Neoclassical Criminology Case Study

When someone is cruelly or unjustly targeted for a crime, they become victimized. Once victimized, that person is more likely to be victimized again (Cole 2017). We obtain this information through the National Crime Victimization Survey collected by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The NCVS collects information about crimes that have or have not been reported and their reasoning why (Bureau of Justice Statistics 2015). People are surveyed, twice a year for three years, about if they were victimized and then asked to elaborate if they were. Through this survey, certain trends are apparent. Traits such as age, race, or gender have an influence on your chances for victimization. An African American Male child would have the highest chances of

Classical criminology blames free will for any crime committed and, therefore, required that whoever was guilty take responsibility for their actions. There was a religious influence on deciding whether or not you were guilty and with little rights, every accused had the odds stacked against them (Cole 2017). This was before society had a means of clearly understanding of psychological, biological, and social factors affecting a person. Neoclassical criminology rose after this during the nineteenth century. As people grew more conservative, so did the courts. They viewed criminals as self aware and had choices. A criminal’s rights were better protected until convicted as The Supreme Court enacted many laws to maintain a fair criminal justice system, such as Miranda Rights. The Miranda Rights is a phrase that every officer must state upon arresting someone, so the accused is aware of their rights (Oyez 2017). Positivist criminology remains the most popular , as it takes the individual's specific needs into consideration to see why this crime occurred and if they need help. Science has become more reliable and in-depth to the point where we can detect a tumor that would be causing abnormals actions. Science also allows us to treat and rehabilitate criminals, so they are not reincarcerated. The

Crime is expensive. Taxes help pay for some of the dues of the criminal justice process. Crimes can cause property damages, causing for the victim to be compensated. There are also psychological cost to crime. Paying for psychologist for things like trauma or emotional damages after a crime has been committed has quite a price. Even though it would be advised that all victims obtain this treatment, due to its cost or skepticalness, people fail to get or maintain their full treatment. Crime also causes fear. Once someone has been mistreated, they lose trust in their protection. This can cause stress to build up and people start to avoid contact and limit where they go (Cole 2017). This produces sheltered people with unhealthy habits. People are prevented from living their own lives because of this fear. The news and media do not help this problem too. Media produces information that leads one to believe that victimization is worse than it actually is. Even though crime rate have been steadily decreasing since the 1980s, public opinion believes that crime is an imminent danger all the time (Cole 2017). Fortunately, The Justice For All Act in 2004 helped a number of these matters, including compensation for wrongly convicted and victims. It includes the right to be reasonably protected from the accused, the right to full and timely restitution as provided with the law, and other