I found the classical school paradigm video had a lot of facts that I wasn’t aware about. The criminal contrast theorists challenged the demonic perspective that was in Europe for over a thousand years. This in turn caused the basis of criminal justice policies throughout Europe. These policies were seen as a protest against the demonic perspective. The demonic perspective saw that it was sinful to do crime therefore the state had power to make gruesome punishments upon criminals. They did this because the state thought they were acting in the place of God to make decisions on punishments. To me, this would be a scary time to live in as a small “crime” could result in a brutal punishment. I found it interesting that Beccaria might of had a influence in the French Revolution in 1776 due to his political writings. He was seen as a protest writer. Beccaria’s points for how the criminal system should work is interesting. His first point is that Legislators should define crimes and what their punishments should be. His second point was that Judges should follow the law and he argued that judges should have no discretion among others. The most interesting point of his that I agree with is that excessive severity fails to deter crime, rather it might increase it. The last point I found interesting was that a crime seriousness should be determined by the extent of the harm caused by that crime on society. Overall, I thought this video provided a lot of facts that I didn’t know before and gave some insight into the roots of the criminal justice system. -CUBSFAN007
I agree with you knowing that I would not have wanted to live during this time period because in a sense it was a scary time. Basically a period of fear because most people were afraid to be punished for something so minor. So minor that it is probably considered a petty crime in our time. Even thought crime is considered a sin that gives no right to punish more severely then what the crime was. That wouldn't be the act of god, it would be showing more dominance and who has the power of the state. Obviously you wouldn't want to live in fear and that was probably shown during this time. hollywood007
I agree with you when you say that this would be a scary time to live in. Nearly every crime that was committed was followed by a horrible punishment of torture. People would have to go to bed and wake up every day/night of their lives hoping that some small thing that they did was not seen as a crime. What is even more crazy about this is the fact that the small crimes received the same punishment as the big crimes most of the time. It did not matter what the crime was, all that mattered was that someone committed a crime, so they would have to face their punishment of torture. -Fozz007
This video had a lot of facts to offer, and classical theory was in the background. In Europe, religion was the dominating influence in people lives. The church was looked to as the decision maker when it came to punishments. Punishments were severe, and were believed to be deemed appropriate to fit the crime. People were either imprisoned, tortured or both, often to till death. All under the auspices of this is God’s will, and God’s will must be done. In all instances the punishments did not fit the crime, and people were needlessly tortured, killed, or physically maimed the rest of their lives. Yet, all this is unnecessary because Becaria said that excessive punishment does not deter crime. The church had too much influence on society because there was no real separation of church and state. People had rough lives, and committed crimes just to survive. The thing to keep in mind is that fear is tool that has constantly been used to keep people in line. Becaria came along, and said that state and federal governments are responsible for creating laws and punishments for breaking those laws. Judges interpret those laws and sets the punishment to fit the crime. Therefore, punishment has been taken out of the hands of the church and placed within the legislative body of government. This had no effect in preventing or deterring crime. In a way, nothing deters crime except being vigilant and alert. Criminal Justice has evolved since the time when the church was, judge, jury, and executioner. The criminal justice system is a work in progress. There is always more than one way to look at problem or an issue. Having solutions are important, but learning how to reach those solutions are what is truly important. In the end the goal, is to better humanity.----YouMustAcquit007--
I agree that the criminal justice system is still a work in progress, but I am so thankful that it has come this far in todays society. I can not even imagine how terrible it must have been living back in that day and age when the church was in charge of punishments for crimes. It is insane how crazy sever their punishments were. Sometimes even torturing a person to death. Im so thankful for out criminal justice system. -KiiNG007
