punishment & prevention Flashcards
peter joyce
-punishment is necessary/desirable:
>deterrence= punishment makes ppl think 2x abt committing crime
>incapacitation= protects potential victims
>rehabilitation= prevents reoffending
>retribution= society giving a just punishment
Durkheim
-before industrialisation ppl were held together by mechanical solidarity
-if ppl broke these norms they were seen as deviant and law was based upon retribution
-as society dev the collective conscience weakened, so punishment changed to retitutive justice
-this new punishment helped w/ boundary maintenance
3 eras of punishment (marxism)
-early middle ages= religious penance (workers in high demand so didn’t imprison for long periods)
-later middle ages= brutal punishment, rich needed to control the poor
-17th century= shortage of labour, prisoners used for labour
Melossi & Pavarin (marx)
-prison dev to impose punishment on workers who wouldn’t submit to factory discipline
-punishment enforces laws that benefit the rich.
reiman (marx)
punishment as a way of enforcing laws that benefit the rich. WC exp harsher punishments even if their crimes do less harm
foucault
-change from sovereign power (punishment carried out on the body/publically) to disciplinary power (govern the soul, not body)
-references Bentham’s panopticon prison design and links this to monitoring in modern society e.g. cctv
ETV of foucault
-few criminals are put off by CCTV
-exaggerates the extent of control over prisoners
Garland
-penal welfarism to culture of control
-adaptive response= govt intervene in high risk group’s lives to change how they act
-expressive strategy= politicians create perception that crime is declining
-sovereign state= use of mass imprisonment to reassure the masses 9punitive sanctions)
ETV of Garland
-shows importance of ‘law and order’ politics
-Goffman= reflected in racial oppression of black e.g. 30% black men w/ no college edu in prison by 30
-less state control mechanism, now use other professions e.g. psychologists
Liebling & Crewe (prison works)
-incapacitation= frequent offenders off street)
-acts as a deterrent= potential criminals fear prison
-prevents reoffending= unpleasant exp
-reforms prisoners via treatment programmes= treatment for drugs etc and education
liebling & crewe (prison doesn’t work)
-makes reoffending more likely as prison disrupts a stable life
-stigmatisation occurs= self concept, see themselves as criminals so reoffend
-the prison environment acts as a schl for crime= values are linked to other criminals
Community penalties/ rehab
-£35k on each prison place annually, £4k on community orders
-unpaid community work more effective in ending reoffending (32% to 27%)
-current env more important than past punishment in stopping reoffending
-USA has 700 ppl in prison per 100k, norway has 66 per 100k, norway focus on rehabilitation
govt plans/ white paper strategy
-zero tolerance to drugs
-getting offenders clean
-getting offenders into work
Clarke (right realism)
-ppl commit offences when costs of offending are less than the benefits obtained
-we should make it more difficult to commit offences
-‘rational choice theory’- weigh up risks/ awards rather than acting morally
Felson
-crime occurred when a likely offender and target came together where there is no capable guardian
-port authority bus terminal building= change in architecture discouraged the crime that was previously happening
target hardening (felson?)
-makes targets less accessible/ attractive
-e.g. improving locks on houses or cctv
-shows that both informal and formal control is needed to prevent crime
ETV of right realist view
-ignores causes of crime e.g. deprived
-assumes crime is a rational decision
-limited to opportunistic crime (doesn’t mention domestic, corporate, green crime)
-undesirable as reduces civil liberties by increasing surveillance
-only nature of crime is changed, not amount
crime displacement
-spatial= committed in diff place
-temporal= committed at diff time
-target based= diff victim
-functional= less risky crime committed
e.g. Port Authority Bus Terminal
Wilson & Kelling (right realism)
-broken window theory= prevent areas from deteriorating so crime doesnt become an endemic
-formal & informal control needed
-env improvements make an area less intimidating so citizens can exercise informal controls
etv of env crime prevention
-investments in localities may be more effective e.g. more leisure facilities
-not enough police to patrol areas at risk of deterioration
-Reiner= police more effective by clamping down on ‘hot spots’ of crime, rather than anti-social behaviour
no tolerance policy
-stop crime from getting out of hand
-curfews, street drinking bans, dispersal orders
Hoyle (positivist)
-used victim surveys in positivist victimology which found that young, male, ppl who go out, ethnic minorities were more likely to be victims
Mind (positivist)
-victimisation varies with the specific type of crime e.g. rape
-vulnerable groups
positivist victimology
-proneness= victims bc of their characteristics
-precipitation= the victim initiated the crime
etv of positive victimology
+important in identifying patterns, exposed problems in CJS e.g. level of trauma as a victim
- victimisation surveys may not be reliable, accused of victim blaming, limited range of crimes
Radical victimology
looks at the structural factors which makes groups more likely to be victims
Lea and Young (radical)
-victimology needs to consider that class inequality is made worse by high rates of victimisation among those in poor inner city areas
Jones, Maclean & Young (radical victimology)
being a victim was more problematic for the poor as they often lacked insurance & their relationship w. the police was uneasy
ETV of radical victimology
-not distanced enough from pos victimology
-relies on limited/ unreliable crime surveys
Walklate (critical victimology)
-the state often acts in it’s own interests in defining who is and isn’t a victim
Tombs and Whyte (critical victimology)
corporate victims often don’t realise they’re victims as corporations use their power to obscure the extent of their crime therefore victim surveys may not work
Critical victimology
political campaigning by victim groups can make a difference and lead to rights being acknowledged e.g. SA at work, but they believe society still works in interests of the powerful
