As there is no clear victim in this case the principle of harm will not be applicable here and would not be considered as an act that can be criminalised. This paper is about whether a victimless crime can be criminalised. Various theorists have argued in favour and against the criminalisation process. The argument against criminalisation is mainly on the violation of the individual autonomy of a person, where he will be criminalised for an act that he did as a part of exercising his autonomy and has not affected any other person in the process. On the other hand, one argument from the side favouring criminalization is that if such acts are not criminalised then they may cause social harm.
Strain theory however takes a completely different approach and examines the social strain as humanities punishment. Work within the structure society has product or become members of a deviant subculture to achieve the same goals, just through alternative means. Strain theory was designed to explain why U.S.A had a large influx in gangs. Therefore, examples of crimes under strain would be selling or associating with illegal substances or becoming involved in illegal activities such as theft. Strain theory clearly explains that “people turn to deviance in the pursuit of widely accepted widely accepted social values and goals”, Robert K. Merton.
I don’t think surveys should be used in an argumentative article about violence or gun control laws. The other problem with comparing these sets of data with one another were the variance in culture, urban structure, and government structure that these two nations have with one another. The two nations also have differing definitions of “violent” crimes. These are simply logical fallacies that should eliminate this author’s sources from the argument of the article. A more effective form of arguing comparative data on violent crimes may have been from police or official records comparing states that have more or less strict gun control laws.
Another theory related to criminal activity would be the social control theory. This theory explains that people can see the advantages of crimes and are capable of doing crimes but does not do the crimes for fear of the consequences
I think that Utilitarians favor exploring the alternatives because doing something to someone, even a criminal, who has committed a heinous crime, morally wrong, and two wrongs do not make a right, it is setting the wrong view for society. I do not agree with not punishing people who do wrong things. I feel that no matter how big the crime or infraction is, there must be punishment, if not then society will keep breaking the rules, and then we would live in an unsafe world, we would not have a sound mind, and be able to function,
Violent crimes are violations of the criminal law that requires violence against one person to another, which the extent of minor to major impact on society of criminal jurisprudence that has shifted from the past to today. There are two differences in the violence and crime. Crime can be any type of rape and homicide, but in fact where does the sense of violence come from as today. In the past nothing wasn’t homicide or violence, it was all about the different laws in different groups that were created and to be punished in the way of hate, the sense of integration or separation in the past. Today crime is in any type of way, but as a law enforcement, what makes a violent crime.
The theory of criminal justice This theory states that criminal procedures are part and branch of philosophy that focuses on punish those who break the law. There is a strong correlation between criminal procedures and the philosophy of law as well as the morals and ethical standards of society. Criminal law theorists put more emphases on offenses that can be seen as illegal and that warrant criminalization of the activities or events. Thus, most of these theorists believe that there is the need to punish the lawbreakers to set an example to other individuals who may have intentions of following their suit or engaging in legal activities. Some of the activities classified by criminal law theorist as a crime or illegal include murder, rape and
Hate speech is not hate crime. Hate crime is a crime usually, an act of violence towards people of different race, someone with a disability, religion, or sexual orientation, as said from report-it.com. Hate crime is much different, because hate speech is just a stated opinion
The actions taken by Maycomb’s trash include, forcing them out of the jury, unlawfully accuse them of crimes they did not commit and have an unlawful trial. This wrongful behavior is also demonstrated by the work created by government officials and police officers, as narrated in Jim Wallis’s text, is discriminatory as he claims, “We expect too little of law enforcement officials when we fail to hold them accountable for the misjudgments
Mandatory sentencing laws often target moral vices like alcohol, sex, drugs, and to friendships and family via prohibition, and crimes that threaten a person's livelihood. The idea is that there are some crimes that are so serious there is no way to accept the offender back into the general population without first punishing them sufficiently. Some crimes are viewed as serious enough to require an indefinite removal from society by a life sentence, or sometimes capital punishment. It is viewed as a public service to separate these people from the general population, as it is assumed that the nature of the crime or the frequency of violation supersedes the subjective opinion of a judge. Remedying the irregularities in sentencing that arise from judicial discretion are supposed to make sentencing more fair and balanced.