There were many facts in this video that made me think a bit more about the classical theory. First the spiritualistic approach dominated european thinking for a thousand years. Which was the basis for most criminal policies. The thing that shocked me the most was that since crime was a sin to god this gave the criminal justice system the right to do gruesome tortures to people who committed crime because it was acting in the place of god. This was appalling to me because what if someone did a small crime that hurt no one in the process. They could possible be hurt worse than there crime. So basically the punishments were not fitting the crime which is shocking. I believe no one would have wanted to live during this time period. Becaria created a book that had a few key points that should be taken into consideration. The first point is that legislators should define crimes and define specific punishments. But the role of judges should determine the guilt of the person but have no discretion among others. There job is to follow the law. The biggest point he made and what made his book important was that severity doesn't deter crime but rather increases it. Which is a big point to be made. His last point he made was that the serious of the crime should be determined by the harm that it made to society. Which is also a big key point to take away because it is only right that the punishment fits the crime. A big thing from this book is that severity is not very important. It is certainty that is the most important for a criminal. So by this he points out that laws obviously should be published so the public will know. Throughout the years his theory has fallen in and out of favor until it was actually tested in 1968. This video pointed out a lot of good facts and points that are important to know for the classical theory. It is important to know these key facts when studying this major because it is a big part of the criminal justice system. hollywood007
I found the spiritualistic approach in Europe interesting. It was especially interesting because they used this approach to inflict grousom tourture. I wonder If when the American constitution was written they included that cruel and unusable punishment would be outlawed. I also found it interesting that Baccaria thought capital punishment should be abolished with one exception. I wonder how Baccaria felt about the tourture methods used with the spiritualistic government. -11Bravo
I learned many new things that I did not know about classical criminology thanks to this video. The first thing I learned was the fact that state viewed criminal acts as sins for the devil towards god. Because of this, the state took their own action against crime. If a crime was committed, the state would actually torture the criminal to try and act in the name of god. So, someone who got caught stealing would face some form of horrible torture. Also, someone who killed an individual would face either the same or a different form of horrible torture. Regardless of the severity of the crime that was committed, torture was the punishment that would be enforced onto the person. Another thing I learned was the fact that excessive severity failed to deter crime, as it actually increased it. Criminals knew that no matter what criminal act they did, they would have to face a horrid punishment. So, instead of committing just one crime, criminals would go out and commit some of the worst crimes ever seen, knowing that they are going to receive the same punishment as they would have received just by committing one crime. This would have been an absolutely horrible time to be alive during. People would have had to live in fear every single day of their lives, fearing for the horrific punishments that they could possibly receive. Going to bed and waking up, hoping that they were not found guilty of something that could not even be remotely close to being a crime. Even the simplest of crimes, even acts committed by the people could have been seen as a crime, which the state viewed all crimes as sins. Therefore, the smallest possible thing that could have been considered a crime would still have to face a punishment involving torture. Thanks to this video, I learned how criminology started and how it has evolved and become what it is today. -Fozz007
I also like that in the video they talked about how the excessive punishment hardly ever was able to deter crime and it even could increase the amount of crime. I also learned a lot I did not know about Classical criminology from this video and one of those was that the state was able to act as God upon criminals by giving out very harsh punishments even if it was something as simple as stealing on one end and as horrible as murder on the other often times the gap between those two punishments would not be as great as it is today. RHB007
I found this video very interesting and very informative because it shared a lot a facts from how many criminal justice organizations have been derived from. It’s not shocking that the first form of so-called criminal punishment was based purely off of spiritualistic views in England. Religion back then essentially govern everything in their lives including how they treated their criminals. Crime back then was a sin to God and this gave their criminal justice system the right to do gruesome things to people who have committed a crime and it was said in the video they took the place of acting as God when punishing people for crime. Often times the punishment the crime the offender could have Committed a small crime that did not hurt any person and the punishment might inflict pain on the offender even though no pain was inflicted on anyone by the offender. It was very interesting that the video said Beccaria’s writings may have had an effect on the French revolution 1789. He was very popular and inspirational because he wrote about fair punishments and why people commit crimes. This is why many new criminal justice organizations at the time used and builded off of his theories. Our founding fathers even took into account his publications when establishing forms of punishment. Just like we had talked about in class and in the book he points out that oftentimes excessive punishment does not in fact deter crime. This just really stood out to me because we talked in class the other day about how and why strict punishment does not deter the crime goes with and often times it leads to even more. RHB007
