Crime
In ordinary language, a crime is an unlawful act punishable by a
The notion that acts such as
The state (
Usually, to be classified as a crime, the "act of doing something criminal" (actus reus) must – with certain exceptions – be accompanied by the "intention to do something criminal" (mens rea).[4]
While every crime violates the law, not every
Definition
Criminology and penology |
---|
Criminal law |
---|
Elements |
Scope of criminal liability |
Severity of offense |
|
Inchoate offenses |
Offense against the person |
Sexual offenses |
Crimes against property |
Crimes against justice |
Crimes against the public |
Crimes against animals |
Crimes against the state |
Defenses to liability |
Other common-law areas |
Portals |
The exact definition of crime is a philosophical issue without an agreed upon answer. Fields such as law, politics, sociology, and psychology define crime in different ways.[6] Crimes may be variously considered as wrongs against individuals, against the community, or against the state.[7] The criminality of an action is dependent on its context; acts of violence will be seen as crimes in many circumstances but as permissible or desirable in others.[8] Crime was historically seen as a manifestation of evil, but this has been superseded by modern criminal theories.[9]
Legalism
Legal and political definitions of crime consider actions that are banned by authorities or punishable by law.[10] Crime is defined by the criminal law of a given jurisdiction, including all actions that are subject to criminal procedure. There is no limit to what can be considered a crime in a legal system, so there may not be a unifying principle used to determine whether an action should be designated as a crime.[11] From a legal perspective, crimes are generally wrong actions that are severe enough to warrant punishment that infringes on the perpetrator's liberties.[12]
English criminal law and the related common law of Commonwealth countries can define offences that the courts alone have developed over the years, without any actual legislation: common law offences. The courts used the concept of malum in se to develop various common law offences.[13]
Sociology
As a sociological concept, crime is associated with actions that cause harm and violate social norms.[14] Under this definition, crime is a type of social construct,[15] and societal attitudes determine what is considered criminal.[16][17]
In legal systems based on
Paternalism defines crime not only as harm to others or to society, but also as harm to the self.[18]
Psychology
Psychological definitions consider the state of mind of perpetrators and their relationship with their environment.[19]
Study
The study of crime is called criminology.
Subfields of criminology and related fields of study include crime prevention, criminal law, crime statistics, anthropological criminology, criminal psychology, criminal sociology, criminal psychiatry, victimology, penology, and forensic science.[22] Besides sociology, criminology is often associated with law and psychology.[23]
Information and statistics about crime in a given jurisdiction are collected as crime estimates, typically produced by national or international agencies. Methods to collect crime statistics may vary, even between jurisdictions within the same nation.[24] Under-reporting of crime is common, particularly in developing nations.[25] Victim studies may be used to determine the frequency of crime in a given population.[24]
Foundational systems
Natural-law theory
Justifying the state's use of force to coerce compliance with its laws has proven a consistent theoretical problem. One of the earliest justifications involved the theory of natural law. This posits that the nature of the world or of human beings underlies the standards of morality or constructs them. Thomas Aquinas wrote in the 13th century: "the rule and measure of human acts is the reason, which is the first principle of human acts".[26] He regarded people as by nature rational beings, concluding that it becomes morally appropriate that they should behave in a way that conforms to their rational nature. Thus, to be valid, any law must conform to natural law and coercing people to conform to that law is morally acceptable. In the 1760s, William Blackstone described the thesis:[27]
- "This law of nature, being co-eval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original."
