Early and Classical Criminological Theories
Introduction to Criminological Theories
This section begins a three-week discussion on criminological theories, forming the end of Unit 1.
Today's lecture focuses on early and classical criminological theories.
Next week will cover mainstream criminological theories.
The final week will address critical criminological theories.
Learning Objectives
Define Theory: Comprehend the purpose and structure of a theoretical framework in criminology.
Explain Beccaria's Contributions: Understand the foundational ideas brought forth by Cesare Beccaria.
Understand Bentham's Work: Grasp the concepts developed by Jeremy Bentham regarding human behavior.
Discuss Hedonistic Calculus: Explain the mechanism by which individuals weigh pleasure against pain in decision-making.
Articulate Punishment's Purpose and Qualities: Describe the aims and necessary characteristics of punishment in classical theories.
Differentiate Deterrence: Distinguish between general and specific deterrence.
Defining Criminological Theory
A criminological theory is a set of interrelated propositions that attempt to describe, explain, and predict crime.
The core objective is to answer the fundamental question: "Why do people commit crimes?"
Historical Explanations of Crime (Pre-18^{th} Century)
Before the 18^{th} century, explanations for criminal behavior were predominantly religious and spiritual.
Crime was attributed to supernatural forces, such as demons or the devil, with offenders considered "sinners."
Responses to crime were characterized by extreme cruelty, harshness, and public display (e.g., public beheadings or quartering).
The Enlightenment and the Shift in Thought
Theological explanations for crime began to decline in the 18^{th} century, coinciding with the Age of Enlightenment.
This period marked a significant shift in thinking across all aspects of the world, including crime.
A move towards more scientific explanations of crime emerged.
Enlightened thinkers began advocating for dignity in punishments, questioning the harshness and irrationality of existing practices.
Cesare Beccaria: The Father of Classical Criminology
Cesare Beccaria is widely recognized as the father of classical criminology.
In 1764, he published "An Essay on Crimes and Punishments" (original title: "On Crimes and Punishments").
His work served as a foundational call for reform of the criminal justice system.
Beccaria's plea was to humanize and rationalize laws, making punishments more just and reasonable, moving away from barbaric practices like beheading or torture.
His argument was that a rational and scientifically informed society should have a criminal justice system that reflects these values.
Beccaria's Key Arguments for Reform:
Laws Protect the Public, Not Avenge Crime: Beccaria believed laws should primarily focus on public safety and order, rather than serving as a means of revenge against offenders. He viewed harsh punishments of his time as retaliatory rather than protective.
Necessity of a Written Criminal Code: He argued that all laws must be written and codified, ensuring that everyone is aware of what constitutes a crime and preventing arbitrary enforcement or invention of laws.
Reduction of Judicial Discretionary Power: Beccaria criticized the extensive power held by judges, who at the time made all decisions regarding guilt and sentencing. He advocated for decentralizing this power.
Trial by Peers: To further reduce judicial power and promote fairness, he proposed that individuals should be tried by a jury of their peers, rather than solely by a judge.
Beccaria's Influence on Modern Legal Systems:
Many of Beccaria's ideas have been adopted by contemporary legal systems.
Codified Law and Punishment: Modern legal systems, such as in the United States, feature written, codified laws that are publicly accessible.
Reduced Discretion of Judges: The implementation of policies like mandatory minimum sentencing, discussed in previous lectures on mass incarceration, significantly limits judicial discretion by prescribing specific sentences for particular crimes.
Introduction of Juries: The concept of a jury of one's peers is a cornerstone of the U.S. legal system, aimed at ensuring fairer trials and distributing decision-making power. However, it's important to note the practical reality: approximately 97 ext{\%} of cases never reach a jury, as they are resolved through plea bargains, where defendants plead guilty (often to a lesser charge) in exchange for a lighter sentence.
Jeremy Bentham and Hedonistic Calculus
Jeremy Bentham, another Enlightenment thinker, built upon Beccaria's ideas.
He introduced the concept of hedonistic calculus to explain criminal behavior.
Hedonism: Bentham believed that people are inherently hedonistic, meaning they are self-interested and constantly seek pleasure.
Rationality: He also viewed people as rational actors who aim to maximize pleasure while minimizing pain.
Hedonistic Calculus: This is the method by which individuals logically weigh the anticipated benefits (pleasures) of certain actions against their potential costs (pains).
Application to Crime: For example, robbing a bank might offer immediate pleasure (money). However, a rational individual would also consider the potential pain (consequences) of getting caught, such as arrest, incarceration, and loss of freedom. If the perceived pain outweighs the pleasure, the individual will likely refrain from the crime.
Crime occurs when the anticipated pleasure outweighs the anticipated pain.
Modern Deterrence Theory
Bentham's ideas on hedonistic calculus directly influenced the development of modern deterrence theory.
Two Purposes of Punishment: According to deterrence theorists:
Deter Crime: To discourage individuals from committing criminal acts.
Reaffirm Social Order: To reinforce societal norms and acknowledge those who abide by the law.
Qualities of Punishment Necessary for Deterrence:
To effectively deter crime, punishment must possess three key qualities:
Certainty:
Punishment must be certain; individuals must know they will be punished if they commit a crime. If the likelihood of punishment is low, people are more likely to participate in undesirable behavior.
Example: Speeding. Many people speed frequently, yet most do not receive speeding tickets, reducing the certainty of punishment.
Context: Victimization surveys indicate that less than half (< rac{1}{2}) of crimes are reported to the police, meaning a significant amount of criminal activity goes unpunished, undermining certainty in the U.S.
Severity:
Punishment should be severe enough to deter, but it must be proportional to the crime. If a punishment is excessively severe, it is less likely to be carried out.
Example: If underage drinking on campus resulted in losing a finger, law enforcement would be hesitant to enforce such a disproportionate penalty.
Proportionality: There must be a balance between the severity of the crime and the severity of its punishment for deterrence to be effective. In the U.S., sentences are often severe, with the death penalty reserved for the most severe crimes (e.g., first-degree murder).
Swiftness:
Punishment must be swift, occurring immediately or soon after the crime, to establish a clear connection between the act and its consequence.
Example: Puppy training – nose in pee right after the act connects the punishment to the behavior. Punishing days later would be ineffective.
Challenge in the U.S.: The U.S. justice system often lacks swiftness, with cases taking years to move through the courts, weakening the perceived connection between crime and punishment.
Types of Deterrence
General Deterrence:
Definition: The preventative effect of the threat of punishment on the general population. It is aimed at potential offenders.
Purpose: To deter the broader populace from committing crimes by demonstrating the consequences of criminal acts. The idea is that if individuals know about laws or witness others being punished, they will be less likely to offend.
Example: Seeing another driver pulled over for speeding prompts you to slow down, deterring you from the same behavior.
The Death Penalty: Often discussed for its potential general deterrent effect, the death penalty, as the most severe punishment, is hypothesized to reduce homicide rates. However, evidence generally suggests that the death penalty does not actually deter people from committing crimes, a point further explored in assigned readings.
Specific Deterrence:
Definition: Punishment aimed at an individual who has already offended, with the goal of preventing them from repeating their criminal acts.
Purpose: The idea is that experiencing punishment will be so impactful that criminals will not re-offend (recidivate).
Reality in the U.S.: In practice, this is often not true. Many individuals who are incarcerated in the U.S. do re-offend, indicating that specific deterrence is not universally effective.
Conclusion
This overview concludes the discussion on early and classical criminological theories.
Students are reminded to complete assigned readings and section assignments by the end of the week.