Biological theories have led to crime control and punishment policies that aim to change the working of the criminal's brain or body and cure the condition that causes their criminal behaviour
Used for crowd control and public order offences, causes uncomfortable/distressing sensations including vomiting, breathing difficulties and disorientation
The Nazis' 'racial purity' policies were an extreme case of eugenic policies, targeting the physically/mentally disabled, Jews, Gypsies/Roma, and other 'deviants'
Aversion therapy has had very limited success, usually only short-term, and its use in attempting to 'cure' gay people has been criticised as a human rights abuse
Merton: In America (and to a large extent the UK), the main social goal is to gain wealth. However, the poor find their opportunity to do so legitimately (e.g. through a good education) blocked. Many adapt to this by "innovating" - using illegal means such as theft.
Subcultural theorists (such as Albert Cohen, and Cloward and Ohlin) also argue that crime is caused by blocked opportunities. Different subcultures cope with this by becoming professional criminals, joining gangs or dropping out.
Crime control and punishment policies based on Merton's strain theory
1. Policies to tackle poverty. Better welfare benefits, wages and job security would reduce crime by giving everyone a more equal chance of achieving success by legal means.
2. Equal opportunities in school. Treating working-class pupils equally would reduce their failure rate, making them less likely to suffer status frustration and join delinquent subcultures.
3. Education in prison. Half of UK prisoners have a reading age of 11. Better education in prisons would help inmates gain skills to get a good job and go straight.
Evidence shows that anti-poverty policies have a positive effect. Societies that spend more on welfare jail fewer people. Those with greater inequality, like the USA, have higher crime rates.
Argues that much crime is the result of a self-fulfilling prophecy. By labeling someone as criminal, we risk them living up to their label and committing further, more serious crimes.
1. Decriminalisation: Decriminalising minor offences such as possession of cannabis would mean many fewer young people were labelled as criminals. A criminal record can prevent them getting a job and lead to secondary deviance (further offending).
2. Diversion policies: These aim to keep an offender out of the justice system so as to avoid labelling them as criminals. Some are informal, like when police use their discretion not to charge someone. Others are formal, such as requiring an offender to attend an anger management programme to avoid prosecution.
3. Reintegrative shaming: Labels the act but not the actor, avoiding stigmatising the offender as evil, while still encouraging them to repent and encouraging others to admit them back into society.
Evidence shows crime control policies based on labelling theory can deal successfully with minor offences and young offenders. By avoiding labelling people as criminals and keeping them out of the justice system, they avoid pushing individuals into a deviant career.
Sees criminals as making a rational choice to commit crime. Their view has led to three main crime control and punishment policies:
Situational crime prevention (SCP): Aims to reduce the opportunities for crime by increasing the risks or difficulties of committing the crime and by reducing the rewards.
Environmental crime prevention: Argues that a disorderly neighbourhood sends out the message that nobody cares, attracting offenders. Calls for a zero tolerance policing (ZTP) strategy taking a tough stance towards even minor crimes.
Penal populism and imprisonment: Argues that higher costs such as tougher penalties should deter criminals. Believes 'prison works' through incapacitation and deterrence.
Evidence shows that SCP can lead to displacement, with more vulnerable targets (such as the old, poor or disabled) being victimised more because other targets have been hardened. ZTP can increase juvenile crime by removing law-abiding youths from the streets, and can lead to targeting of ethnic minorities due to police racism.
Evidence shows imprisonment is ineffective in preventing recidivism (repeat offending): 48% of adults are re-convicted within a year of release. The risk of imprisonment doesn't deter offenders enough to affect overall crime rates.
Sees the rootcauseofcrimeasanunequalandunfairsocialstructure. Their theory has been applied via threemainpolicies to reducecrime:
Policies to reduce inequality: Call for major structural changes to tackle discrimination, inequality of opportunity and unfairness of rewards, and to provide good jobs and housing for all.
Democratic policing: The police must involve local communities in deciding their priorities and focus on crimes that victimise the disadvantaged.
A multi-agency approach: Crime control must involve many other agencies apart from the police, such as schools, youth services, housing departments, social services, the probation service and NHS.
Some of the policies advocated by left realists reflect the approach of the New Labour governments from 1997 to 2010, which aimed to be 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'.
A modern form of the Panopticon: a surveillance system in which people can be observed without knowing whether they are being watched. Depends on criminals believing they are being watched and being deterred by this. Critics suggest CCTV'srealfunctionmaybetoreassurethepublic, even though it makes little difference to their security.
Evidence shows CCTV has little effect other than displacement, and that CCTV operators have used racist stereotypes, singling out Black youths for surveillance.
Involves using data to draw up a statistical picture of likely offenders, often using official crime statistics. Can be discriminatory, creating a self-fulfillingprophecy where certaingroups are over-targeted by the police.