I see where you are coming from in that you did not find it surprising that the criminal justice punishment in England was based off spiritual views. From many history classed that I have taken I also do not find it surprising that they delivered punishment on spiritual views. I do not find it surprising but I do find it interesting that they did. They were supposed to be a highly sophisticated society so it is interesting to me that they were basing punishment on spiritual beliefs. I also found it really interesting that Beccaria’s book might have had an in the French and American revolutionary war. -ClarkKent007
I agree with you on the point that in that time period religion ruled most peoples lives and became an issue in and toward society itself. That is essentially the sole reason that the concept of church and state was de eloped in our current day justice system and has helped to improve our society in monumental ways. Gray007
I had watched the video with Jacob Cooper before this one, they had a similar approach to the information they gave. Even though I had watched the video with Jacob Cooper I still learned more interesting facts that I had no idea of. What was interesting that this video states is how long demonic perspective on crime lasted. It lasted over a thousand years, in that period the state could inflict punishment that was cruel and unusual because they saw crime as a sin. They could inflict these types of punishments because they said they acted in the place of God. By giving the back story of how Classical criminology came to be it helps shed light on how impactful it was back then and now. With Classical Criminology the punishment cannot exceed the weight of the crime committed. This helps stop biasness in harsh punishments. It also helps stop people from trying to get out of a crime by saying they were possessed. When Beccaria published his book in 1764 there was evidence that it gave influence to our founding Fathers for a new criminal justice system. That is interesting that one man can influence our nation and even France. With this new criminal justice system influencing the United States and France it then spread throughout the rest of the industrialized world. An interesting point that he makes is that the severity of the crime does not deter the crime itself but actual increases it. Before I watched this video I would have thought it to be the other way around. That the severity of the crime would stop a criminal from doing such act. After I watched this video I now agree with that logic that the severity of the crime does not stop the crime. Criminals are going to commit more crimes because they are already going to get in trouble so why stop just for that one. -ClarkKent007
I agree with you. And out of both videos I got that people didn't feel that the crimes that they committed were because of them. They felt that factors, or higher powers were the reasons that they committed criminal acts. I also agree with your statement " the severity of the crime does not stop the crime". I feel that if these criminals are not stopped for what they do, they'll just keep doing it since punishment was not received. okurrr007
The demonic perspective was a concept held in Europe that essentially allowed law to be enforced to the fullest extent upon any punishment. They believed that since its written that god saw all crime as a sin it justified unnecessarily harmful and severe punishments. This is an insanely outdated concept rightfully so for more reasons than one. Sentencing a shoplifter to the death penalty for example is a little absurd and in my opinion its slight overkill. Bacardi played arguably the largest role in changing these ideals. One of the many points he argued was that the more severe the punishments are the more severe the crimes develop to be. Meaning for example if someone is going to receive the death penalty upon any and every crime committed, rather than just robbing the bank they may also kill every witness because at that point they have nothing to lose. The punishment will, in theory, be equally as severe either way so to the criminal it may seem safer to eliminate any witnesses as a way to keep himself from being caught. This in turn condtradicts the goal the demonic perspective has intended. Bacardi believed that the punishment of the crime should match the nature of the crime and no more or less, otherwise it wouldn’t yield results. Three things that have been proven to help produce results in lowering crime rates are the certainty, celerity, and severity of the punishment, none of which matter without the other two. They need to maintain a healthy balance for it to be effective. The certainty of the punishment wouldn’t matter if it were just a slap on the wrist, but the severity wouldn’t matter if it wasn’t certain, and neither would matter if the punishment is delayed. There needs to be balance. Gray007
Hi, I like what you had to say in regards to people being ruled by the church. In how to live, what they are allowed to do and not do. There was no proper logical explanation for why torture was carried out other than it is punishment for doing things that God does not like. Something clicks that whatever is happening needs to change. The times change and so do the punishments that reflect the changes in laws. Society is full of people who are going through different phases of their life, therefore the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems are in existence. –YouMustAcquit007--
