REACTION PAPER ON CLASSICAL CRIMINOLOGY

The classical school by Beccaria generally places emphasis on the individual

suggesting that we have the ability to make our own choices and that crime in society is
a product of an individuals free will. Unknown. (Unknown). Beccarias Theory.
Beccarias theory is not really concerned with the nature of the criminal, but with
delivering justice. He believed that behaviour is determined by hedonism which is
known as the pleasure pain principle. This is where if the pain outweighs the pleasure,
then you wont commit crime.

The classical school states that we need a more equitable form of law and
introduced a programme of law reforms. It is said that social order is based on law and
not religion; punishment should be prompt because if it is not prompt, then the individual
has not learned their lesson. This punishment should be proportional to the harm
caused to society. The classical school is considered a good alternative to a system
based on fear and control as the new system is more reasonable and just. It also
provided a benchmark for other theories to develop and compare. However, it fails to
take into account why individuals commit crime e.g. social and environmental factors. It
also raised questions such as do we always have free will and are we all equal in
society, suggesting that children and mental health patients fail to acknowledge that
social reason affect rationality.

One contentious area within criminology is the idea that the criminal is 'normal'.
Jeremy Bentham, a Classical thinker, argues that this is indeed the case. Criminals are
'normal' in that they are rational, calculated decision-makers just like everybody else.
Individuals have free-will and they are guided by a hedonistic calculus - the
maximization of pleasure and the minimization of pain. Such idea suggests that before
engaging in criminal activity, the criminal calculates whether the reward outweighs the
risk. i.e., is the potential pleasure worth the potential punishment? However, what this
assumption fails to consider is that criminality can sometimes be a spontaneous
reaction; it's not always a pre-meditated one. People may act out of pure desperation;
giving little thought to the consequences should he/she be caught. An ideal to support
this would be the clichd scenario in which an individual steals a loaf of bread to feed
his/her starving family. Such action involves no particular thought process; they do what
they do simply because they wish to survive. However, that's not to say that rational
choice is not apparent. It does have relevance to certain crimes, especially crimes such
as burglary in which a planning process is undergone beforehand to avoid detection and
significantly increase the chances of a successful sweep, such as observations of home
security and patterns in daily comings and goings.