively recent, the Classical Theorists
attempted to examine crime in a way that would allow for a
"rational"formulation of policy. CLASSICAL CRIMINOLOGISTS are
often associated with 18th and early 19th century theorists
(e.g., Lombroso, Beccaria, Garrafolo).
CLASSICAL THEORIES:
BECCARIA: Considered "father" of Crim
Intent to look at crime as VIOLATIONS OF LAW (ie, not
broad definition of crime as "sins against nature," but more
limited, as violates of statutes, regardless of behavior (explain
and give examples)
Assumptions of classical criminology:
a) Crime is a LEGAL PROCESS (this is a "justice" model of crime
control, involving both a crime control and due process
model--ie, crime is "not following laws").
b) Major weaon against crime is punishment.
(NOTE: This assumes that people will
do what is in their best interests, and assumes a "rational"
calculation of OUTCOMES of behaviors--This is a "DETERRENCE"
model of crime (ie, punishment will stop crime)
c) Institutionalizion is the way to eliminate crime (put people in
prison and REHABILITATE them through moral correction, rather than
"treatment," or through changing society)
d) Control crime AFTER
it occurs (ie, react to crime, rather than prevent by
anticipating who will commit crimes, or under what conditions)
e) Environment, etc, are NOT factors in crime control
f) Personality structures need not be addressed
g) Criminals are NOT to be treated--criminal law is for those who
voluntarily and immorally violate the law (ie, crime associated with
MORAL behavior--and as will be discussed in a few weeks, implied a
type of RESPONSE TO CRIME (ie, moral development) and excluded other
responses. . .
h) No leagal guarantees for treatemtn of those convicted of crime; ALL
PERSONS TREATED EQUALLY regardless of circumstances (ie, punishments
are equally applied to all)
i) We know all we need to know about human behavisor (ie, no research
necessary), and crime control policy must be in hands of police,
lawyer, etc (point: Like many theories of today, especially
"tough-on-crime" types, let criminal justice practitioers
deal with the problem, and the rest of us stay out of it.
We can add:
1. Punishment must outweigh the profit
2.Punisment must be increased in proportion as it falls short
of certainty
3. Repeat offenders must be punished more severely
4. Moreserious offenses must receive harsher punishment
5. When two offenses in the offing, punishment for most
serious must be sufficient to dissuade against the second
6. Punishment must fit the crime
7. Punishment must not exceed that which is necessary to
prevent the crime
8. Punishment should be same for all who commit same crime
NEOCLASSICAL---BENTHAM (work between 1820-1861)
REFORM ORIENTED--these folks agreed in principle, but found
punisments harsh because they didn't account for individual
diferences. They introduced concept of MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
RETURN TO "WHY PUNISH?" --
POSITIVIST CRIMINOLOGY:
In the 19th and early 20th century, the CLASSICAL model began to
be replaced with what is called a "positivistic" model that
looked at the DEFINITION of crime not so much as violation of
LAW, but as ANY BEHAVIOR THAT OFFENDED the sensibilities of
normal people. In this view, one important topic began to be the
TYPES of people who committed crime, and WHY!!
BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF POSITIVISTIC CRIMINOLOGY
Cesare Lomroso (late 1800s)--first to use "scientific method)
He identified four types of criminals:
1) Born Criminals
2)Insane criminals
3) Occasional criminals
4) Passional criminals (crimes of passion)
(This was about 1876--DEFINE TYPOLOGY)
ENRICO FERRI: He added (1881) HABITUAL CRIMINALS
a) Crime can be cured by treatment---punishment model replaced by
treatment model, and as we shall see in a few weeks, this
dramatically shaped how PRISONS functioned.
b) We need not be so concerned about the legal and ethical
aspects of crime, but rather with those factors that ACT UPON
people to INDUCE THEM TO COMMIT CRIMES.
NOTE: THIS IS ONE DEFINITION OF POSITIVISM--THE SEARCH FOR THINGS THAT
US ACT UPON PEOPLE,
AND AN ATTEMPT TO DISCOVER GENERAL "LAWS" OF BEHAVIOR. . .
c) We need not be concerned about the lack of a basic theory of
behavior in psychology or sociology which will allow us to treat
criminal behavior successfully---work with what we have
d) Need not change the environment in which crime occurs (it is
the PERSON who commits crime and is the focus of attention)
e) Need not change criminal behavior in order to change the
criminal (explain--ie, change the "causes" first, and the
"behaviors" will follow)
f) We can develop biological, psychological and sociological
theories of behavior in total isolation from one another and
still have a sound basis for criminological theory. (ie,
disciplines exist in isolation, and "causes" exist in isolation
from other factors (eg, environment) as well, and an adequate
theory need not take these into account.
g) Proper time to treat criminal is at maturity. . .need not
worry about PREVENTIVE techniques. (ie, LIKE CLASSICAL THEORY,
this is a REACTION to crime (ie, after it occurs). THis means
also that juveniles are treated differently.
SOME IMPLICATIONS:
1) Offenders must be held LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE
2) Punishment sould be abandoned and repaced with
SCIENTIFICALLY DETERMINED sanctions (INDIVIDUALIZED SENTENCES
3)SENTENCES NEEDTED TO BE INDETERMINATE
4) Parole boards should determine release
5) Offenders should receive "aftercare" after release
Return to JT's homepage
Page maintained by: Jim Thomas - jthomas@sun.soci.niu.edu