But
Thus the necessary and sufficient conditions for the truth of a proposition of law involved internal logic and consistency, and that the state's agents used state power with responsibility. Ronald Dworkin rejects Hart's theory and proposes that all individuals should expect the equal respect and concern of those who govern them as a fundamental political right. He offers a theory of compliance overlaid by a theory of deference (the citizen's duty to obey the law) and a theory of enforcement, which identifies the legitimate goals of enforcement and punishment. Legislation must conform to a theory of legitimacy, which describes the circumstances under which a particular person or group is entitled to make law, and a theory of legislative justice, which describes the law they are entitled or obliged to make.[29]
There are natural-law theorists who have accepted the idea of enforcing the prevailing morality as a primary function of the law.[30] This view entails the problem that it makes any moral criticism of the law impossible: if conformity with natural law forms a necessary condition for legal validity, all valid law must, by definition, count as morally just. Thus, on this line of reasoning, the legal validity of a norm necessarily entails its moral justice.[31]
History
Early history
Restrictions on behavior existed in all prehistoric societies.[32] Crime in early human society was seen as a personal transgression and was addressed by the community as a whole rather than through a formal legal system,[33] often through the use of custom, religion, or the rule of a tribal leader.[34] Some of the oldest extant writings are ancient criminal codes.[33] The earliest known criminal code was the Code of Ur-Nammu (c. 2100 – c. 2050 BC),[citation needed] and the known first criminal code that incorporated retaliatory justice was the Code of Hammurabi.[35] The latter influenced the conception of crime across several civilizations over the following millennia.[36]
The Romans systematized law and applied their system across the Roman Empire. The initial rules of Roman law regarded assaults as a matter of private compensation. The most significant Roman law concept involved dominion.[37] Most acts recognized as crimes in ancient societies, such as violence and theft, have persisted to the modern era.[38] The criminal justice system of Imperial China existed unbroken for over 2,000 years.[39]
Many of the earliest conceptions of crime are associated with
Post-classical era
In
Common law first developed in England under the rule of Henry II in the 12th century. He established a system of traveling judges that tried accused criminals in each region of England by applying precedent from previous rulings.[44] Legal developments in 12th century England also resulted in the earliest known recording of official crime data.[33]
Modern era
In the modern era, crime came to be seen as an issue affecting society rather than conflicts between individuals. Writers such as
The concept of crime underwent a period of change as modernism was widely accepted in the years following World War II. Crime increasingly came to be seen as a societal issue, and criminal law was seen as a means to protect the public from antisocial behavior. This idea was associated with a larger trend in the western world toward social democracy and centre-left politics.[47]
Through most of history, reporting of crime was generally local. The advent of mass media through radio and television in the mid-20th century allowed for the sensationalism of crime. This created well-known stories of criminals such as Jeffrey Dahmer, and it allowed for dramatization that perpetuates misconceptions about crime.[48] Forensic science was popularized in the 1980s, establishing DNA profiling as a new method to prevent and analyze crime.[49]
Types
Violent crime
Violent crime is crime that involves an act of violent
Property crime
Common examples of property crime include burglary, theft, and vandalism.[53][54]
Examples of financial crimes include
Public order crime
Public order crime is crime that violates a society's norms about what constitutes socially acceptable behavior. Examples of public order crimes include
Political crime
Political crime is crime that directly challenges or threatens the state. Examples of political crimes include subversion, rebellion, treason, mutiny, espionage, sedition, terrorism, riot, and unlawful assembly. Political crimes are associated with the political agenda of a given state, and they are necessarily applied against political dissidents.[62] Due to their unique relation to the state, political crimes are often encouraged by one nation against another, and it is political alignment rather than the act itself that determines criminality.[63][64] State crime that is carried out by the state to repress law-abiding citizens may also be considered political crime.[65]
Inchoate crime
Inchoate crime is crime that is carried out in anticipation of other illegal actions but does not cause direct harm. Examples of inchoate crimes include attempt and conspiracy. Inchoate crimes are defined by substantial action to facilitate a crime with the intention of the crime's occurrence. This is distinct from simple preparation for or consideration of criminal activity. They are unique in that renunciation of criminal intention is generally enough to absolve the perpetrator of criminal liability, as their actions are no longer facilitating a potential future crime.[66]
Participants
Criminal
A criminal is an individual who commits a crime. What constitutes a criminal can vary depending on the context and the law, and it often carries a pejorative connotation.[67] Criminals are often seen as embodying certain stereotypes or traits and are seen as a distinct type of person from law-abiding citizens. Despite this, no mental or physical trend is identifiable that differentiates criminals from non-criminals.[68] Public response to criminals may be indignant or sympathetic. Indignant responses involve resentment and a desire for vengeance, wishing to see criminals removed from society or made to suffer for harm that they cause. Sympathetic responses involve compassion and understanding, seeking to rehabilitate or forgive criminals and absolve them of blame.[69]
Victim
A victim is an individual who has been treated unjustly or made to suffer.
