(Institute/University)
Introduction
Deviance and criminal conduct can be perceived as the “outcome of rational choices based on efforts, rewards, and costs involved,” citing Cornish and Clarke (1998). Moreover, Wang (2005, p. 105) posits that offenders are logical in their thinking patterns and will opt for choices that will reward them. This factor emphasizes the fact that even the most incorrigible and dangerous criminals and offenders will evince a reasonable thinking pattern. This is particularly true for serial criminals who exhibit intelligence to avoid capture.
Over time, offenders will be to enhance their decision-making processes. Offenders will look to optimize opportunities and at the same time lower risk by striking a balance between their wants to ‘operate’ within their zones with the requirement to remain anonymous. In this light, internal as well as external factors mold the hunting mechanisms of offenders. Chronic offenders, with each new crime, gains experientially, learning from the instance and enhancing their ‘criminal’ skills (Wang, 2005, p. 107).
The ‘ecological school of criminological theory’-also known as the ‘statistical, geographic, and cartographic school.’ In 1825, Andre Guerry devised a scheme that marked out areas where high rates of criminality occurred. In this operation, criminological impulses were linked to specific conditions in an area. In connecting destitution with criminality, Guerry discovered that wealthier areas had higher incidents of crimes against property; Guerry also noted urban and commercial areas also had higher property crime indices compared to rural areas.
On the other hand, brutal crimes were committed at a higher rate in rural areas. Guerry also noted that the findings were consistent on a year –to- year basis. Nonetheless, the works of both Guerry and Lambert Adolphe Jacques Quetelet, whose works were released half century earlier than that of Cesare Lombroso, who is often identified as ‘the father of criminology.” Lombroso’s main work, “The Criminal Man (1876) supported the concept that man is born a criminal. Instead of being framed as progress in the field of criminological science, the preponderance of these ‘positivists’ may have led to the journey of the field into a half century marked by antiquated and eventually inutile ideas. By placing the burden on the individual rather than on the contribution of the inequality of society, the wealthy among the society were placated, who espoused that the criminal inclinations of the person was mainly a result of the shortcomings of the individual (Hagan, 2012, pp. 120-121).
Early studies in criminology stated that criminals were already predisposed to commit crime owing to their socioeconomic status. Societal criminologists Brantingham and Brantingham (1981) were primary influences in the field moving the focus of research on crime prevention rather than establishing criminal behaviors and triggers. The science here focused on location rather than on the specific ‘red flags’ that would point to psychological indicators for criminal propensity in the individual.
Criminological arguments can be segregated into theories that strive to expound on the development of the offender, and those that expound on the establishment of the events. Majority of the research in the area has been focused on the development of the criminal-why people develop the tendencies to commit crime. It has been only recently that the study has included the crime itself and the factors attending the same and it is stated here that the place of the crime is central to the methodology of assessing the instance of criminal conduct.
Deviance arguments will ultimately evince the reasons a person resorted to criminal conduct as well as the environment that contributed to that direction. Though theories can posit offender deterrence programs that are focused on people with a propensity to commit crimes; nonetheless, these theories do not proffer any accurate bases to foretell these possibilities, and there is little agreement on a future argumentative structure in this area in the future (Eck and Weisburd p. 4).
Studies in the field of criminology evinces that specific social aspects are connected with an increased propensity to commit crime. Sarco and Kennedy (2002) proffer that many offenders tend to come from the marginalized sectors in society. It has well documented that social as well as economic marginalization is strongly linked with criminal activity. This is particularly true in instances of theft, robbery, and murder. The literature on this aspect showed that criminals were either working at unskilled jobs or those that paid mediocre wages or did not have any gainful employment. Furthermore, there is a strong relationship between criminal activities and racial background, in particular African Americans in the United States and Aboriginals in Canada (Department of Justice-Canada, 2015).
It is widely held that as a “rule of thumb,” crime rates are significantly higher in urban areas. In the work of Sir Anthony Bottoms (2007), the Fitzwilliam College emeritus fellow discussed the work of the Chicago School of Sociology regarding the connection of location and criminal activities. Analysts at the Chicago School discovered that frequencies of juvenile criminal activity followed a “geographical pattern” within the urban areas. Nonetheless, it must be noted that a geographical assessments of criminal instances is not restricted to the lay of the urban areas and not even to comparisons of rural and urban areas. In terms of transnational or computer-related crimes, geographical factors can have a level of effect (Kirwan, Grainne, 2011, p. 46).
The issue of criminality and its relation to geographical area is not a new concern. French commentators have long proffered that even as early as the 19th century, the dispersion of criminal activity across the country was related to the digressing social environment and the features of the society. The Chicago School study noted that the features within a specific social environment were crucial to the rise in criminal activities within a specific area. Withal, the focus tended to center on a “macro” approach to the issue-centering on the larger jurisdictions (states, cities, and communities) rather to the immediate proximity of the area where the crimes are committed (Eck and Weisburd, p. 2).
