Morality, Crime, Compliance and Public Policy (From Ideology, Crime and Criminal Justice, P 20-51, 2002, Anthony Bottoms, Michael Tonry, eds., -- See NCJ-197140)

• NCJ Number: 197142
• Author(s): Anthony Bottoms
• Date Published: 2002
• Length: 32 pages
• Sale Source: Willan Publishing
• Publication Format: Book (Hardbound)
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This chapter discusses why the normative or moral dimension is of central importance for criminology.

Abstract

The traditional concept of criminal responsibility was based on the view that an individual that chooses, by free will, to commit a crime is morally responsible for that act. In contrast, where for any reason -- such as duress, infancy, or mental incapacity -- the individual’s moral responsibility is reduced or absent, this fact has to be taken into account by the law. Enrico Ferri, mentor of Leon Radzinowicz, believed that it was not the business of criminal justice to assess and measure the moral guilt of an offender, but to determine whether the offender was the perpetrator of an act defined as an offense. Radzinowicz believed that criminological theories and explanations have a very distinct and direct consequence on public policy. Positive morality is morality actually accepted and shared by a given social group. Critical morality is the general moral principles used in the criticism of actual social institutions. Adherents of the classical school of criminology offered a powerful challenge, based in critical morality, to the existing autocratic criminal systems of many 18th century European states. Classical and neo-classical principles often became part of the positive morality of later nation-states. Crimes were acts that were proscribed by a society, as a way of marking out conduct considered impermissible. Rules of many kinds were required to enable people to live their lives in an orderly way. In an organic, rural society the rules of a given social group will be based on its evolving social norms. This is not necessarily the case in a more differentiated society; prohibitions may be imposed by those in power in the hope of securing obedience through deterrent calculation. Instrumental compliance to these rules is facilitated through incentives and disincentives. Constraint-based compliance include physical constraints (natural or imposed), and social-structural constraints. Normative compliance includes acceptance of or belief in social norms; attachment leading to compliance; and legitimacy. Compliance can be based on habit or routine. 2 figures, 30 notes, 60 references