4.8 - Control & Punishment Flashcards
3 Crime Prevention Theories
> SCP
ECP
SCCP
Crime Prevention & Control (KS)
> Clarke (Target Hardening, Rational Choice Theory & SCP & Contrast w/ Root Cause Theories)
> Feslon (SCP & Port Authority) (PA)
> Wilson & Keilling (Broken Window Theory & 0 Tolerance Policing & NY Example)
Clarke - General view on Situational Crime Prevention
Reducing chances for crime, targeting specific crime, + risks of crime & - rewards & managing environment
Clarke (Target Hardening, Rational Choice Theory & SCP)
> Make it harder to be target of crime e.g. bars on windows, alarms systems, more CCTV
> Reshaping environment to design crime out of area, based on RCT
> e.g. burglar weighs + & - of robbing each home, if home used TH - likely to rob
> If haven’t + likely as they feel they’ll get away w/it.
Clarke (SCP & Contrast w/ Root Cause Theories)
> Instead of looking @ factors e.g. socialisation or capitalism
> Need for focus on immediate situation - most crime opportunistic, so - opportunities = - crime
Feslon (SCP & Port Authority) (PA)
> PA, area w/ lots of crime e.g. drugs, prostitutes, homeless
> Due to poor design, lead to + chances for deviancy, design crime out stops deviant activity
> e.g. large sinks homeless used to bathe, replaced w/ small hand basins
Chaiken - Criticisms of SCP (Displacement Theory)
> Doesn’t stop crime but moves it to diff area, in NY crackdown on subway crime, made it safer area
> But simply moved to streets instead
Types of Displacement
> Spatial (Somewhere else)
Temporal (Another time)
Target (Diff V)
Functional (do diff crime) > Tactical (Diff method)
Overall Criticisms of SCP
> Works for opportunistic street crime, not CC crime
> Not all criminals make rational choices in crime of violence, under influence of drugs/alcohol
> CCTV: focuses too much on young M & WC, feminists see it as male gaze, observe F & try control them
General View on Environmental Crime Prevention (ECP)
Improve local area & deal w/ low lvl crime e.g. vandalism, graffiti & loitering.
Wilson & Keilling (Broken Window Theory) (ECP)
> Signs of disorder e.g. graffiti, littering, vandalism, aren’t dealt w/ giving signal no one crimes
> So ppl wanting to do crime see police aren’t policing it well & feel they’ll get away w/ it
> Absence of control leds to crime, members of community, feel intimidated & powerless
Wilson & Keilling (0 Tolerance Policing)
> Need 4 crackdown on disorder e.g. environmental improvement strategy - any broken window repaired immediately
> Police don’t just focus on serious crime, but all minor thing, stops neighbourhood decline & serious crime
Wilson & Keilling (0 Tolerance Policing, NY Example)
> Prior graffiti issue, new clean car policy, for graffiti to be cleaned from cars immediately
> So graffiti artists realised it’s waste of time, money so just stopped doing It.
> Also big fall in homicide rates between 93 & 96
Criticisms of 0 Tolerance Policing, NY Example
> Can’t know if fall in crime was due to 0 tolerance, but factors
> e.g. + police NO’s & falling unemployment, lack of cocaine availability etc.
> Criminalises petty deviants e.g. net widening
General View on Social & Community Crime Prevention (SCCP)
> Remove conditions causing ppl to do crime in 1st place, long term strategy
> Focus on reducing root causes e.g. poverty, unemployment & lack of housing etc.
> Even if policies on poverty etc, not main focus, likely to - crime as side effect
Example of SCCP Perry Pre-School Project (Michigan)
> Supplementary education w/enrichment programme & weekly home visits, for EM kids
> Longitudinal study over 40yrs, kids had - crime rates
> & calculated every dollar spent, 17 saved in welfare & prison costs.
