Policing policies including broken windows and zero-tolerance policy have different limitations on what can be stopped. The broken windows theory gave police a wide discretion when stopping citizens. During the time when broken windows was implemented, citizens were able to get away with low-level crimes. Once zero-tolerance began, the officers became more strict in stopping citizens which would make them feel targeted for the wrong reasons, like the color of their skin. The zero-tolerance policy was implemented to update the police’s discretion of what to stop and to keep crime down.
PREVENTIVE THEORY Preventive philosophy of punishment is based on the preposition ‘not to avenge crime but to prevent crime’. It presupposes that need of punishment of crime arises simply out of social necessities. In punishing a criminal the community protects itself against anti- social act which endanger social order in general or person or property of its members. The real object of the penal law therefore, is to make the threat generally known rather than putting it occasionally into execution. It suggests that prisonisation is the best mode of crime prevention as it seeks to eliminate offenders from society thus disabling them for repeating crime.
Decriminalization is the lessening of criminal penalties in relation to certain acts, perhaps retroactively, though perhaps regulated permits or fines might still apply. Decriminalization isn’t the same as legalization. Decriminalizing drug use doesn’t make it legal. It just takes the legal penalties away from at-risk individuals. Selling and distributing the drug would still be a criminal offense.
‘’The principle of manipulability refers to the predictable ways in which people act out of rational self-interest and might therefore be dissuaded from committing crimes if the punishment outweighs the benefits of the crime, rendering the crime an illogical choice.’’(http://www.biography.com/people/cesare-beccaria-39630) Beccaria believed that the criminal justice system needed to be changed, he thought the present criminal justice system was ‘barbaric and antiquated’. Beccaria also believed that certain laws should be changed and who they should benefit. He believed the system should establish the appropriate punishment for each crime committed. Unlike many of the other theories ‘’On Crime and Punishment’’ wanted to help and protect the rights of the criminals as well as the rights of the victims, he believes that punishment of the criminals should be that which serves the greatest public good. Beccaria also put forward in his theories the first modern argument against the death penalty.
This sentence is to eliminate preventable death tolls nationwide. The theory of deterrence is that people who do wrong will fear punishment, causing them to act within the law. There are two different types of criminal deterrence, specific and general. Specific deterrence focuses on lessening the probability of having a repeat offender. The Three Strikes Law plays in accordance with this type of deterrence.
They noticed that the criminals would use the “insights” gained in therapy groups as further justifications for their behavior. Rather than providing the criminal offenders with valuable pieces of the puzzle, the Doctors were giving them further rationalizations for their crimes. The criminals were gaining a whole new vocabulary with which to excuse their conduct and manipulate others. The Doctors eventually concluded that the approaches that worked well with non-criminals were inapplicable to this difficult
Another factor to consider is that not all crimes result in the immediate arrest and conviction with the guarantee of apprehension; therefore, the overall deterrence effect becomes reduced. A scholar in crime and punishment, Michael Tory states, “At the very least, macro-level research on deterrent effects should test the null hypothesis of no effect rather than the price theory assumption that offenders’ behaviours will change in response to changes in legal threats” (3). Tough on crime policies and an increased severity on punishment will not advocate for the desired deterrence affects. Instead, our current criminal justice system seems to actively ignore the failing legislatures and laws that feed into increased recidivism rates. Yes,
Crime reduction is quite similar to crime prevention, for crime reduction to occur we need to prevent it at first. Crime prevention strategies are usually implemented by criminal justice agencies, individuals, businesses and non-governmental agencies in order to maintain order and enforce the law. Crime prevention strategies not only deter crime but also reduce the risk of increasing victimization in the society.Crime prevention has many objectives but the most main objective is to reduce and deter crime. Many criminal justice agencies have developed strategies through public policy in order to prevent crime. Various models have been adopted by countries in order to combat crime.
Cohen and Marcus (1979) advanced the routine activities approach motivated by Hawley’s (1950) work on human ecology and that of Shaw and McKay (1950) on juvenile delinquency. According to William and McShane (1994: 250), the routine activities approach is somewhat of a recent approach, utilizing two central concepts, freedom of choice and action based on routine behaviours to explain and predict criminal victimisation. 2.1.1 Exposition of the routine activities approach In its early development, the routine activities approach mainly focused on property crimes. As a result many scholars believed that it could not be used in explaining personal or violent crimes, as it seemed to focus on a static state of affairs as far as the victim was concerned (Mustaine and Tewksbury, 2000: 340). This misconception and understanding of the routine activities approach has changed and it is now believed to be able to be applied in understanding offenders and criminal context, instead of merely a means to explain or predict the risk of criminal victimisation (Felson, 1997: 209).
Deviance is any thoughts, beliefs, characteristic, or actions that go against social norms. Typically, but not all the time, deviance results in punishment. Crime is deviance, but it is a violation of a written law, not just a norm. All crime is deviance, but not all deviance is crime. Someone picking their nose is an example of deviance, but it is not a crime.