Circumstantial Crime Regrettably, crime happens nearly every day in every city to some unfortunate person or property. The willingness to attempt the majority of these crimes began with a decision regarding the short term goal, in the value of the crime, and the long term ramifications a punishment could bring (Hollander-Blumoff, 2012). Cities spend vast amounts of tax dollars every year in an attempt to mitigate and eliminate crime. Consequently, there are not enough officers to enforce societies many laws nor is the police force robust enough to protect every citizen and piece of property. Utilitarian theorists Jeremy Bentham and Cesare Beccaria were 18th century philosophers that who proclaimed the fact, mankind has the free will to be
…show more content…
In fact, this is one differentiating detail between classical criminology and neoclassical criminology. Supporters of neoclassical theory dictate that protecting ones liberty or privacy is not punishable if reasonable (Robert, 2016). Two other factors modify the classic doctrine for neoclassical theory; it admits the need to recognize the environment and psychological circumstances of the crime committed (Hagen, 2013). In short, every person should not fear persecution for protecting his or her house and …show more content…
Neoclassical theory speaks volumes of deterrence tactics; thereby, the assumption that criminals are rational offenders and certainly weigh out the cost/benefit before the majority of wrongful acts are committed. Policies such as “just deserts” that impose the biblical notion of lex talionis, an eye for an eye, comparable compensation must be paid for damages sustained (Hagen, 2013). Reasonable deterrence is one of the fundamental ideals that neoclassic theorists implore; therefore, strict legislation is needed to mitigate crime. The death penalty is a prime example of this, heinous offenders deserve to receive the death penalty; consequently, in America this is deeply divided as reasonable and tends to trend the crime rate proportionally (Alder, 2015). A fair and comparable penalty is still needed, while the death penalty would deter minor crimes from being committed, it does not warrant a petty criminal to lose his or her life for making an irrational choice to commit a
In fact, this is one differentiating detail between classical criminology and neoclassical criminology. Supporters of neoclassical theory dictate that protecting ones liberty or privacy is not punishable if reasonable (Robert, 2016). Two other factors modify the classic doctrine for neoclassical theory; it admits the need to recognize the environment and psychological circumstances of the crime committed (Hagen, 2013). In short, every person should not fear persecution for protecting his or her house and …show more content…
Neoclassical theory speaks volumes of deterrence tactics; thereby, the assumption that criminals are rational offenders and certainly weigh out the cost/benefit before the majority of wrongful acts are committed. Policies such as “just deserts” that impose the biblical notion of lex talionis, an eye for an eye, comparable compensation must be paid for damages sustained (Hagen, 2013). Reasonable deterrence is one of the fundamental ideals that neoclassic theorists implore; therefore, strict legislation is needed to mitigate crime. The death penalty is a prime example of this, heinous offenders deserve to receive the death penalty; consequently, in America this is deeply divided as reasonable and tends to trend the crime rate proportionally (Alder, 2015). A fair and comparable penalty is still needed, while the death penalty would deter minor crimes from being committed, it does not warrant a petty criminal to lose his or her life for making an irrational choice to commit a