Several factors affect an individual's likelihood of becoming a victim. Some factors may cause victims of crime to experience short-term or long-term "repeat victimization".[73][74] Common long-term victims are those that have close relationships with the criminal, manifesting in crimes such as domestic violence, embezzlement, child abuse, and bullying. Repeat victimization may also occur when a potential victim appears to be a viable target, such as when indicating wealth in a less affluent region.[73] Many of the traits that indicate criminality also indicate victimality; victims of crime are more likely to engage in unlawful behavior and respond to provocation. Overall demographic trends of victims and criminals are often similar, and victims are more likely to have engaged in criminal activities themselves.[75][76]
The victims may only want compensation for the injuries suffered, while remaining indifferent to a possible desire for
Criminal law
Virtually all countries in the 21st century have criminal law grounded in
Criminalization
The state determines what actions are considered criminal in the scope of the law.[82] Criminalization has significant human rights considerations, as it can infringe on rights of autonomy and subject individuals to unjust punishment.[83]
Criminal justice
Law enforcement
The enforcement of criminal law seeks to prevent crime and sanction crimes that do occur. This enforcement is carried out by the state through law enforcement agencies, such as police, which are empowered to arrest suspected perpetrators of crimes.[84] Law enforcement may focus on policing individual crimes, or it may focus on bringing down overall crime rates.[85] One common variant, community policing, seeks to prevent crime by integrating police into the community and public life.[86]
Criminal procedure
When the perpetrator of a crime is found guilty of the crime, the state delivers a sentence to determine the penalty for the crime.[87]
Corrections and punishment
Authorities may respond to crime through corrections, carrying out punishment as a means to censure the criminal act.[88] Punishment is generally reserved for serious offenses. Individuals regularly engage in activity that could be scrutinized under criminal law but are deemed inconsequential.[89] Retributive justice seeks to create a system of accountability and punish criminals in a way that knowingly causes suffering.[90] This may arise out of a feeling that criminals deserve to suffer and that punishment should exist for its own sake. The existence of punishment also creates an effect of deterrence that discourages criminal action for fear of punishment.[91]
Developed nations are less likely to use physical punishments. Instead, they will impose financial penalties or imprisonment.[61] In places with widespread corruption or limited rule of law, crime may be punished extralegally through mob rule and lynching.[95]
Whether a crime can be resolved through financial compensation varies depending on the culture and the specific context of the crime. Historically, many societies have absolved acts of homicide through compensation to the victim's relatives.[96]
Liability
If a crime is committed, the individual responsible is considered to be liable for the crime. For liability to exist, the individual must be capable of understanding the criminal process and the relevant authority must have legitimate power to establish what constitutes a crime.[97]
International criminal law
International criminal law typically addresses serious offenses, such as
Causes and correlates
Basic analysis of criminal behavior is determined by a
Social factors similarly affect the likelihood of criminal activity.[25] Crime corresponds heavily with social integration; groups that are less integrated with society or that are forcibly integrated with society are more likely to engage in crime.[102] Involvement in the community, such as through a church, decreases the likelihood of crime, while associating with criminals increases the likelihood of becoming a criminal as well.[25]
There is no known
Public perception
Crime is often a high priority political issue in developed countries, regardless of the country's crime rates. People that are not regularly exposed to crime most often experience it through media, including news reporting and crime fiction.[105] Exposure of crime through news stories is associated with alarmism and inaccurate perceptions of crime trends. Selection bias in new stories about criminals significantly over-represent the prevalence of violent crime, and news reporting will often overemphasize a specific type of crime for a period of time, creating a "crime wave" effect.[106]
As public opinion of morality changes over time, actions that were once condemned as crimes may be considered justifiable.[107]
See also
Notes
- ^ a b "Crime". Oxford English Dictionary Second Edition on CD-ROM. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2009.
- ^ ).
- ^ In the United Kingdom, for instance, the definitions provided by section 243(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and by the Schedule to the Prevention of Crimes Act 1871.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-19-860756-4.
