Is aggression an innate and deterministic quality from birth, or is it something that one that all can control, as a matter of free will and choice, to be used when we need it in a calculated manner? At birth all people are born with aggression as a survival trait. As we educate ourselves as we have seen in the video “The Truth About Violence” even in an educated culture such as the United States we still have violence. Violent people and we are drawn to violent sports such as cage fighting and football.
Even the most mild manner people who don’t like violence in movies, sports or anywhere else can find enjoyment from participating in violence. When a person results to violence I don’t believe they can control the amount of aggression that they have. In my opinion it is never a calculated amount. This is why we have crime of passion and people become violent and do things that they will have never did if they would not have lost their temper or snapped as some people call it. Depending on the persons upbringing and education level determines how much it will take or how long before a person will lose their temper.
The society that a person is raised in has a lot to do with their aggression level. In certain countries where violence is accepted and even rewarded the individual learns that it is ok to celebrate violence and participate in it. It will bring certain people adrenaline rushes so they will seek it if it’s not taught that there is a time and a place for everything. 2. Identify and explain the major issues regarding accurately predicting crime trends and the future of the “criminal man,” as illustrated in Bennett’s work, Crimewarps, in our text.
Some of the major issues with trying to identify the issues is that no one can predict the future. It is difficult to predict the future trends based on the demographics of today. We can speculate on what we think will happen but that is not a guarantee of what will happen. I don’t believe that we can predict crime trends based on demographics or on criminal theories. Society is always changing and with the media influencing our upbringing and beliefs this will influence the crime trends. 3.
Which Classical School theorist do you think contributed the most to the advancement of criminological theory? Explain why you choose that particular theorist over the other Classical School theorist of the time? I believe that Beccaria contributited the most to the classical school of thinking. As we can see today some of his theories still hold true. People should be treated equally and punished based on the crime and not the person. Now we still see Hollywood actors and actresses get away with more than a normal person would but I think as a whole Americans are ok with this.
Professional athletes get DUI’s and drug charges all the time but in the military one DUI or drug charge and your being kicked out. You lose your job for one mistake when we allow professional athletes and entertainers that we see in the media frequently get away with the stuff. This I don’t agree with and we need to be better on it. No one is above the law and we need to improve on this. Also Beccaria is the theorist that had the idea that every criminal should be treated as innocent until proven guilty. We still have this in our criminal justice system.
In my opinion though depending on who you are and the crime such as in the military you are guilty until proven innocent. To me this is an injustice to determine someone’s guilt based on color or sex or even religion. I agree with his thought process of the punishment should fit the crime an example of this would be if someone stole a loaf of bread to feed their family and the punishment was death. I understand that stealing is wrong and I know in the medieval times that stealing could get your hand cut off which to me is a little extreme but I guess it was used as a deterrent.
Thru Beccaria we have learned many lessons and adopted some of his theories which are still in use today. You have to let the people know what the crimes are and the punishment for those crimes in order to try and deter people from committing those crimes. 4. Which Positivist School theorist do you think contributed the most to the advancement of criminological theory? Explain why you choose that particular theorist over the other Positivist School theorist of the time?
To me Lombroso was the most influential theorist in the positivist school theorist of the time. Even though he had some weird views which sound crazy today such as the slope of someone’s head or the size of their ears. I do agree with his four major categories. He is also the theorist that came up with crime of passion which I understand and the irresistible force that he speaks of. He thought of the social factors to go alone with crime also depending on the laws, structure of the government, church organization, sex, marriage and climate to name a few.
Lombrosos also was the theorist who took the causes of crime away from sin and turned it over to science the same as we use today. 5. Explain both the consequences and benefits that the Positivist School brought to criminal justice reform. A consequence of Positivist school is that if offenders are characterized by unchangeable bodily appearance then we would have to just kill them at birth or cage them like animals. This is represented in the movie 300 where if a baby looked deformed or different they would just throw it off a cliff.
Another consequence was that this way of thinking would objective and oppress parts of the society. One of the major benefits of the Positivist School made it that criminals were rehabilitated instead of just punished in order to prevent future crimes. Also the Positivist’s taught us that criminaloids committed less serious crimes because they would commit crime if opportunity presented itself or they were drinking alcohol and had other criminals present. They taught us about job training and counseling to help out offenders.