CCJS 461 Project 1 Essay

375) and by using this hedonistic calculus people will refrain from committing crimes. This concept focuses on the punishment fitting the criminal and on preventing future crimes from occurring. The three most important factors in effectively deterring a criminal from further crimes are the severity of the punishment, the certainty of the punishment, and the swiftness of the punishment. If criminal doesn’t believe he will be punished or he feels the punishment is minor in comparison to the crime or if the punishment is not swift enough, then he/she will not be deterred from committing crimes. Studies on the effectiveness of deterrence have shown to be inconclusive. The deficient areas of deterrence are crimes committed in the heat of passions, crimes committed under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and the massive backlog of cases in the nation’s courts (Neubauer & Fradella, 2008).

Operant Conditioning Theory by B.F. Skinner is a psychological manipulation using rewards and punishments to enforce positive behavior. It uses an individual person’s response to events or stimulus. When a particular Stimulus-Response pattern is rewarded, the individual is conditioned to respond. The distinctive characteristic of operant conditioning is related to previous forms of behaviorism. The Operant Conditioning theory comprises of neutral operants, positive/negative reinforcers, and positive/negative punishers. Through these factors, we get the desired behavior of our subject because they do not want to be punished for under performing so they do what they’re told to or do more of what they were assigned to to receive positive stimulus

International Association for Property and Evidence. (2015, March 8). Professional Standards, v.2.5.1. Retrieved from IAPE: http://www.iape.org/Standards_2015.PDFs/Stands%202.5.1%20Approved%20Clean.pdf

It allows us to examine what makes crime acceptable and desirable in the minds of potential criminals, and it gives us the tools necessary to use a proactive rather than reactive approach to crime control. To look at crime from a psychological point of view is nothing new. However, use of this technique may lead to better methods of deterrence. To begin, we must understand what the concepts are that have shaped the average person’s mind. In general the average person is faced with the concepts of determinism, free will, and social identity as they mature into adulthood.

The statistical analysis on recidivism is constantly expanding. The psychology of criminal conduct (PCC) has a positive and secure promise of an effective program, and is gaining attention for its ability to predict, influence and explain criminal activity. Researchers also deny that the past and future criminal activity can be separated by

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Cincinnati: Anderson.

There are many perspectives in which one can analyze and understand why a person decides to commit a crime. Some perspectives are social learning theory, strain theory, classical and rational choice theory, deterrence theory, biological and psychological positivist theories, among others. However, for the purposes of this paper, the biological and psychological theories will be discussed.

Deterrence and Rational Choice are two theories that our criminal justice system has been in place to prevent criminals from committing crimes. Of the many types of deterrence that is available to use that displays our societies consequences, we are going to look at

Severe punishments, such as long stints in prison and the death penalty, are designed to pose as threats or warnings to those who consider committing a crime. It also seems that, theoretically, more severe punishments, such as longer prison sentences, would help deter crime at least by keeping the offender locked away, thus “deterring” them from committing more crime. Certainty of punishment would serve to deter potential offenders with the threat of a definite, undesirable penalty, should they be caught and convicted. Certainty and severity of punishment both play on an offender’s sense of self-preservation, in hopes that potential offenders may not commit crimes to protect themselves from undesirable consequences. Promptness of punishment theoretically serves to deter crime by playing on not only the potential offender’s self-interest, but on the idea that public attitudes against the offender will be more severe soon after the crime is committed.

The goal of this paper is to analyze if the criminal justice system, as it is constructed today, is doing enough to punish and to deter crime. It will also look to see if there is deterrent in punishment at all. To do this there are a number of theories that should be examined. This includes the following Deterrence theory, rational choice theory, and lastly the positivist theory. The deterrence theory is a very basic, but overlapping theory to all of the others. We learn that at a very early age that reward vs cost is a critical thing to weigh when making decisions. This carries over to the decision to commit a crime and not to commit a criminal act. The rational choice theory states that human beings are decision making creatures. This theory would subscribe to the idea that the tougher the punishment, the higher the cost. The higher the cost, the likelihood of an individual committing a crime would drop. The positivist theory subscribes to the opposite of the rational choice theory. Under this school of thought individuals with lower intelligence or lacking social status do not have the same ability to make a rational choice when it comes to the ability to make a choice to, or not to, commit a crime.

This paper will explain the contemporary utilization of the classical perspective of criminology. Deterrence theory, rational choice theory, routine activities theory, and lifestyle theory will be explained and defined thoroughly detailing each theory and provide a historical background, theorist(s) involved, prior literature, scientific methods, results, personal opinions, and policy implications for each theory. These theories are still being utilized in law enforcement in present day enforcement of laws and policies and this paper will describe an in-depth explanation of the theories.

In classical theory, the main objective of study is the offence and the nature of the offender is a rational, free-willed, calculating and normal individual (Aker, 2012). However, it became apparent that some were more motivated to commit crime than others, regardless of deterrence. Therefore, the classical doctrine cannot account for re-offending. Based on empirical research done on convicted offenders, the notion of deterrence was rarely given thought of (Burke, 2013). Initially, most offenders give a lot of thought to the notion of punishment; however, in the process of committing the offence, offenders give little consideration to deterrence and consequences. As a result, this defies whether the purpose of deterrence is, in fact, achieving what it is meant to (Burke, 2013). The model is idealistic, that individuals could be controlled by the threat of punishment- by the likelihood of arrest, prosecution and

Example of Operant conditioning, is when you decided to snooze the alarm in the morning after partying all night long. Finally you decide to get up to go to work you are running 15 min late. And decide to step on gas pedal. You are now driving 50 mph on a 35 mph road. You think you are fine and won 't get caught because everyone else is driving fast also. All of sudden a cop is hidden in between the trees and bushes. You try to brake, in order to slow down a bit, but it 's too late…. The cop has turn on the lights and tail-gating you already. You pull over and you try to convince him that you had a “tough night”… even though it 's a lie, and to let you off with a warning. The cop tells you he doesn 't care and you should know better. Therefore he gives you a speeding ticket of about two hundred dollars and a court date if you decide to fight it. In order to go to court you will have to miss work, which means you won 't get paid. Then you have to pay for all the additional court fees if you want to go to clear your record; your insurance will go up, have to pay for driving school and miss more work also. You will have to go through all this trouble, time and money. Just for being too lazy and “tired” to get up on time.

Criminal law is the body of law that relates to crime. It might be defined as the body of rules that defines conduct that is prohibited by the state because it is held to threaten, harm or otherwise endanger the safety and welfare of the public, and that sets out the punishment to be imposed on those who breach these laws. [1] The criminal law serves several purposes and benefits society by maintaining order, resolving disputes, protecting individuals and property, providing for smooth functioning of society and safeguarding civil liberties.[2]

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