Criticisms of SCCP
> Expensive & long term, gov’s only think about shorter periods of time
> Doesn’t deal w/ CC
Surveillance
Monitor behaviour to control & gather data on ppl & use it to regulate their behaviour e.g. CCTV
Surveillance (KS)
> Foucault (Birth of Prison, Panopticon, Dispersal of Discipline)
Baumann & Lyon (Post-Panoptical Society)
> Mathieson (Synoptic Surveillance)
Thompson (Impact of Synopticon on Politicians)
> Ericson (Surveillant Assemblages) (SA)
> Feely & Simon (Actuarial Justice)
Young (Actuarial Justice)
Lyon (Actuarial Justice)
Foucault & Birth of Prison - 2 Diff Types of Power
> Sovereign Power
> Disciplinary Power
Sovereign Power
> Past societies based on SP, monarch had full control > ppl’s bodies
> & capital/corporal punishment was a spectacle
Disciplinary Power
New system of discipline seeks to control body & mind through surveillance
Foucault (Panopticon)
> Prison design, where prisoner has cell visible to guards but guards not visible to prisoners
> Unaware if they’re being watched they must behave as if they are
> Turns into self-surveillance: control becomes invincible insider prisoner
Foucalt (Dispersal of Discipline)
> Institutions e.g. mental asylums, factories schools use this pattern & DP widespread in society
> We don’t need discipline like past, as we feel we’re constantly being watched e.g. by CCTV or being policed by each other
> We police ourselves in our own mind e.g. we live within the panopticon, so - crime
AO3 Criticisms of Foucalt
> Norris & Loveday
Goffman
Koskela
Norris & Loveday - Criticisms of Foucalt
> CCTV = no impact on crime & causes displacement, few robbers, shoplifters put off
> Fulfills ideological function gives public false assurance on their security.
Goffman - Criticisms of Foucalt
Exaggerates extent of control e.g. even psychiatric patients can resist control
Koskela - Criticisms of Foucalt
CCTV is extension of male gaze, makes F + vulnerable to voyeurism of M camera operator
Baumann & Lyon (Post-Panoptical Society)
> Knowledge of being watched controls our behaviour
> Liquids surveillance means we’re monitored from where we drive to what we buy
Types of Surveillance Theories after Foucault
> Synoptic Surveillance
> Actuarial Justice
Mathieson - Synoptic Surveillance
> Now top-down surveillance everybody watches each other e.g. social media
> Media scrutiny of powerful groups leads to + self-surveillance.
> Video cameras, dash cams also society to exercise control over controllers e.g. filming police wrong doing.
Thompson & Impact of Synopticon on Politicians
Politicians now fear media surveillance may uncover damaging info on them e.g. Hancock
McCahill (Criticisms of Synopticon Surveillance)
> Doesn’t reverse established hierarchies of surveillance
> e.g. police w/ power to confiscate cameras of citizen journalists
Ericson (Surveillant Assemblages) (SA)
> Surveillance tech involves manipulation of digital data > physical bodies
> Combo of tech into powerful SA e.g. CCTV footage anaylsed w/ face recognition software
Feely & Simon (Actuarial Justice)
> New tech of power able to stop offending w/ use of algorithms to predict chance of ppl offending
> Focus on groups not ppl, to stop offending e.g. airport stop & search based on risk factors e.g. reg/age etc
> Classifying groups based on perceived danger.