What I'm getting is that both of these criminology terms do not feel that the individuals feel that they are the reason that THEY committed the crime but someone else made them? This is saying that the devil is the reason crimes are being committed? In this video, unlike the other I got that people did receive punishment. I do agree that the crime that you committed should be equal to the punishment. You committed a criminal act so accept the punishment. There indeed should be a type of penalty for what you did. Watching these videos I feel that people should take up for their own actions. I agree with him when he says "the severity of punishment of itself emboldens men to commit the very wrong". I interpreted that as saying basically if they are not stopped for certain crimes, they are going to continue to do whatever they want to until they receive some type of punishment for THEIR actions. I'm very religious and do not agree with the devil being the cause of their actions. If you're a true believer of God, the crimes would not have been committed in the first place. I also don't feel that this type of criminology should've been around because in the video it basically said if harm wasn't done to anyone during the crime people should be able to be let go. That's what I got out of this video. Cost of crime exceeds rewards. Best statement in this video to me. This video gave me the idea that people did get some type of punishments for their crimes. They felt that the punishment given were as if they we given from God. Crimes were compared as sins. Doing wrong, receiving the punishment. In Europe classical criminology was practiced for thousands of years. okurrr007
This video made me think hard about how the punishment should definitely always fit the crime. Watching this short documentary also made me realize how lucky we are that cruel and unusual punishment is no longer allowed, although death penalty is sometimes considered cruel and unusual. Punishments in medieval times were usually very cruel and inhumane and often resulted in a painful death. These punishments often didn’t fit the crime, but back then a prison system probably was not a thing, and if it was then it likely did not have room for a lot of people, so they just killed offenders. Additionally electricity was not really a thing, and chemicals, IV lines, and the like were not around yet either. This left your options to being stabbed, beheaded, etc, but even then that is better than some of the other punishments. In addition to the the banning of unusual punishments, today’s punishments do fit the crime (usually). A speeding ticket does not end with your death. Maybe the death of your bank account but, that is recoverable. If I understood correctly this video taught me that the church was against Beccaria’s ideas, which means the church was for the old style of doing things. Redranger007
We are so lucky to not have these cruel punishments. It's crazy to think of the situations people had to go through, back in the day. I do believe they had prisons back in the day. Just because Beccaria had to write an essay on it, but I agree that they probably didn't have a lot of room, or money to keep people in. It was probably worst to be incarcerated then to be killed honestly. The church was very weird, and really needed to be reformed. The whole, faith and laws go together crap really messed up a lot of good peoples lives. ^~^Itis007
Wow! Okay, this video was really informational on a lot of things. First off, I honestly didn't know how bad our justice system was back in the day. I knew that he had the death sentence used a lot, but I had no idea that we would torture people. Or, that we would have some many unjust, or unfair punishments for certain crimes. In today's world that would be unheard of, and would get people into a lot of trouble! The times before, we focused way to much on “evil beings” or “spirits.” Although, it seems the people implementing these punishments were under the control of an evil spirit. Beccaria is a really good person who could see how bais the justice system was at the time. I truly do believe he did play a part in the revolutions that happen, along with a lot of other factors as well. The pages of his book this video covered is exactly how he structure our own justice system today! It’s crazy to think that people would find what he said to be wrong! Other thing as well, it seems that people in the justice system were looked at as above average citizens, another mistake. These people, or judges were unfairly punishing people, in my opinion, on biases. Main thing to take away from all of this is that, the punishment should match the crime. Otherwise we got kids getting hanged for stealing candy bars! Also, the crime should be considered serious if it is a danger to the public as a whole, and not to just a singular person. Otherwise, its hard to take the whole, everyone is equal statement serious. I see how he is found to be one of the cores to classical criminology. Although, I don’t like the whole “you know what you are doing when committing a crime, and no outside forces should be involved when deciding if you are guilty.” So if someone threaten to kill me unless I killed someone else, then I don’t believe the same punishment should be followed as if I just killed someone for my own desire. ^~^Itis007
