Durkheim believed that in modern societies, traditional norms became undermined without being replaced. This undermining created no clear guidelines to influence societal behaviour, and he referred to this as a state of Anomie. He developed this theory through his study of suicide (Giddens, 2009, p.941). Durkheim was interested in the way that societies function as a whole and how this contributed to the continued success of a society (Lausten, Larsen, Nielsen, Ravn and Sørenson, 2017 p. 36). Durkheim worked to record both moral and social requirements for societal consistency in modern and traditional societies in order to advance a theory about society as a combined reality.
However, Feinberg articulated that ‘legal moralism’ and paternalism are insufficient grounds for criminalising conduct . He convincingly argued that under a liberal scheme for criminalisation, ‘the Harm and Offence Principles’ diminish the good reasons (critical moral justifications) for criminal prohibitions . The exposition of harm principle is provided by J.S Mill, stating the state can only exercise its power over any state members when its purpose is to prevent harm to others . The harm principle has negative and positive thrusts, negative thrust limits state’s power to punish, it gives political priority to individual freedom from coercion rather than collective goods such as morality or welfare, self-harm is insufficient to become a crime . While positive thrust justifies state’s coercion, it supports harm prevention .
Nonetheless it is imperative while examining crime to consider various issues which bring up a few significant issues with respect to the way crime is seen in the society. Investigating inquiries, for example, who makes the tenets of society (laws) and why, is imperative as any response to this inquiry is supported by examination on social power, political power, class distinction and the way crime is socially constructed. Social standards and values fluctuate fundamentally crosswise over diverse societies, religions and social orders. Despite the fact that it can be said that when these social norms are upset, the "breaking" of social "principles" can be unlawful, in which case it turns into a demonstration of crime, it is likewise essential to separate in the middle of crime and deviance which both incorporate the violation of social standards (Akçomak and ter Weel,
(Young, 1981). Classicism Enhancing informational knowledge is the purpose of its punishment, which allows people to conduct rational decision. Therefore, the proportional penalty is suggested to launch when they devoted violation that harms the society, which promoted equality that offenders need to be aware of. Positivism Positivist focused on the background of the criminal, who believed people committed crime because of the environment influence. Treatment is a preferable than punishment to offenders(Young, 1981).
Torture is against the law, therefore torturing the man would break the law. Using the universalized maxim would also mean violating the principle of humanity because according to the principle you have to "always treat a human being (yourself included) as an end, and never as a mere means" (Garcia, Kant Slide 19). By torturing the man, he would be treated as a mere end instead of an end. Therefore, following both
The main difference between unfair advantage and lex talionis is that the former theory focused on what the criminal achieved by committing the crime while the latter one just considered what the victim has lost. To explain it more, the criminal law inherently came to existence to protect the people and their rights. So, obeying the law which is accompanied by some self-restraint – it means to neglect his own right by limiting his freedom - is one of the penal law 's principles. This principle discussed that one ought to neglect his/her own rights not to enter in the other 's territories. By this system, any person has a private territory - the law-abiding - which is limited by the territory of the others.
Positive criminology focuses on the criminal rather than the criminal law because the motivational and behavioural actions, especially springing from life situations, may explain criminal deviancy. The Positivist would argue, therefore, that the law and its implication would be secondary, if not irrelevant (Matza, 1964). Positivist theorists dispel the Classical theory of free will and use scientific determinism to study the criminal behaviour. Instead, positive criminology focuses on set of determinates and constraints that affect an individual and link them to criminal deviancy and behaviour. With free will, there is a improbable chance of totality, especially given that humans cannot control the sociological, neurological and environmental factors in their lives.
In cases of unjust laws, by obeying them, the country is put in harm and not in benefit. In Gandhi’s Satyagraha it is stated “An oppressor’s efforts will be put in vain if we refuse to submit to his tyranny,” (page 38). This means to make a change in the law, it is the responsibility of citizens to stand up for the wrong of the country. This act is what giving back to the country means, not, obeying unjust laws. As mentioned before, unjust laws don't seem unjust to everyone, there are some people benefitting from it in the wrong way which is why it is unjust.
Unlike radical feminists who that abolishing prostitution is possible, I am of the idea that it is impossible to abolish prostitution in society, so criminalization is the best option. My idea of criminalization is punishing the “johns,” who exploit the women and not the women whose vulnerable position leads them into prostitution. I support Freeman’s (1989-1990) notion that the solution to prostitution requires: Only broad social and economic reforms, coupled with profound changes in our most deeply entrenched cultural norms, would eliminate the causes of prostitution. Because that amount of structural change is an unrealistic immediate
(2014)] Public criminologists are called upon to take into account the ethics of the “democratic under-labourer’’ who is less focused on a collaboration of social forms by reliable knowledge. They set out to enforce better politics of crime and