Classical criminology theory and rational choice in crime causation

Criminology

Classical theory elucidates crime as a creation and outcome of beliefs that advantages of committing crimes are extremely greater than normative, socially acceptable behavior. The foundation of this school of thought on criminology is that crime is a rational choice and that many individuals have the capacity to resort to crime. In addition, individuals will commit crime subsequent to the comparison of prospective advantages and disadvantages of such actions. The positivist school of criminology tries to ascribe crime causation to understood, contemplative assertion of advantages that criminal activities carry. Next, sociological school of criminology asserts that crime comes about due to manifold factors that can be split into mental, biological, and social factors. Therefore, it implies that crime is a result of social factors and elements that influence the behavior of human beings.

Week 2 Discussion

Siegel delineates the three different ways crime is recorded in our country. The first method is the uniform crime report. This encompasses the collection of data from police department records all over the nation regarding reported crimes and arrests. The strengths are that it is a measure of arrests and homicides and it is a dependable nationwide sample. The downside is that it fails to account for crimes that go unreported to police, usage of drugs, and also encompasses errors in reporting (Siegel 37). The second way is the National Crime Victimization Survey. This takes into account the collection of data from a large national survey. The strength is that it incorporates crimes not reported to the police and employs cautious sampling methods and is a survey undertaken every year. Lastly, there is self-report surveys, which encompass data collected from local surveys. The strong suit is that they consist of crimes not reported, drugs and substance abuse, and personal information of delinquents. The weakness is that they are dependent on the veracity of delinquents and overlook delinquents who decline or are incapable, owing to potential imprisonment (Siegel 37).

Week 3 Discussion

The concept of reintegrative shaming asserts that the structure and culture of a society can have an influence on the deviant acts undertaken by people through a practice of shaming. It delineates that the resultant guilt acts not only a social practice that forms individuals' sense of right and wrong but also as a kind of informal social control when unlawful activity takes place (Siegel 197). The concept of reintegrative shaming can be employed in a more official legal system for instance that found within the United States. One of the ways is through restorative justice, which can be applied in the justice system of the U.S. In particular, this can be done in both, formal, as well as informal ways. A good example is in an instance of aggravated assault where the offenders are made accountable by making them realize the mistakes, and the harm caused thereby, and at the same time assisting them to make amends (Mongold and Edwards 208).

Week 4 Discussion

There are different degrees of homicide, each of them necessitating certain elements. To begin with, first-degree murder takes place when an individual murders another with due planning, contemplation, and deliberation. The elements required is that the killing was deemed beforehand and motivated. Secondly, the murder was planned, and did not happen on impulse. Second-degree murder necessitates the murderer to have malice afterthought but not scheming or objective planning (Seigel 268). This takes place when an individual ignores the life of the victim and has desire to generate serious bodily harm. Good examples of these sorts of homicide can be perceived in the killings that take place in the fights amongst gangs (Seigel 268). One type of homicide is felony murders and an example is a killing that takes place during a robbery. The second one is voluntary manslaughter and a scenario is one, which takes place in the course of activated violence (Seigel 268).

Week 6 Discussion

In my own words, I can define white-collar crime to be one that is driven by monetary gains. It is a crime that normally does not include violence and is more often than not undertaken by professionals within the government and corporate world. On the other hand, I can define economic crime to be an action that is against the law and that which is committed by a person or set of people to benefit financially. The accepted and largely observed description of a white-collar crime offender is a highly regarded individual, deemed to be of high status within the society and particularly in his or her profession. In my own words, I can explain enterprise crime as a crime undertaken in numerous transactions over the course of time or certain fixed period. In addition, it does not incorporate violence. The challenges addressing white-collar crime encompass the perspective that such perpetrators are individuals deemed to be decent and non-violent, and are therefore treated with discretion and deference instead of dread and sternness (Podgor 732). This in turn brings the inclination of laying blame to the victims for the losses they incur.