Essay Sample on Criminal Justice Theories Crime and Deviance

Think of some places in your town/city that are known to have relatively high rates of crime. Describe. Next, use the offender search theory to make sense of this crime pattern. Why should the crime be clustered at such places, according to the offender search theory?

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

London's rates of crime are rising sharply. According to the England police department data, 34 out of 43 crimes in England are reported in London. Overall, the police argue that England is the most dangerous part of England. In terms of numbers in the previous five years crime has doubled from 1455 offenses in 2014 to 2981 in 2018 (McCord, & Conway, 2018). Of all the crimes, knife crime is the most reported time of crime in England. Knife crime in London is associated with other petty crimes. These petty crimes include; assault, robbery, threat to kill, murder, attempted murder, and sexual offenses. Crimes involving knives or threats by sharp objects are the most reported in the city.

According to the offender search theory, there is a framework that explains crime in London. In the routine activities of crime and how criminals find suitable targets, London is favorable because of the way it is designed. London has late clubs and bars that operate way past midnight when the streets are cold, silent, and lonely. Lonely, silent, and cold streets are favorable for assault and robbery cases. Late-night bars and clubs create a suitable environment for drug-related crimes. Offenders seeking to commit crimes prefer London because of its late-night recreational life. The people of London also create an environment that suits criminal activity. Day time people stay at work or various economic activities, while at night most people are at their recreational activities which favors criminal activity in the city (McCord, & Conway, 2018).

Offenders' search theory explains that crime is high in a city such as London because they create an environment that favors potential targets for criminals. Victims of a city fall into the plan of criminals because the city provides a difficult environment for criminal detection. The spaces of crimes are blind to the victims but open to the criminals. These spaces that make it possible for crime to happen are known as offender awareness space (McCord, & Conway, 2018). Offender space theory can be used to explain criminal activities as seen in the London case.

Locate five research articles on the effects of the death penalty (or three strikes) on homicide rates. Describe the methods and findings of this research. Overall, is (general) deterrence theory supported? Explain.

The first article is by Christensen, (2017). The article compared the crime rate across the state of America that punishes homicide with death and those that do not punish through the death penalty. In the finding, the article determined that in places of the death penalty, there was an increased crime rate. Murder rates in death penalty states were at 45% while the murder on non-death penalty states was at 10%; a difference of 35%.

Another article by Amnesty argues against the death penalty. In the article by Parker et al., (2017), the method used was sampling across states in Canada. In Canada, the research determined that the death penalty does not deter violent crime and does not make society safer. The research further developed that since the abolishment of the death penalty Australia has reduced crime rates by 44% (Parker et al., 2017).

In the third article, Garrett et al., (2017) seek to determine if the death penalty states have higher homicide rates. The research article conducted across five countries. The five countries are assumed to have the highest number of crimes. The article determined that five countries with the legal death penalty had a combined homicide rate of 46.6%. These countries are Trinidad, Jamaica, Brazil, Lesotho, and Guatemala.

A similar article by Broughton (2017), focused on homicide rates in states that had abolished the death penalty. A total of 41.1% of crime rates was jointly realized (Broughton, 2017). The research determined that the death penalty was not a factor of homicide anymore.

Lastly, research by Sina, (2016), researched jails. The research having interviews determined that those in jail were not considering the death penalty a threat to them not committing homicide.

Overall, the deterrent theory is not supported. All five articles argue that death penalties for wrongdoers have no contribution to homicide rates. Homicides have causal factors that cannot be reduced by applying severe punitive measures.

Think about your life and your teenage years, especially. Describe someone you know (yourself or a peer) who could be classified as an LCP. Describe someone you know (yourself or a peer) who could be classified as an AL. Why do you describe yourself (or any of your peers) that way? Justify your classification with a thorough application of Moffitt’s work.

Linda Felix is one of my best friends. Growing up he was just a kid in my neighborhood until we joined elementary school together. Felix was tall then the rest of us and equally well built. I was lucky to be one of his friends at least I escaped the bullying procedures that he subjected to others. He would snatch candy from other kids. At times he would pick lunchtime apples from other pupils’ plates and eat without caring. He missed school on so many occasions, serving the suspension. His parents were never really at home since they traveled a lot. After the early years, Felix continued to be a bully, getting a lot of body tattoos, which later meant he had joined a gang. Linda Felix is a group of criminal offenders known as a life-course-persistent offender.

