Violent Crimes
Violent Crimes
1.) The three (3) perspectives on human nature are conformity perspective, non-conformity perspective, and learning perspective. The conformity perspective states that humans are basically good (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). On the other hand, the non-conformity perspective, the humans to be unruly by nature, and that they have to be controlled by the community. The deviant behavior of humans can cause them to commit crimes indiscriminately. The learning perspective states that humans are neutral and that they have to be controlled by society. These three perspectives relate to violent crime and criminal behavior in that an offender develops negative behavior due to unachieved goals, loss or death of a loved one, financial problems or negative life events including divorce, which can trigger anger and frustration of every human being. When this happens, some people commit crimes due to the negative psychological state of disappointment, anger and frustration of a person (Siegel, 2008).
The three (3) categories of risk factors associated with criminal behavior are social, family and psychological development risk factors (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). The social risk factors include poverty and social class. The root cause of crimes originates from socioeconomic factors. In fact, the crime rate in poor communities is high since there are inadequate resources allocated from them by the localities to give them the basic services including housing, healthcare and education. Members who come from these poor families are generally unemployed. As a result, they resort to other illegal means to provide for their basic needs. These indigent families engage themselves in deviant subcultures which promote criminality. The root causes of criminality are poverty, social disorganization, and breakdown of traditional values which may result to criminal careers (Siegel, 2008). Under the social learning theory, it has specifically provides for the informal social rewards and punishments including the formal application of sanctions by the legal and correctional system for the purpose of preventing the violation of norms (Akers, 1990).
2.) The process of operant conditioning or operant learning refers to the fundamental learning process wherein the criminal behavior is acquired or eliminated by the consequences that follow such behavior (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). This can be illustrated by the temper tantrum of a toddler at the check-out counter of a grocery when he wants to have one of the candies from the shelves, which will prompt his mother to give in to the toddler’s desire and buy the candy. When the child’s parents do this, the next time they are in the check-out counter of the grocery, the temper-tantrum strategy will be used again by the child since it worked during the first time. The child was able to learn the consequences of his timely temper tantrums to get what he wants. This is the negative behavior caused by operant conditioning. However, it also increases positive behavior in people. In the case of children, they are encouraged to complete their homework on time to earn good grades from their teachers, or they clean their rooms to earn a reward from their parent parents. On the other hand, the employees finish their projects on time in order to receive bonuses or promotions. Based on these illustrations, the promise or possibility of receive rewards can cause the increase in behavior. However, operant conditioning may be used to decrease the behavior of a person. I believe that operant conditioning is the most powerful origin of criminal behavior because it is evident in all people around us. Thus, when there is removal of a negative consequence or outcome, such negative outcome has a tendency to decrease or deter the undesirable behaviors. For example, the strict enforcement and implementation the death penalty results the potential punishment against serial killers or murderers. Hence, such result can prevent or deter disruptive behaviors among individuals. Criminal or deviant behavior will be diminished if the state will impose such punishment. This illustration of operant conditioning decrease criminal behavior.
3.) One of the core behavioral characteristics of the criminal psychopath shall include impulsitivity, anti-social behavior, lack of empathy or remorse and having a cold-blooded behavior (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). Psychopaths generally act of impulse and such behavior is cyclical in nature. In the case of rapists who possess the characteristics of psychopaths, they have the tendency to have non-sexual motivations when they commit their crimes. They are motivated by the following factors: anger, vindictiveness, the excessive use of instrumental aggression, sadism and purposeful aggression (Bartol & Bartol, 2014).
One of the instruments that is used to measure psychopathy is the Psychopathy Checklist (“PCL”). PCL can assess the affective, emotional, behavioral, interpersonal and social deviance facets of criminal psychopathy from different resources (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). The PCL uses self-reports, behavioral observations and collateral resources, including arrest records, court records, family members, parents, and friends of the psychopathy. The original PCL has been revised and called the PCL-R, which includes 20 new items. The PCL-R has been expanded for the purpose of using it the other offenders who come from other countries. It contains updated validation data for male and female offenders. The Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) is the 12-item short form version of the PCL (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). The Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) is the instrument that is being used to assess the psychopathic characteristics of the youth offenders (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). On the other hand, the P-Scan: Research Version is a screening instrument being used as a rough screen for psychopathic features and serves as the walking hypothesis that is used to deal with suspects (Bartol & Bartol, 2014).
The difference between criminal psychopathy and mental disorder is that psychopathy refers to a personality disorder, while mental disorder refers to a mental sickness or disease that results to insanity.4.) The difference between an organized and disorganized crime scene.
An organized crime scene means that there is evident premeditation and planning on the part of the offender. In an organized crime scene, there is an indication that the offender has control of himself and the victim (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). On the other hand, a disorganized crime scene shows that the offender only acted on impulse, rage or excitement. The offender committed the crime without planning or premeditation on his part. The offender obtains the victim by chance and does not have specific criteria in mind. While in an organized crime scene, the offender selected the victim based on his personal criteria (Bartol & Bartol, 2014).
The motives of the four types of serial murders according to Holmes and DeBurger are the visionary serial killers, mission-oriented serial killers, hedonistic serial killers, and the power or control serial killers. The visionary serial killers are out of touch with reality since they are suffering from psychosis or schizophrenic by nature. They feel that they were forced to kill their victims by seeing visions or hearing voices in their heads. On the other hand, the mission-oriented serial killers believe that their mission in life to kill certain individuals such as prostitutes and homosexuals. The hedonistic serial killers are the most common type of serial killers since they commit murder to give them pure thrill, excitement and joy by doing the cruel and perverted sexual activities (Bartol & Bartol, 2014). The power or control serial killers earn additional satisfaction by knowing that they have complete power and control over their victims and sexual activity is usually present as part of their motivation.
The victimology perspective important in understanding serial murder to be able to know the real motivation of the serial killers in murdering their victims and to determine if the victim has a relationship with the offender.
References
Akers, R.L. (1990). Rational Choice, Deterrence, and Social Learning Theory in Criminology: The Path Not Taken, Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 81(3), 653-676).
Bartol, C. & Bartol, A. (2014). Criminal Behavior: A Psychological Approach, 10th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Siegel, L. (2008). Criminology the Core, 3rd ed. California: Cengage Learning.
