Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
16 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Why Punish? |
1. Crime reduction:
2. Retribution:
|
|
Social perspectives on punishment > Functionalism |
Functionalism (Durkheim)
1. Retributive justice: traditional society strong collective conscience, punishment severe. 2. Restorative justice: modern society - Accountability defined as assuming responsibility and taking action to repair harm × Reductionist: street crime v white collar who decides what is a moral offence? + effectiveness: best interests of all, punishment severe enough but morally upstanding |
|
social perspectives on punishment >> Marxism and Realism |
Realism Right Realism: zero tolerance policies Left realism: looking at rehabilitation as ZT causes discrimination Marxism: (capitalism and punishment)
+ Holistic: takes into consideration MC crime and root causes >> Contemporary e.g: America's war on terror and increased surveillance × effectiveness: what practical solution? |
|
social perspectives on punishment >> Birth of the prison- Foucault |
1. Sovereign power
2. Disciplinary power:
+ demonstrates this idea as prevalent in all aspects of society e.g. schools, mental asylums × shift from corporal punishment to imprisonment wasless clear than he suggests × He exaggerates extent of control – won’t always occur, de-sensitization |
|
imprisonment today |
|
|
improsonment today: prison population |
prison pop: mostly male/WC/young/poorly educated + blacks overrepresented
Garland: USA and even UK is moving into mass incarceration era +Allusion: Capitalism look successful as prisons soaks up 40% of unemployed |
|
Prisonment today: Transcarceration |
Transcarceration: trend towards individuals being institutionalized all their lives e.g. care- young offenders- prison
+ aim: diversion diverting Y/O away from prison system to avoid SFP e.g. community based programmes, curfews, tagging, ASBOs × not all successful in diverting Y/O away from prison system e.g. ASBOs a badge of honour |
|
Crime prevention and control >> Right Realist: Clarke |
Situational crime prevention:
× criticizes root causes such as poor socialisation/capitalism -fail to offer solution + Felson: port authority bus terminal in NY - poorly designed/provided opportunities for deviant conduct e.g. luggage thefts, rough sleeping, drugs - Re-shaping the physical environment greatly reduced such activity e.g. large sinks where homeless were bathing replaced with small basins |
|
Evaluation of Clarke |
+ Practical: easy and cheap to introduce crime prevention strategies × Displacement: crime then moves to another area > Chaiken et al: found a crackdown on subway roberries in NY just displaced crimes to streets above × focuses on petty crime and ignores white collar crime prevention × ignores the root causes of crime e.g. capitalism, poverty |
|
Crime prevention and control > Environmental crime prevention |
> Wilson and Kelling: Broken windows
+ influential and zero tolerance policing has been seen to have successes in NY × does not solve the causes of crime × doesn't focus on white collar crimes × displacement to areas with less prevention |
|
Crime prevention and control > social and community crime prevention |
Social and community crime preventions
× crime will still occur as the prevention take place × impractical: expensive which take a long time × softer policing: re-offending or increase in crime due to more opportunities |
|
Victims and victimization |
>> UN definition: those who have suffered harm (including mental, physical, emotional suffering, economic loss and impairment of basic rights) through acts or or omissions that violate the laws of the state × Christie: a victim is socially constructed e.g. the media creates a stereotype of ideal victim (someone who is weak, blameless or innocent e.g. a child or an old woman) >> impact of victimization: - can have serious physical/emotional impact on its victims e.g. disrupted sleep, feeling helpless, difficulties socially |
|
Patterns of victimisation |
>> Class: poorest groups are more likely to be victims e.g. more crime in deprived areas + Newburn and Rock homeless people 12 x more likely to experience violence + 1/10 urinated on >> Age: Generally younger people are more at risk - Babies: under 1 most at risk of being murdered - teenagers: more vulnerable than adults to offences like assault, sexual harassment, theft and abuse - elderly: risk of abuse in old people's home >> Ethnicity: EMs are at greater risk of victimization - racially motivated crimes >> Gender: men are at greater risk than females at being victims of violent attacks
>> repeat victimization: if you are a victim once, likely to be a victim again
|
|
Victimology: Positivist |
1. Positivist victimology: victims invite victimization by the type of person they are (displaying wealth, not making home secure, being drunk) > Miers: defines the aims of positivists victimology
× Victim blaming: suggests they asked for it × structural theorists: ignores wider structural factors e.g. poverty, patriarchy × reductionist: ignores situations where victims are unaware of their victimization e.g. green crime |
|
Victimology: Critical |
2. Critical criminology: Powerless groups are at greater risk and the cause is not the individuals' behaviour but society > structural factors: patriarchy/poverty places powerless groups such as women/poor at greater risk of victimisation > Manipulation of victim label: state has power to apply/deny the label of victims e.g. when police drop charges on man for assault on wife, denying her victim status |
|
Critical Victimology: evaluation |
+ Tombs and Whyte: show how violation of health and safety laws are often explained as the fault of worker
+ rape cases: women blamed for fate e.g. asking what they were wearing >> failure to label individuals as victims hides true extent to victimization + "Woke": demonstrates how victim label is constructed by power + how benefits powerful at expense of powerless + critical criminology: refutes idea that victim caused their victimization through own choices e.g. not making home secure |