4.8 - Control & Punishment Flashcards
3 Crime Prevention Theories
> SCP
ECP
SCCP
Crime Prevention & Control (KS)
> Clarke (Target Hardening, RCT & SCP & Contrast w/ Root Cause Theories)
> Feslon (SCP & Port Authority) (PA)
> Wilson & Keilling (Broken Window Theory & 0 Tolerance Policing & NY Example)
Clarke (SCP, Target Hardening & RCT)
> Make it harder 2 be target e.g. bars on windows, alarms, CCTV
> Design crime out of area burglar weighs + & - of robbing home, if used TH - likely to rob
> If haven’t + likely 2 get robbed as can get away w/it.
Clarke (SCP & Contrast w/ Root Cause Theories)
> Stop focus on factors e.g. socialisation/capitalism
> But immediate situation as + crime opportunistic, so - chance = - crime
Feslon (SCP & Port Authority) (PA)
> PA, area w/ + crime e.g. drugs, prostitution etc
> Poor design, = + chances 4 crime, improve design = - crime
> e.g. large sinks homeless used 4 bathing, replaced w/ small hand basins
Chaiken (Displacement)
AO3 (KS) SCP
> Measures don’t stop crime but = displacement
> NY crackdown on subway crime = safer area > but later moved 2 streets
Types of Displacement
> Spatial (Somewhere else) > Temporal (Another time) > Target (Diff V) > Functional (do diff crime) > Tactical (Diff method)
Overall Criticisms of SCP
> No exp 4 CC crime & dont always make RCT
Wilson & Keilling (Broken Window Theory) (ECP)
> Graffiti/vandalism, undealt w/ so signal PO don’t care area
> D feels they get away w/it, lack of control = intimidation & powerlessness 4 members
> So need 4 0 tolerance on minor crime - stops this
Wilson & Keilling (NY Example of 0 Tolerance)
> Graffiti issue but clean car policy, = immediate removal from cars
> So D see it’s waste of 🕒 £ so stop
Criticisms of 0 Tolerance Policing, NY Example
> Not due 2 0 tolerance, but + PO & - unemployment & cocaine availability
Aims of SCCP
> Long term process on reducing root causes e.g. Perry Pre-Skl Project
> Supplementary education w/ home visits 4 EM, over 40yrs kid w/ - CR
> Every £1 spent = 17 saved in welfare/prison cost
Criticisms of SCCP
> Gov’s only think shorter term & no focus on CC
Surveillance
> Monitor & gather data on ppl & use it 2
> Regulate behaviour e.g. CCTV
Surveillance (KS)
> Foucault (2 Types of Power, Panopticon & Dispersal of Discipline)
Baumann & Lyon (Post-Panoptical Society)
> Mathieson (Synoptic Surveillance)
Thompson (Synopticon & Politicians)
> Ericson (Surveillant Assemblages) (SA)
> Feely & Simon (Actuarial Justice)
Young (Actuarial Justice)
Lyon (Actuarial Justice)
Foucault (2 Types of Power)
> Sovereign: Monarch controlled ppl body w/ capitalist punishment (spectacle)
> Disciplinary: Seek 2 govern mind & soul
Foucault (Panopticon & Dispersal of Discipline)
> Guards can see D, not vice versa so feel always watched, must self-surveil
> Now pattern widespread in society discipline unessential
> Constantly feel watched by peers so 👮 selves in own 🧠 live within panopticon, so - CR
AO3 (KS) Foucalt
> Norris
> Koskela
Norris
AO3 (KS) Foucalt
> CCTV = no effect = displacement, few shoplifters put off
> Ideological function gives us false assurance of security.
Koskela
AO3 (KS) Foucalt
CCTV extension of MG, F vulnerable to voyeurism of M camera operator
Baumann & Lyon (Post-Panoptical Society)
> Idea of being 👀 controls behaviour
> Liquids surveillance = monitoring from purchases 2 transport
Mathieson (Panopticon v Synopticon)
> Now centralized surveillance - all watches all e.g. social media
> Scrutiny of powerful groups = + self-surveillance.
> Video cameras lets us exercise control > controllers e.g. PO misbehaviour
Thompson (Synopticon & Politicians)
> Politicians now fear media uncover damaging info
> e.g. Boris Johnson
McCahill
Mathieson AO3 (KS)
> Don’t reverse hierarchies of surveillance
> e.g. PO confiscate cameras of citizen journalists
Ericson (Surveillant Assemblages) (SA)
> Surveillance tech uses manipulation of digital data > physical bodies
> Combo of diff tech into powerful SA e.g. CCTV footage anaylsed w/ face recognition software
Feely & Simon (Actuarial Justice)
> Uses algorithms predict % of ppl offending but focus on groups > ppl 2
> e.g. airport S&S based on risk factors e.g. reg/age etc
classify groups based on perceived danger.