- ^ Easton, Mark (17 June 2010). "What is crime?". BBC News. Archived from the original on 27 February 2013. Retrieved 10 June 2013.
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 30–37.
- ^ Ashworth & Horder 2013, pp. 2–3.
- ^ Fattah 1997, p. 49.
- ^ a b c Sumner 2004, p. 5.
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 31–35.
- ISSN 0143-6503.
- ^ Ashworth & Horder 2013, pp. 1–2.
- ^ Canadian Law Dictionary, John A. Yogis, Q.C., Barrons: 2003
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 35–36.
- ^ Sumner 2004, p. 3.
- ^ a b c Fattah 1997, p. 29.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 10.
- ^ a b Fattah 1997, p. 38.
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 36–37.
- ^ "Criminology". UCAS. 2021-07-27. Retrieved 2023-07-03.
- ^ ISSN 0360-0572.
- ^ Hoefnagels 1973, pp. 57–66.
- ^ Pease 2010, p. 7.
- ^ S2CID 153397453.
- ^ ISSN 0014-2921.
- OCLC 50423002.
- OCLC 4832359.
- OCLC 31410701.
- OCLC 4313351.
- ISBN 978-0199599141. Archivedfrom the original on 2019-08-06. Retrieved 2019-07-17.
The moral standards...which Dworkin (in line with natural law theory) treats as capable of being morally objective & true, thus function as a direct source of law and...as already law, except when their fit with the whole set of social-fact sources in the relevant community is so weak that it would be more accurate (according to Dworkin) to say that judges who apply them are applying morality not law.
- .
...it was part of the task of a legal theorist to explain the 'normativity' or 'authority' of law, by which they meant 'our sense that 'legal' norms provide agents with special reasons for acting, reasons they would not have if the norm were not a 'legal' one'...this may be a matter calling more for a psychological or sociological explanation, rather than a philosophical one.
- ^ a b Roth 2014, p. 18.
- ^ a b c Roth 2014, p. 9.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 46.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 26.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 47.
- OCLC 22054.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 42.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 36.
- ^ a b Roth 2014, p. 8.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 64.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 84, 91–94.
- ^ Roth 2014, pp. 97–105.
- ^ Roth 2014, pp. 63–64.
- ^ Davie 2010, pp. 23–24.
- ^ Davie 2010, p. 38.
- ^ Sumner 2004, pp. 4–5.
- ^ Fattah 1997, p. 14.
- ^ Davie 2010, p. 43.
- ^ .
- S2CID 210251609.
- ^ Bricknell, Samantha (2008). Trends in violent crime (PDF) (Report). Australian Institute of Criminology.
- .
- ^ Van den Bogaard, Joop; Wiegman, Oene (1991). "Property Crime Victimization: The Effectiveness of Police Services for Victims of Residential Burglary". Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 6 (6): 329–362.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 13.
- ^ Sara Baase, A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computing and The Internet. Third Ed. "Employee Crime" (2008)
- ^ Skogan 2012, pp. 173–174.
- ^ Skogan 2012, p. 173.
- S2CID 222817127.
- ^ Tonry 2011, p. 3.
- ^ a b c Roth 2014, p. 11.
- ^ Head 2016, p. 1.
- ^ Hoefnagels 1973, p. 111.
- ^ Head 2016, p. 2.
- ^ Ross 2003, pp. 3–4.
- ^ Cahill, Michael T. (2011–2012). "Defining Inchoate Crime: An Incomplete Attempt". Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law. 9: 751.
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 123–124.
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 125–126.
- ^ Hoefnagels 1973, pp. 16–17.
- ^ Spalek 2017, p. 4.
- ^ a b Spalek 2017, p. 3.
- PMID 20419728.
- ^ a b Bottoms & Costello 2010, pp. 674–675.
- ^ Fattah 1997, p. 153.
- ^ Fattah 1997, p. 150.
- ^ Spalek 2017, p. 2.
- ^ See Polinsky & Shavell (1997) on the fundamental divergence between the private and the social motivation for using the legal system.
- ^ See Polinsky (1980) on the enforcement of fines
- ^ a b Girgen, Jen (2003). "The Historical and Contemporary Prosecution and Punishment of Animals". Animal Law Journal. 9: 97. Archived from the original on 29 December 2019. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 48.
