Fluent Essays

Each feedback post needs to be 250 words or more (2)APA format.Attached is the initial post for reference.Charles:Good Evening class. In this weeks topic the Positivist vs Classical school of Criminology we discuss the difference between each some pros and cons that i can see between them.In its very basic form Classical is having the punishment fit the crime to me this means that for every crime that is criminal there should be a set punishment. some examples are Petty Theft will land you in jail and most likely you will be trespassed from the company or the individual site in which the crime occurred. Where as crimes that are more aggressive and lethal such as murder would land you in a federal prison and most likely you will end up on death row waiting to be put to death (kind of like the old eye for an eye). This Theory was invented in the 18th century this system had all members of the social order given equal rights Burke under the law. Beccaria even demonstrated the main significance of humanizing law and order to make it feel more righteous. This also fell into line with utilitarianism in which the founders believed that the greatest good for the greatest number of people would be right. Therefore laws should be made with the intent to please the majority.Positivist from what I have read is having a punishment fit the criminal. This outlook goes into the sociological, psychological, and biological backgrounds to see what factors cause this type of criminal behavior. The people who back this theory believe that there are two different types of behavior one in criminals and one in non criminals this is rooted in their heritable makeup. Lombroso one of the founders of this school believes that criminals are born and not made. This came from him finding similar traits while dissecting criminals.After reviewing these two schools I side more with the classical side than the positivist side of the house. Having a punishment set for types of crimes is in itself a deterrent for people to not want to commit crimes and then making sure that these punishments are fair and fitting of the crime makes it just in my opinion. The view point of the Positivist side where it is believed that people can be born into criminals and they have no choice in the matter does not seem right with me as everyone makes choices at the end of the day weather they be good or bad. The human factor plays allot into this because yes maybe someone with a mental illness commits a crime and they find that he doesnt understand what he did to a certain extent but everyone is held equal under the law.Racial profiling to me is not a way to get justification to stop someone to try and find probable cause that a crime may o rmay not have been committed. this type of policing always tends to lead down a slippery slope that never ends well. I have never heard or seen of any way that an officer can justify using racial profiling as a means to find out if a crime has been committed.The events of 9/11 as heinous as they were against the United States does not justify targeting a select ethnic background for different treatment by law enforcement be that at the local, state or federal level. Having middle eastern men going in public and stating that they will attack Americans should have you be suspicious when encountering these said people who appear and give off warning signs.Personally when i was stationed over seas we had allot of middle eastern males and females who worked on our base and we never had any issues even when the Iran tension was rising during 2019. These people came to our base and did the job they were paid to do and did nothing suspicious or deviant trying to hurt us.“The Difference between Classical and Positivist Understanding.” UKEssays.com, www.ukessays.com/essays/criminology/the-d2 hours agoJamie:Positivist is the practice that the punishment a criminal receives should fit according to the criminal. This would take into account the criminals biological, psychological, mental, bodily anomalies, and environmental characteristics that went into “making” them a criminal. I say “making”, because this is what Cesare Lombroso believed. That a person was either born a criminal, or occasional criminals. This class of criminal would commit their acts based upon needs and stress (Simon, 2006). So when assessing the type of punishment that the suspect would receive, not only would they look into preventative measures, but also rehabilitation.Classical is the practice of letting the punishment fit the crime. Cesare Beccaria was an advocate for this theory and believed that the court system should narrow their focus to the crimes committed at that time to avoid dishing out a harsher punishment than necessary (Bruni & Porta, 2014). If I am understanding this correctly, he was concerned that if two men committed the same crime, but they were punished based on their personal characteristics, rather than the crime that was committed, then their punishments may not be the same. This could lead to the man with the lesser punishment to believe that he could commit that crime again since his penalty was not as high as the other man’s.I am torn between the two and cannot fully side with one over the other. Positivist seems like it could lean towards the side of stereotyping individuals. While this may help with profiling, it could also end with too harsh a punishment for someone who committed a minor first offense, but just happen to fit all of the other categories for a “born criminal”. With classical, I have to agree with Beccaria that dishing out a lesser sentence to one person and a higher sentence to another could cause a problem. However, I do not necessarily believe that we should only focus on the current crime that was committed. If it appears that the criminal is not repenting from their previous punishments, or if they are escalating, then that needs to be taken into account as well.I would not argue that racial profiling is justifiable. I think there is a lot more that goes into criminal profiling than ethnicity alone. When police officers focus on race when they are seeking out suspects it leads to rough feelings and mistrust on both sides. If officers were focusing on people with only a certain race, not only could that particular target of theirs be innocent, but they could very likely be letting a true criminal slip from their grasp because they were not looking at the bigger picture. So while I do think that race could be a small piece of the puzzle when sorting through information, I do not think it should be a relying factor. When we consider 9/11, I can fully understand how considering race for these types of scenarios can be of more importance, but all it would take to get around that is for them to recruit someone of a different ethnicity to their cause. So again, relevant, but not full proof and I do not think it should be wholly relied upon, just a part of the picture when criminal profiling.Sources:Simon, J. (2006). Positively punitive: How the inventor of scientific criminology who died at the beginning of the twentieth century continues to haunt american crime control at the beginning of the twenty-first. Texas Law Review, 84(7), 2135-2172. Retrieved from https://search-proquest- com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/203691880?accountid=8289Bruni, L., & Porta, P. L. (2014). Cesare beccarias on crimes and punishments.History of Economics Review, (60), 64-74. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docv... early_history_of_criminal_theory.docx Unformatted Attachment Preview Running head: FORUM 1 Forum 1 CRRJ303 Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation FORUM 2 Early History of Criminal Theory It is first necessary to note that thought is the primary basis of the concept of crime which considers what most individuals believe is true thus leading to theories and philosophies. When it comes to criminology, there are two leading historical schools of thought; positivist and classical which are considered almost similar yet somewhat different (Adler et al., 2013). The classical believed that the punishment should fit the crime, whereas the positivist believed that the nature of the criminal should determine which punishment is appropriate. Classicalists believed that a wrongdoer becomes discouraged from engaging in a horrific or more serious crime as it will attract a more severe ergo and punishment. On the other hand, positivists believed that for the punishment to fit the criminal, several factors need to be considered, which include the criminal’s environment (society), as well as their mental, biological, and psychological characteristics (Rimke, 2011). These factors would help determine the appropriate length of imprisonment and the assistance that may be provided to the wrongdoer so that the crime is not repeated. The view of crime during the period around 1920 was mainly positivistic, as opposed to the existing classical viewpoints, and was guided by the need for more research on the nature of crime and the existing social sciences. The social focus included theories on realism, idealism, reform, moral panic response, subcultures, and deviant behavior (Adler et al., 2013). The positivistic approach sought to develop ways of treating the criminals in a manner that will prevent crime from escalating and also, at the same time, understand the mind of a criminal to help in the rehabilitation or reformation of the criminal and educate the public sector. FORUM 3 When it comes to discussing crime, the issue of class is rarely measured as most researchers seldom focus on the income of a victim or an offender. This may be concerning the fact that most people often assume that America is a classless society, yet the analysis of geographical, political, and economic factors proves otherwise. However, when considering crime data, it is evident that an individuals income and wealth determine whether there will be an arrest, conviction, imprisonment, or execution (Adler et al., 2013). Race is a crucial factor when it comes to crime, as higher crime rates are often witnessed in minority groups. When it comes to the aspect of gender, the topic of women and crime is often treated as an afterthought as the criminal justice system has a male-centered nature. In my opinion, engaging in racial profiling when it comes to apprehending dangerous criminals is not a proper course of action to take by law enforcement and other members of the public. However, it is vital to acknowledge the fact that various factors led to the increase in racial profiling such as the fact that most of the crimes often take place in low-income neighborhoods which are often comprised of minority groups (Delsol, n.d). This information prompts some law enforcement officers to believe that they seek to promote law and order in the society when they focus their efforts in such areas. The same also applies to the numerous acts of terrorism that often take place on American soil as they are mostly traced to a particular race of people. This implies that racial profiling is often confused with criminal profiling, where statistical categorization of individuals concerning some identifiable qualities is assumed to correlate to some behaviors, such as hijacker and serial killer profiles. When it comes to the events of 9/11, the terrorist attacks do not suggest a justification for other forms of profiling, as this will make other members of that community feel targeted and FORUM 4 oppressed. If this group feels that they are targeted by law enforcement, there are less likely to abide by the states rules as they will feel a sense of injustice. Law enforcement has attracted a lot of negative backlash from the public as a result of the numerous reported cases where police officers abuse their power and use excessive force when dealing with members of minority groups. Racial profiling is often believed to be unjust as law enforcement officers generalize individuals based on their national origin, religion, ethnicity, and race as opposed to using intelligence, specific suspect descriptions, or individual behavior (Edmonds, 2017). It is unfair to view individuals as suspicious based on their appearance, who they are, and where they pray as opposed to their actions. FORUM 5 References Adler, F., Mueller, G. O. W., & Laufer, W. S. (2013). Criminology (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies. Delsol, R (n.d): Racial profiling. Centre for Crime and Justice Studies. Retrieved from: https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/publications/cjm/article/racial-profiling Edmonds D. (2017): Does profiling make sense - or is it unfair? BBC. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-42328764 Rimke, H. (2011). The pathological approach to crime: Individually based theories. In Criminology: Critical Canadian perspectives (pp. 78-92). Toronto, Canada: Pearson Education Canada. ... Purchase answer to see full attachment