Young (Actuarial Justice)
Damage limitation strategy to reduce crime using statistical info to pick out likely offenders
Lyon (Actuarial Justice)
> Aims to categorise ppl, who’re treated diff based on level of risk
> e.g. counter-terrorism scheme in Birmingham
> Surrounding 2 muslim areas w/ 150 cameras
Criticisms of Actuarial Justice
> Offender profiles complied w/ OS, showing young black M + likely to offend
> Profiling leds to police targeting & SFP, so + likely to be caught & convicted
Labelling & Surveillance
> CCTV operators targets blacks due to racist stereotypes
> Creates SFP, criminalization of black + as offences are revealed
> Criminalisation of others lessened as their offences are ignored
Purposes of Punishment
> Deterrence
Rehabilitation
Incapacitation
Retribution
Deterrence - Purposes of Punishment
Stops others offending in future e.g. Thatcher’s Sharp Shock regime in youth offenders institutes in ’80s
Rehabilitation & Incapacitation, Retribution - Purposes of Punishment
> Reforming & reeducating offenders so no longer offend e.g. training (REH)
> Removing offender’s capacity to reoffend e.g. maiming & execution (IN)
> Eye 4 eye society entitled to take revenge for breaking shared VC (RET)
Punishment (KS)
> Durkheim (General View & 2 Types of Justice)
> Rusche & Melossi (Marxism)
Kirchheimer (Marxism)
Althusser (Marxism)
Thompson (Marxism)
> Weberianism (Perspectives on Punishment)
> Garland (Penal Welfarism, Era of Mass Incarceration)
Downes (Ideological Function of Mass Incarceration)
> Carrabine et al (Consequences of Rising Prison Population)
Simon (Drugs, US & Imprisonment)
Cohen (Alts to Prison)
Durkheim General view on Punishment
Reinforce SS & shared values
Durkheim (2 Types of Justice)
> Retributive
> Restitutive
Retributive - 2 Types of Justice
> Society has strong CC, offenders crime has broken CC, desire to impose vengeance on offender
> Society wants to lash out & hurt person for upsetting equilibrium of society
Restitutive - 2 Types of Justice
> Ppl more individualised & diff from 1 & other, but still interdependent
> Function of justice to repair damage e.g. compensation, to restore things to prior state
> Expresses collective emotions
Criticisms of Durkheim view on Punishment
> Durkheim view too simplistic, societies actually have restitutive justice > retributive
> e.g. paying off a blood feud > execution
Althusser (Marxism, Capitalism & Punishment)
> CJS part of RSA, tool bourgeoisie uses to defend property & position of power
> Part of agency of fear, WC fear of being taken away from families or death, so always conform
Thompson (Marxism, Capitalism & Punishment)
> Punishments e.g. hanging & transportation to colonies for theft & poaching
> Part of rule of terror by UC > WC
Rusche & Melossi (Marxism, Capitalism & Punishment)
> Punishment reflects eco base of society, under capitalism imprisonment is dominant
> As time is money & offenders pay by doing time, removing ability to earn wages
> Prison & capitalist factory, both have strict discipline style, subordination & loss of liberty
Kirchheimer (Marxism, Capitalism & Punishment)
> Change in punishment from transportation - cheap prison labour, shows change in eco needs of UC
> Brutality + when pop + & land - as labour forces -
Weberianism (Perspectives on Punishment)
> Only state w/ power to punish criminals not church like past
> Punishment now based on impersonal rules/regulations set out by large gov
Changing Role of Prisons
> Pre-Industrial Europes had wide punishment e.g. fines, flogging etc, was mainly for holding offenders b4 punishment
> Only est enlightenment imprisonment is form of punishment
Imprisonment Today
> Now harshest punishment, buts fails to rehabilitate due to re-offending & are skls of crime
> est 80’s move to ‘’populist punitiveness’’ - politicians want tougher sentences but leads to + prison pop
Garland & Penal Welfarism
> From 50’s state used PW & CJS tried rehabilitating offenders to reintegrate in society
> Moved into era where ‘punitive state’ has ‘culture of control’ & desire to punish offenders through
> e.g. actuarialism, incarceration, transcreation, politicians use idea of being tough on crime to win elections
Carrabine et al (Consequences of Rising Prison Population)
> Now over pop w/ poor sanitation & lack of educational & wrk opportunities & inadequate family vists
Trends in Demography of Prison Pop
Young, Male, Uneducated, BAME
Garland (Era of Mass Incarceration)
> NO of prisoners + rapidly, 700K in local jails & +5 mil under supervision of CJS
> Now systematic imprisonment of whole groups of pop e.g. young black M 3.5K/100,000 in US
Downes (Ideological Function of Mass Incarceration)
US prison soaks up 30%-40% of unemployed so makes capitalism look + successful.
Simon (Drugs, US & Imprisonment)
> War declared in last 40yrs on drugs gives limitless arrests of imprisonable offenders
> As drugs industry has multiple potential roles leading to crime
Transcreation & Prison
> Ppl are locked in cycle of control, shifting vs diff carceral agencies through life
> e.g. care, young offenders’ institution, prison, w/ blurring of boundaries w/ CJS & Welfare Agencies
> Social services given + criminal control role sharing data w/police on = individuals
Alternatives to Prison
Recent + in Custodial controls e.g. probation, curfew, community service & electric tagging etc
Cohen (Alts to Prison)
>
- controls put net of control over + ppl, range of sanctions allows control to penetrate deeper in society
> Doesn’t take young away from CJS, but diverts them into it
> e.g. ASBO fast-tracking them into custodial sentences.