Another offender that, I would describe is myself. I started being a football fan when I was young, my dad would always take me to soccer games around the country. In my teenage years, I became a football addict. I would consistently steal money from him to travel and watch Manchester United football games. I went ahead to know my father’s master card password and would at times impersonate him. I used his master card to travel and watch football all over the country. My father noticed the inconsistencies in his financial transactions and notified the police. The police traced the inconsistencies to me. I had to take the punishment from my dad. My crime description above is that of the adolescent limited (AL) group.

The difference between the two groups of offenders is persistence. LCP is an individual who displays persistent characteristics of antisocial behavior. The behavior can be traced to the early stages of development. For instance; Linda Felix started being a bully when we were still young and did not stop until he joined a gang. The continuity of antisocial behavior is what is referred to as LCPs. Starting from an early stage and persisting throughout the life span. AL, according to Mortiff, is the absence of a history of antisocial behavior (McCord, & Conway, 2018). However, antisocial behavior is adopted within the adolescent future. In the case, I am not an identity thief but the love for football makes me look like one. I am not a thief anymore, which proves short criminal careers limited during the adolescent years.

Design a community justice strategy using Clear’s argument. Thoroughly describe the elements of the strategy, and explain why your proposed strategy is consistent with Clear’s ideas in Imprisoning Communities.

The justice system of any community that is modern and progressive should be based on a preventive approach rather than a punitive approach. The punitive approach only targets a group of people and do not turn their behaviors as explained by Clear.

The first element of the strategy is the objective. The objectives of the progressive community strategy of justice are to ensure the criminals become inclusive contributors and respected members of society.

The second element of the justice system is the stakeholders. Members of the community are the greatest stakeholders as they are the greatest beneficiaries. Criminals are also beneficiaries as they are absorbed into the society, unlike incarceration where they turn out worse.

Dealing with offenders is done through Todd Clear’s theory of tackling the underlying cause of crime than punishing the criminal. Causes of offenses include; poverty, lack of engagement or employment, and discrimination. The community will help when they tailor wrap-around services that include; better access to service, housing, health service, their well being, and employability rate. The strategy of the underlying cause of crime, helps offenders become better people than imprisoning as identified by Clear.

The last element of the strategy is how to absorb the offenders back to society. Most offenders are not always accepted back to society after imprisonment. Many of them, end up depressed. To include Clear’s argument, the strategy considers that the offenders have strengths that the community can benefit from; having them work social service to the community help offenders get absorbed back. The strategy provides one of the best community justice policies that consider Clear’s argument.

Describe how environmental criminology could influence probation and parole. How does this approach differ from traditional probation/parole? What elements would you include in an opportunity assessment? What activities would you place on the activity calendar? Which place managers would you most commonly reach out to and why?

Environmental criminology theory assumes that an offender is motivated to commit crime through opportunity. Opportunity creates motivation to commit a crime. If an offender has the opportunity to commit a crime, they will eventually take up the opportunity. The theory interferes with parole and probation by putting the offenders within an environment with limited opportunity to commit further crime. Constraining offenders, allows them to read the environment for clues as to what type of behaviors could be feasible and acceptable. (McCord, & Conway, 2018) Probation and parole, thereby only influence offenders into perceptions of rewards, risk efforts, and excusable abilities.

The theory is different from traditional approaches in the following manner; Traditional approaches highly focus on behavior and restraining. The offender is restrained from participating in communal activities that other people could freely participate in. Additionally, the offenders are exposed to various behavior monitoring situations during probation to determine if they are fit to fully join as a free person.

In an opportunity assessment, there is a need to include the following elements; location of the offender. The location should be free from the risk of crime. Another element of opportunity assessment is how the offender might benefit from committing a crime. An offender committing a crime is likely to take up the opportunity. The last element is the morality and principles of the individual. Morality as an opportunity can discourage certain moral actions.

The activities to place on the calendar of an offender on probation or parole are those that involve service to the community. The community service helps the community reduce stigma placed on offenders. The offender gets a chance to redeem themselves so they can get help from any community service members.

In terms of place manages, it would benefit reaching out to community service managers. Community service is among the best people since they are trained to bring out the best in people. Other people to reach out to as managers are community counselors.