NCJ Number
64521
Date Published
1980
Length
11 pages
Annotation
CRIME IS DISCUSSED AS A PRODUCT OF POVERTY, AND TWO METHODS OF CRIME PREVENTION, STRICT LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOSTERING GREATER MORALITY AND EQUALITY, ARE EXAMINED.
Abstract
ALTHOUGH MANY BELIEVE SOCIAL ORDER TO BE IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO WARRANT HARSH LAWS AND CRIME PUNISHMENTS, THIS PAPER ARGUES THAT, SINCE CITIZENS WILL COMMIT FEWER CRIMES AS THEY GROW MORE MORAL, MORAL AND FAIR CRIMINAL LAW ARE WHAT IS NECESSARY. ALTHOUGH SOCIETY AND COURTS ASSUME THAT CRIMINAL ACTS INVOLVE WRONG INTENT AND RESULT FROM FREE CHOICES BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG, MORAL RESPONSIBILITY IS FAR MORE COMPLEX THAN RIGHT OR WRONG DECISIONS. JURIES, AS COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES, SHOULD BE FREE TO DECIDE MORAL RESPONSIBILITY IN CRIMINAL CASES, TAKING ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN MAKING JUDGMENTS. THIS VIEW, HOWEVER, HAS OPPONENTS WHO CLAIM THAT CRIMINALS SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR BEHAVIOR AND THAT MORAL RESPONSIBILITY SHOULD BE DEFINED BY LEGISLATURES AND JURIES' JUDGMENTS SHOULD BE GUIDED BY LAW. OPPONENTS ALSO CLAIM THAT TREATING RATHER THAN PUNISHING CRIMINALS MAY LEAD TO INVASIONS OF PRIVACY AND CURTAILMENTS OF FREEDOM AND THAT THE LIBERAL SOCIAL SCIENCE APPROACH TO CRIME HAS PROVEN INEFFECTIVE. BUT THE STRICT LAW ENFORCEMENT VIEW IGNORES KNOWN FACTORS OF CRIME SUCH AS POVERTY. JURY SELCTION AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM SHOULD ACCORDINGLY TAKE ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME CAUSES, SUCH AS POVERTY, INTO ACCOUNT, AND CITIZENS SHOULD MAKE AN EFFORT TO ELIMINATE POVERTY. NOTES FOLLOW THE ARTICLE. (PAP)