Classical and Positivist Criminology

527 Words3 Pages
Classical and Positivist Criminology “Let the punishment fit the crime” (Siegel, 2010, p.33), this is the statement that summarizes the thinking behind classical criminology. During the eighteenth century researchers wanted a more rational approach for why people committed crime. They believed there was a link between crime and punishment. Classical criminology was developed by Italian scholar, Cesar Beccaria in 1738 (Siegel, 2010). Beccaria firmly believed in utilitarianism: the belief that people have control of their behavior and choose to commit crime because the pleasure received outweighs the pain of punishment. He believed that in order to prevent crime the punishment must be sufficient enough to counterbalance the gain. The punishment must also be swift, necessary and public, but most importantly follow the law. The Classical School, unlike the Positivist School; was not interested in studying criminals, but rather law making and legal processing. The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution reflect the Classical movement, thus the law of today is classical in nature. Cesare Beccaria, believed crime could be linked to bad laws, not necessarily bad people. He thought that if a criminal justice system could be implemented to guarantee equal treatment of all before the law. His famous book, On Crimes and Punishment presented a new design for the criminal justice system that serviced all people, and dubbed him the father of modern criminology. The Positivist School of Criminology was developed by Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909). This replaced the notion of free will and rationality with the notion of determinism. He along with his fellow positivists; Enrico Ferri and Raffaele Garofalo sought explanations for criminal behavior through scientific research and experimentation. Lombroso believed in the, criminally born. They believed they had
Open Document