g. stealing bread in Les miserable), and allowing the nature of punishment be focused more on the crimes that tend to hurt society the most.
Part 2 -- Developmental Theories and Understanding of Criminal Behavior - the basic idea of development theories of crime have at their core the idea that humans are actually either inherently good (more Locke) or more of a blank slate in which society/culture leaves its mark. Any antisocial behaviors must develop over time and are the result of some sort of underlying behavior or condition that occurs and is amplified during life's processes and activities. Circumstances, not an inherent bent on being deviant, is what makes this theory work.
The theory changes the position of how we view criminal activity in that some actions increase the possibility of deviance, while others decrease crime. It is not, however, as simple as nature vs. nurture. People who have a nurturing environment, who come from good families, and people who are part of the clergy or other moral orders commit crimes, too.
Development theory does help us understand how serious delinquency and aberrant behavior can have roots in serious child abuse and maltreatment. In this case, and after many years of serious issues, developmental theory helps us understand how societal monsters are created that, frankly, no amount of deterrence can mitigate the behavior. "Among persons who have been punished many times and/or have avoided punishment repeatedly (i.e. habitual offenders,) their criminal behavior should be largely a function of specific deterrence (direct experience with punishment and punishment avoidance" (Stafford and Warr, 398).
The different developmental theories certainly...
These theories all look towards the external -- the coercion, the manner of psychological and cultural pressure, the idea that criminal behavior comes from outside the individual. In some respects, this almost sounds as if it is not the individual's fault that the behavior is occurring, but rather the idea that it is caused by other actions. Choice theory holds that the individual is optimally responsible for their own behavior and that society mitigates the behavior, it does not cause it per se.
It seems as if this is somewhat of a philosophical argument -- one as old as Locke and Hobbes -- are individuals born good and need nurturing so they will be the best they can be for society, or are, as Hobbes noted, born in a state of sin/evil and society's job is to control them? Criminological theories are contradictory simply because humans act in a contradictory manner -- there is no solid evidence that everyone commits deviant behavior for the same reason. We can group causality and actions, but since there are so many different motivations and individual differences, it is unlikely that there will ever be a universal theory of deviance that holds up in all cases.
References Taken From:
Cullen, F. & Agnew, R. (2011). Criminological Theory: Past to Present. New York:
Stafford, M. & Warr, M. (2011). Reconceptualizing Deterrence Theory. In Cullen & Agnew. Criminological Theory: Past to Present. New York:
Oxford University Press, pages 394-99.