Discussion
Kirwan and Power (2013, p. 17) avers that the most significant postulates associated with criminality are ‘societal’ or ‘macro-level’ arguments. The authors cite Howitt (2009) who posits the example of the strain theory as a ‘macro-level’ theory. The center of the argument suggests that the incapacity of the members of a society to achieve all of its objectives. To illustrate the point, not all members of a society will be prosperous; those members who are not able to achieve this goal by legal or accepted means may become inclined to achieve that prosperity by criminal or destructive means. The social framework of crime offers a method of implementing societal arguments.
Aside from the strain theory, the next set are called community arguments; in essence, the propensity towards crime is determined by the societal factors in that area of the community, whether it is a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ area. It is held here that certain parts of urban areas have a higher statistic of criminal activity, and these areas are generally, but not always the case, the area where there is the highest rate of marginalization. The level of socialization that an individual will encounter in that area is also a factor in whether the person will develop criminal tendencies. In this light, it is posited that the person will learn the mores of the environs where these are located; simply put, criminal deviancy is learned by watching and emulating the criminal behavior of those around them.
The tendency towards criminality is not born; it is learned. As with acquiescing with a new skill, there are a number of ways to learn a skill, and a significant amount of literature has been amassed and evaluated on the avenues that this assimilation can occur. There is the common ‘trial and error’ approach, wherein the person learns from “one’s mistakes.” Though there are a number of arguments that can be posited in this light, the arguments for ‘operant conditioning’ and ‘observational learning’ are the most discussed in this regard.
“Operant conditioning” assesses the manner that people assimilate behaviors owing to the impact of one’s actions and circumstances. In the work of F.B. Skinner, humans are bound to learn an action or behaviors as a result of the efforts given to learning; if one studies hard, the reward will be a good grade. The prospect of getting rewarded if an action is learned will impact the future conduct of the individual.
In this light, criminality can generate substantial rewards for the offender; the rewards can range from the purely financial when robbers or thieves strike or on a more psychological angle, the release of the resentment and dissatisfaction of the person with their existing social state. Nonetheless, the reverse can also be seen in conducting criminal activity; if the offender is arrested, the offender may ‘earn’ punishment by being sentenced to prison, or if the individual commits a heinous offense, to suffer the death penalty (Kirwan and Power, 2013, pp. 17-22).
The geographical approach has been censured from focusing too much on the societal circumstances rather than on person. Schmalleger and Volk (2001) states that by centering the approaches on the social agencies and social dysfunction assay in criminal tendency, societal methodologies do not sufficiently integrate the factors of biology, personal mental and emotional states, or volitional decision-making in the consideration of committing a crime.
In the data from the Canadian Department of Justice (2015), additional censure comes from the observation that community statistics for criminality are impacted by the policy of police agencies in allocating increased resources to a particular area. The increased focus by the law enforcement establishment on a particular community gives the impression that there is a higher frequency of criminal activity than is actually prevailing in the area.
It would be fallacious to definitively state that poorer neighborhoods are the ones where criminal activity emanates. Simply put, if a neighborhood is poor or marginalized, then it would automatically legitimize claims that the area is crime-ridden of “full of criminal elements.” Criminal activities also occur in affluent communities or are perceived as socially stable communities. Criminal acts engaging cruelty, robbery, burglary, and illegal drugs normally also occur in wealthier parts of urban areas as well as in various parts of the area as well. In addition, Felson (2002) notes that statistics for home intrusion are higher in areas with lower population densities and in communities where design and community layout offers greater ‘freedom’ to commit crime.
Conclusion
Policy initiatives are directed by argumentative and analytical results. Though theories deals with concerns such as the motive and the manner that crimes occur, the approach addresses in engaging methods to provide accurate discoveries and strives to authenticate the same. The combination of the efforts as a mechanism is geared to craft policies to effectively eliminate criminality. Initiatives to expound crime and delinquency can lead themselves to assessing “deviant behavior” in the person as well as societal dysfunctioning. In analyzing the first issue, Hagan (2012, p. 125) avers that the patient, the offender, is asked the question why will he/she opt to commit crime, or placed on another way, why does some areas have a higher crime rate than others?
In the final analysis, the premise is that individuals assimilate the mores of the societies where these are located. Here, it is assumed that the individual placed in a crime-ridden community will automatically assimilate the criminal inclinations of those in the community that are such. However, by profiling the communities as a generator of crime and criminals, then it would also translate the affluent communities do no generate criminality. However, the paper does not seek to discuss this issue, rather it is noted that crime as an instance must be dealt on the individual level as well as the societal and community levels.
References
Eck, J.E., Weisburd, D “Crime places in crime history” Retrieved 17 February 2016 from <http://www.popcenter.org/library/crimeprevention/volume_04/01-eckweisburd.pdf
Hagan, F. E (2012) Introduction to criminology: theories, methods, and criminal behavior. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Kirwan, G (2011) The psychology of cybercrime: concepts and principles. Hershey, PA: IGI Global
Kirwan, G., Power, A (2013) Cybercrime: the psychology of online offenders. London: Cambridge University Press
Wang, F (2005) Geographic information systems and crime analysis. Hershey, PA: Idea Group