Lyon (Actuarial Justice)
> Categorise ppl, so able 2 treat diff based on lvl 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, show young B M + likely 2 offend
> Profiling = police targeting & SFP > = + likely 2 be caught & convicted
Labelling & Surveillance
> CCTV operators targets blacks due 2 racist stereotypes
> = SFP, criminalization of black + as offences revealed
> Criminalisation of others lessened as offences ignored
Purposes of Punishment
> Deterrence
Rehabilitation
Incapacitation
Retribution
Deterrence (Purposes of Punishment)
> Stops future offending future
> e.g. Thatcher’s Sharp Shock regime in youth offenders institutes
Rehabilitation & Incapacitation, Retribution
Purposes of Punishment
> Reducate & help offenders e.g. drug addicts (REH)
> e.g. maiming & execution (IN)
> Entitlelment 4 revenge for breaking shared VC (RET)
Punishment (KS)
> Durkheim (Aim of Punishment & 2 Types of Justice)
> Rusche & Melossi (Marxism)
Kirchheimer (Marxism)
Althusser (Marxism)
> Weberianism (Perspectives on Punishment)
> Garland (Penal Welfarism, Era of Mass Incarceration)
> Carrabine et al (Consequences of + Prison Pop)
> Cohen (Alts to Prison)
Durkheim (Aim of Punishment & 2 Types of Justice)
> Allows SS & reinforces CC e.g. retributive
> Collectively severely lashing out vs D 4 breaking = librium e.g hanging
> Restitution, repair damage restore 2 prior state e.g. compensation
Criticisms of Durkheim view on Punishment
> Too simplistic, traditional societies use restitutive > retributive
> e.g. paying off blood feud > execution
Althusser (Marxism, Capitalism & Punishment)
> CJS is RSA, tool UC uses 4 defence of property/power
> Agency of fear, WC fear taken away from familiy so always conform
Rusche & Melossi (Marxism, Capitalism & Punishment)
> Reflects eco base of society, imprisonment dominant under capitalism
> Time is £ & so pay by doing time, removes ability 2 earn wages
> Prison/capitalist factory, both strict discipline, subordination & no freedom
Kirchheimer (Marxism, Capitalism & Punishment)
> Change in punishing w/ transportation 2 cheap prison labour, reflects eco needs of UC
> As capitalist eco based on exploitation of labour
Weberianism (Perspectives on Punishment)
> Only state can punish D’s not church like past now based on impersonal regulations set by large gov
Changing Role of Prisons
> Pre-Industrial EU used fines execution, prison used 4 holding D’s b4 punishment
> Now worst punishment, fails 2 stop reoffending & skls of crime
> Populist punitiveness est 80’s, MP’s want harsher sentence, but = + prison pop
Garland (Penal Welfarism)
> est 50’s used of PW, CJS tried rehabilitating D’s 4 reintergration
> Move 2 punitive state’ w/ ‘culture of control’ & punish D’s w/ actuarialism, incarceration, transcreation
> MP’s use idea of being tough on crime 2 win elections
Carrabine et al (Consequences of + Prison Population)
> Now over pop w/ poor sanitation & lack of educational & wrk opportunities & inadequate family vists
Garland (Era of Mass Incarceration)
>
- prisonsers in US 3% of adult pop, no longer incanceration of individual
> Now systematic imprisonment 4 groups of pop e.g. 4 every 100K YBM 3.5K imprisoned
> US prison soaks up -40% of unemployed - capitalism look + successful.
Transcreation & Prison
> Ppl locked into a cycle of control, shifting through carceral agencies in lives
> e.g. in care > young offenders’ institute, prison & mental hospital inbetween
Cohen (Alts to Prison)
>
- controls e.g. probation, curfew, electric tagging, put net of control > + ppl
> Don’t take young away from CJS, but diverts e.g. ASBO fast track 2 custodial sentence
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
AO3 (KS) SCP
> Chaiken (Displacement)
> Feminist (CCTV)
Feminist (CCTV)
AO3 (KS) SCP
> Form of MG, observe F & control them
Trends in Punishment
> Changing Role of Prisons
Transcareation
Alt’s 2 Prison
