Basics of Classicist Criminology

Classicist criminology is a theory of criminal behavior and supports theorists in finding solutions to crime and deviance. The main principle of classicist criminology is that people have free will in making decisions and that punishment can be a deterrent for crime, so long as the punishment is proportional and is carried out promptly. The classical school of criminology was developed by Cesare de Beccaria and Jeremy Benthem during the 18th century; they sought to reduce the austerity of the 18th-century judiciary systems. Beccaria stated that “it is better to prevent crime than to punish them”. During the era, Europeans utilized capital punishments such as being whipped, tortured, hanged, and beheaded in consequence of crime and deviant behavior resulting in, “classical thinking emerged in response to the cruel forms of punishment that dominated the times as enlightened approaches to be taken towards crime and punishment” (Roufa, 2011). In comparison, during the 18th-century woman was punished for acts of adultery but in modern-day society, adultery is not breaking the law or is forbidden suggesting that classical schooling has had a positive impact on modern-day society. Bentham’s writing ideologized human behavior and theorized the pleasure-pain principle, which supports the theory that criminals are rational, they weigh up costs and therefore should create deterrents that slightly outweigh what would be gained from the crime. therefore, if the gain from the crime exceeds the consequences of punishment, then the criminal will choose to commit the crime and suffer the consequence to have that temporary gain.

Classicist criminology is based on four key principles which are: individuals have the will and rationality to act accordingly to their own will and desires, individuals will calculate the rationality of the crime based on the benefits of the crime versus the consequence of the crime, severity of the punishment should be determined by the severity of the crime to deter others and reduce crime, punishment should be swift and appropriate to deter others and reduce crime (Roufa, 2011). These principles for classicist criminology continue to play a key role in criminal justice systems today. “Since the introduction of the classical school of criminology, the use of capital punishment, torture and corporal punishment has declined” (‘Classical’, 2012), it has been shown that classicist criminology has made great leaps in the justice system as before punishments were implemented, people were tortured as well as other forms of punishment but now such punishments are dated. Research has shown that in Europe and America imprisonment has been used as a deterrent to encourage offenders to understand their behavior. As a result, “growth of prison as a major system of punishment to take punishment away from the body and instead punish the mind and soul, to changing one’s outlook and views of their criminal behavior” (‘Classical’, 2012). Classicistic criminology has, however, not made such advancements in as many countries, for example in Afghanistan the death penalty, as well as physical punishments, are still active in today’s society. The idea of avoiding physical punishment links to hedonism where the assumption that people seek pleasure and try to avoid pain, is because once an offender has experienced imprisonment, they are less likely to repeat a crime due to the thought of returning there. In comparison, classicist criminology has been referenced in the United States Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, an example can be found in the 8th Amendment that makes, ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ unlawful and unconstitutional.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Even though classicist criminology suggests that criminals commit crime because of their free will and choice, the justice system has presented weaknesses and that the theory, “puts the blame for the crime problems squarely on the shoulders of the individual, and not on society as a whole”, (See, 2004). The theory suggests that people know what is right and wrong and can therefore sum up the pros and cons of committing a crime, not everyone commits a crime because of their free will. Such scenarios may occur with mental instabilities, poor impulse control, low IQ, or the need for survival. An example is through perceptual deterrence where an individual refers to what they believe the likelihood of arrest to be, and how severe they believe the punishment of the crime will be. If that person was to suffer from schizophrenia, then their judgement may be disproportionate to how severe the crime is and therefore have the lack of free will. This suggests that the classicist theory has implemented that people can rationally understand the pros and cons of committing a crime and has therefore placed those who cannot theorize the consequences in a state of misunderstanding and wrongdoing. The theory makes no indications or suggestions to the fact “there may be biological factors stopping an individual from thinking or behaving rationally” (‘Classical’, 2012). A need for survival demonstrates a lack of free will and conflicts with the theory of classicist criminology. This is because if someone was to steal food this would be viewed as a crime and therefore be punishable with a fine or imprisonment, however, the circumstances of the theft may be misunderstood and therefore the pleasure-pain principle is overruled by the prevention of starvation. On the other hand, compared to the past, when someone stole food, they would have limbs cut off or depending on what is stolen put to death. This shows how classical criminology has made improvements to the present justice system.

Reiman’s statement “the rich get richer, and the poor get prison” shows a discrepancy in how the rich and the poor are treated throughout the criminal justice system. The poor are more likely to be discriminated against and evidence has shown that throughout history, the law has favored the more economically wealthy. Corporate crimes are more likely to be committed by the wealthy and are also given more leniency even when the crime is damaging to society and the environment. When an adult or child of the working class was to commit similar crimes, they would be disproved of because of their financial status. The pleasure-pain principle would suggest that the middle-class have no consideration for the punishment that they would experience. This is because due to the criminal justice system showing more bias towards the middle-class, they do not take into consideration the potential punishments. Also, according to Reiman (2007), “the poor are also treated more harshly in the courts with a poor defendant being more likely to be found guilty than a wealthier defendant”. This further demonstrates how classical criminology benefits the wealthy, this is because when under the same conditions and potential punishment the poor are more likely to be prosecuted due to the fact that they have greater economic status. Therefore, the criminal justice system has had near to no change when it comes to economic bias thus suggesting that classicist criminology influences the rich to become richer with little consideration of the punishments.

Classicist criminology has great application and significance to the modern-day criminal justice system. It provides a key structure for criminal behavior and suggestions for punishments and crime control. Although the classicist theory was developed in the 18th century it can still be implied to the 21st century, a prime example being how America’s justice system was founded. Currently, convicts are serving time that is proportional to the crime they committed; however, classicist criminology does not take into account social factors. Such social factors include poverty, drugs, mental instability and because such factors are not seen as the social norm, there are no given exceptions for convictions. The principle of punishment to be appropriate to deter others and reduce crime consists of many factors which can affect one’s free will and their rationality towards crime. Bentham’s pleasure-pain principle produces awareness as well as guidance for present-day society and the justice system. It produces awareness for society to rationalize the potential punishments compared to the crime they commit. The pleasure-pain principle has contributed to the criminal justice system via appropriate sentencing of crimes that are slightly outweighed, to create a rational deterrent for society.