Criminologists have long since tried to determine the causes of crime and though many theories have been implemented; no one theory can determine all crime. However, the theories determined do complement each other [ (Siegel & Worrall, 2012) ]. Who are these criminals committing these crimes and why do they commit crime? One theory is that crime is genetically inherited [ (Siegel, 2011) ]. If crime can be scientifically proven to say that crime can be, or is inherited, then what about the children who have criminals as parents?
This is to let people know that the punishment always far outweighs thecrime. For example, one method is to embarrass a young person because they committed acrime, or to tell them that eventual embarrassment is part of the punishment before theyeven commit the crime. I think that general deterrence is the most effective way to handle young people andcrime. This tells the young person know, well before they commit a crime, that they will be caught and punished, which prevents them from committing the crime at all. The other methods handle individual problems.
Which comes in, why kids shouldn’t be try as an adult. Most of us teens act pretty much like kids when were still 15-17 years old. In Adam Liptak’s article “Supreme Court to Rule on Executing Young Killers” published in The New York Times quotes “And jurors may not necessarily accept expert testimony concerning recent research showing that the adolescent brain is not fully developed”. Jurors have to accept the fact that teens brains aren’t develop and still may act like little kids. Also the fact that teens are so rough towards one another there brains aren’t thinking on what can happen if there physical towards people violently.
Taking Sides Paper Brigham Young University SFL 210, 002 Taking Sides: Media Violence The issue of media violence and the effect it has on children has had major impacts in the work and research of many scientist and psychologists. Professor of communication Jib Fowles argues that the effects of exposure of media violence on children does not harm them and any results from such research are so slight that it can be ignored. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze three flaws and one strength of the research done on the “No” side of the article “Is Media Violence Harmful to Children?” Summary The issue of Media Violence is a very controversial issue, it has had many people and social psychologists wonder about the influence that media has on children. The article “Is Media Violence Harmful to Children?” is split into two sections and Professor Fowles is on the No side of the article. He states that results of research on the harmful effects of media violence on children are either so vague that they can be openly interpreted to something different or so insignificant that they can be ignored.
Cesare Lombroso (CL) was a Psychiatrist that believed that criminals had common facial characteristics and that they were “born criminals” which he also referred to as “atavisms”. His theory was that genetic factors or abnormalities that are inherited influence individuals to commit crime and that it was the individuals destiny to become a criminal`. This can be identified through the shape of their skulls, large ears and lips, long arms and a flattened nose. He also believed that men were more likely to commit crime than woman as they were more narrow-minded of their interests. CL theory has been largely criticised as it is very much descriptive based rather than experimental.
In some cases, people do get of their charges dropped because they are not mentally fit but does this mean that they all should get the charges dropped I would say not necessarily because not all biological oddities prove to have an effect on aggression so any more people will use anything to try and get considered insane that way they can get easier charges. Does that mean that all the crimes that are committed with biological problems are because they have this biological factor? That would be a probably not there are many things you have to take in consideration someone could have a biological problem but the main reason for his action could be because of his upbringing or his
When looking at Ted Bundy, it’s obvious that his personality might have played a big part in his crimes. As a result of his unstable home environment, Bundy displayed over-attachment problems, which will also be discussed later on. In addition, he displayed aggression from a young age and a lack of caring about other people. If personality is determined by genes such as the study done in Finland claims, then would a child who was naturally optimistic and empathetic have ended up a serial killer had they been in Bundy’s home situation? It’s impossible to tell.
Before, that individuals were believed to have control over their moods and directional approaches. Relating a criminal’s action to biology was not considered a defense. It was believed that crime originated from sin and moral failing. This view was changed when advancements in the social and natural sciences, mainly in genetics started to happen and more people started to accept that certain biological traits can cause crime, such as hormones or genetics. (Ferris, David, August 25, 2013) Hormones are not determined by the environment but instead biologically.
Legalized gun ownership gives a greater chance of being in the wrong hands such as a child, giving it a better chance of resulting in a deadly accident. Crimes and suicide are higher when there is a gun available. Passing restrictive laws against firearms will lower gun crime. There are also several cons against gun control. Banning guns will take away yet another piece of people’s liberty, which is another step to socialism and totalitarians (Messerli).
The question of criminal behaviour being a result of ‘nature or nurture’ has been a topic of debate for many years. This essay will show criminals are ‘made’. It is surmised all humans are born a blank canvas, potentially developing equally and to a society based norm. Research indicates genetic makeup may cause a behavioural predisposition toward crime but there is no known criminal gene. A variety of factors constituting the ‘make –up’ of an individual including biological, environmental, psychological, socio - economic variables can lead one to undertake criminal activities.