UN Definition of Victims
Person harmed through acts/omissions violating laws of state.
Victimology (KS)
> Christie (Victims & Social Construction)
> Miers (3 Areas of PV)
> Hentig (V Proneness) (PV)
> Wolfgang (V Precipitation)
> Mawby & Walklate (Structural Factors)
> Tombs & Whyte (Safety Crimes & Ideological Function of De-Labelling)
> Pynoos - Indirect V’s of Crime
Christie (Victims & Social Construction)
> Stereotype of ideal V favoured by society & media is weak
> Innocent & blameless & target of a stranger’s attack.
Miers (3 Areas of Positivist Victimology)
> Factors making some ppl/groups + likely to be V’s
Focus on interpersonal crimes of violence
Identify V’s contributing to own victimisation
Hentig (V Proneness) (PV)
> V’s + likely to be F, OAP or low IQ, so ‘invite’ victimisation purely due to their character
> Also lifestyle factors e.g. V’s openly display weath
Wolfgang (V Precipitation)
> V’s triggers events leading to crime vs them e.g. murder & being 1st to use violence
> e.g. where V was M & perpetrator F
Criticisms of PV
> Ignores wider structural factors e.g. poverty, patriarchy, racism etc
> Victim blaming, your own fault e.g. rape cases ‘’she asked for it’’ - not sound argument
> V’s may be unaware of own victimisation e.g. crime vs environment w/ harm done, but no law broke
Features of Critical V-ology & Crime
> Structural Factor > State Denial of Label of V > Safety Crime > Ideological Function of Power to Label > Hierarchy of Victimisation
Mawby & Walklate (Structural Factors) - Features of Critical V-ology & Crime
e.g. patriarchy & poverty so F & WC @ + risk of victimisation a form of structural powerlessness.
State Denial of Label of V - Features of Critical V-ology & Crime
> State reserves power to label, but withholds it frm some e.g. police don’t press charges vs M for assaulting wife
> Denies her V status
Tombs & Whyte (Safety Crimes) - Features of Critical V-ology & Crime
> Company violation of law leading to deaths seen due to ‘accident prone’ workers.
> Denies V, V status’ & blames them for their fate.
Tombs & Whyte (Ideological Function of De-Labelling - Features of Critical V-ology & Crime
> Conceal true extent of V-sation hides crimes of UC & denies powerless V’s justice
> Powerless + likely to be victimised, yet least likely to have this acknowledged by state.
Criticisms of CV
> Ignores V’s may contribute to V-sation through not securing homes etc
> Rich @ risk of crime as they’re attractive target to criminals, but not accounted 4 by CV
Factors Impacting ppl Becoming V’s
> Class > Age > Ethnicity > Gender > Repeat V-isation
Class - Factors Impacting ppl Becoming V’s
> WC + likely to be V-ised e.g. crime rates + in areas of + unemployment & poverty e.g. WC can’t afford security
> Homeless ppl + likely to experienced violence > general pop
Age - Factors Impacting ppl Becoming V’s
> Young ppl @ + risk of v-isation. infants + risk of being murdered
> Teens + vulnerable to adults for crimes e.g. assault, theft/abuse home.
> Old @ + risk of abuse e.g. nursing homes, but v-isation is - visible.
Ethnicity - Factors Impacting ppl Becoming V’s
> EM @ + risk > whites of general crime/racially motivated
> EM, young & homeless + likely to report feeling under-protected yet over-controlled.
Gender - Factors Impacting ppl Becoming V’s
M > F are V’s of violence & homicide, but + F V’s of DV, rape etc
Repeat V-isation - Factors Impacting ppl Becoming V’s
> Ppl already V’s + likely to be V’s again, 60% not V’s of any crime in last yr
> But 4% of V’s of almost ½ crime in that period.
Impact of Crime on V’s
Fear of crime, disrupted sleep, helplessness, security-consciousness etc
Pynoos (Indirect V’s of Crime)
> Kid witnesses of sniper attack had PSTD/bad dreams, yr after event
> Hate crimes has waves of harm, radiates out to others intimidating whole communities
> Challenge value system of society
