Drawing on the readings for this week, please write a 2–3-page essay in response to the following:
Many criminologists accept the notion that there are identifiable “causes of crime” YET our current criminal justice system is largely based on the principles of the classical school, including the notions of “free will” and “rational thought”. In fact, we justify our punishments on these very principles – for example, we can mete out a sentence of 25 years for the commission of a felony because the felon “made the choice” to commit the crime. You’ve all heard the saying “if you do the crime, then you need to do the time”. If that felon committed the crime because of a mental illness, drug abuse, or a history of abuse, we have a harder time justifying the long sentence of 25 years.
So, my question to all of you is this: How can the current criminal justice system be effective when it is based on faulty assumptions about human behavior? For instance, if crime is “caused” rather than being the product of free will, rational thought, and logical choice, then how can our system be effective in changing behavior? How do we overcome this dilemma in order to make our system of criminal justice more effective without compromising the impact of the threat of punishment? Is rehabilitation or some other philosophical orientation more effective in terms of guiding our response to crime?
2.
Read the powerpoint and make sure you understand the concepts behind “developmental criminology” . You should understand terms like persistence (a continuance of criminal behavior across a period of time), desistance (stopping of criminal behavior), pathways to crime, and what factors make it more likely to start and stop offending. This is a fascinating area of research! Then, read “The 8% solution” and understand the implications of its findings. Think of it this way – let’s say you have 100 first-time young offenders in front of you. The 8% study found that we could reliably identify which 8 of those 100 would go on to commit more serious crime and end up in the system as our habitual, serious offenders. What this means is that 92 of those young people could be released into the community with NO criminal justice intervention and more likely than not, NEVER offend again. So, instead of putting resources into all of the individuals that come into court for sanctioning and services, the 8% solution would argue that we should put resources into only the 8% that are the most likely to offend. And let the other 92% go on with the business of their lives, knowing they will likely not offend again, or if they do, in a very non-serious way. Think about labeling theory which argues that attaching a label of “criminal” to young people actually makes them more likely to offend again and again. So what is the solution?
write a brief 2-3 page essay addressing the following questions: If you were a judge, what would you do with the 92% of young people who are likely to desist quickly? What would you do with the 8% who are likely to be persisters? And why?