- ^ Roth 2014, pp. 23–24.
- ^ Ashworth & Horder 2013, p. 22.
- ^ Ashworth & Horder 2013, pp. 32–33.
- S2CID 153944387.
- ^ O'Neill 2010, pp. 485–486.
- ^ O'Neill 2010, p. 487.
- ^ Ashworth & Horder 2013, p. 18.
- ^ Hoefnagels 1973, p. 138.
- ^ Hoefnagels 1973, p. 133.
- ^ Hoefnagels 1973, pp. 17–18.
- ^ Ashworth & Horder 2013, p. 16.
- ^ Lipsey, Landenberger & Chapman 2004, p. 211.
- ^ Lipsey, Landenberger & Chapman 2004, pp. 212–213.
- ^ Lipsey, Landenberger & Chapman 2004, p. 215.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 24.
- ^ Roth 2014, p. 23.
- ISSN 0143-6503.
- ISSN 0938-5428.
- ^ Bantekas & Nash 2009, pp. 2–3.
- ^ Bantekas & Nash 2009, p. 6.
- ^ Bantekas & Nash 2009, pp. 10–11.
- ^ Sumner 2004, pp. 5–6.
- ^ Davie 2010, pp. 44–45.
- S2CID 145215732.
- ^ Fattah 1997, p. 4.
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 14–16.
- ^ Fattah 1997, pp. 63–64.
References
- Ashworth, Andrew; Horder, Jeremy (2013). Principles of Criminal Law (7th ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199672684.
- Bantekas, Ilias; Nash, Susan (2009). International Criminal Law. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9781135241803.
- Fattah, Ezzat A. (1997). Criminology: Past, Present and Future: A Critical Overview. Palgrave Macmillan UK. ISBN 9781349258383.
- Head, Michael (2016). Crimes Against the State: From Treason to Terrorism. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9781317157939.
- Hoefnagels, G. Peter (1973). The Other Side of Criminology. Springer Netherlands. ISBN 9789026806698.
- Polinsky, A. Mitchell. (1980). "Private versus Public Enforcement of Fines". The Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. IX, No. 1, (January), pp. 105–127.
- Polinsky, A. Mitchell & Shavell, Steven. (1997). On the Disutility and Discounting of Imprisonment and the Theory of Deterrence, NBER Working Papers 6259, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ross, Jeffrey Ian (2003). The Dynamics of Political Crime. SAGE Publications. ISBN 9780803970458.
- Roth, Mitchel P. (2014). An Eye for an Eye: A Global History of Crime and Punishment. Reaktion Books. ISBN 978-1-78023-359-8.
- Shoham, Shlomo Giora; Knepper, Paul; Kett, Martin, eds. (2010). International Handbook of Criminology. CRC Press. ISBN 9781420085525.
- Pease, Ken. "Crime Science". In Shoham, Knepper & Kett (2010), pp. 3–22.
- Davie, Neil. "Born for Evil? Biological Theories of Crime in Historical Perspective". In Shoham, Knepper & Kett (2010), pp. 23–49.
- O'Neill, Megan. "The Police Response to Crime". In Shoham, Knepper & Kett (2010), pp. 483–510.
- Bottoms, Anthony E.; Costello, Andrew. "Understanding Repeat Victimization: A Longitudinal Study". In Shoham, Knepper & Kett (2010), pp. 649–680.
- Spalek, Basia (2017). Crime Victims: Theory, Policy and Practice (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 9781137505330.
- Sumner, Colin, ed. (2004). The Blackwell Companion to Criminology. Wiley. ISBN 9780631220923.
- Lipsey, Mark W.; Landenberger, Nana A.; Chapman, Gabrielle L. "Rehabilitation: An Assessment of Theory and Research". In Sumner (2004), pp. 211–227.
- Tonry, Michael, ed. (2011). The Oxford Handbook of Crime and Public Policy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199940264.
- Welsh, Brandon C.; Farrington, David P., eds. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Crime Prevention. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199940783.
- Skogan, Wesley G. "Disorder and Crime". In Welsh & Farrington (2012), pp. 173–188.
External links
- Crime at Curlie