I found that this video was very informative on a lot of things! Knowing that our justice system was that bad way back when is sad and scary. I'm happy we have it some what figured out now. Also knowing that crime was a sin to God and that our criminal justice system took advantage of it and tortured people because they were acting in place of God is strange. I knew we had punishments for criminals but I didn't know they tortured people gruesomely. Their punishments were to gruesome to even begin with. If someone got caught stealing they would face terrible punishment even if it was little. This would have been an awful time to live in just knowing that they didn't have the resources we do now and that their punishments were way out of pocket. The church did not want Beccaria's ideas and that they wanted to continue to gruesomely harm people. The church was not matching punishment with crime and that is all Beccaria was trying to do. I personally do not agree that the devil is the cause of their actions, if you believe in what you say you do then no crime should have been committed in the first place. How do they feel that punishment was given from God? When it was said to be a sin? freckles007
I also said that it seems like they were pushing their own agenda rather than deterring crime as far as religion is concerned.You would think that a peaceful god would not want to see someone be punished for something they were taught. Its human nature to do wrong and if they really did read the book then they would have known the he forgives sinners. They were wrong for acting on the part of God because they had no right to take people's lives from them or critically injure them over very minute offenses. It's a good thing we have modernized. GVFF007
This video gave me a broader perspective of classical criminology and how many different things play into it. For instance, in the video it stated that punishments for crimes were decided by the churches because committing a crime was a sin. Back in this time, the people of the church believed that depending on the crime, the punishment should be just as harsh. So pretty much the punishment should fit the crime was a fair way to go about an equal punishment. One thing I liked about this video is that it stated that not every crime that is committed deserved a punishment that would fit the crime because not all criminal acts were strictly that individuals fault one hundred percent. Also the fact that the church had so much power and authority to make decisions whether or not a person should be put to death or imprisoned is insane and wrong in my eyes. Often times the punishment would not fit the crime and the punishment would be severe when the crime was not. In my opinion, I can totally understand why this was a huge issue that they were dealing with. Watching and listening to this video was very eye opening and I am glad that I watched it. It gave me a different viewpoint on the topic. Listening to how they treated people and punished them for their crimes shocked me. I would have hated to live back in that day and age. Anything and everything that you do could be judged and you as an individual would have to be extremely careful everyday to make sure you did not create a sin. I like how our government handles situations a lot more now. I appreciate our government system and their ways of handling punishment. This video was a real eye opener and was very interesting to learn about. -KiiNG007
I thought that was super odd as well. How it is almost like the church took over our courtroom today but back then. I think since there was just not as nearly as much information then as there is now, I believe that is the main issue. Because they probably thought people were committing the acts they were because it was all psychological and that it was a demon possessing them or would come up with a choice to believe it to be that because they could not rationalize why these people that did crimes were so different from the ones that did not. Which in a sense is understandable but to an extent. They thought these people needed punished in such graphic harsh ways as if it almosts proves a point. -notacop007
Well, needless to say the justice system has improved for the better. It's crazy to think that criminals were referred to as demons and the punishers claimed they were acting as God by giving the punishment. When I read this, I could kind of see the relation between the old school and new school because it is the duty of the peace officers to instill fear into criminals in hope that they correct their attitude but I wouldn't go as far to call them demons or relate them to demons. I think the problem in the old justice system was that the enforcement officials did not recognize that it is human nature to do wrong. We all were born knowing that we would mess up somewhere along the line because we would have no other way of knowing whats right or wrong. It is merely a lack of scientific knowledge of how the human body works that fueled this theory and that's also why crime has loosened up lately because there is actual scientific evidence as to why humans act the way they do. The brain is a strange place and not all people learned the same so this frightened the ones who had the rank and officialness so they decided to strictly enforce laws they created and most of the time the punishments were cruel and unusual as if they were actually punishing demons. Could you imagine if the system never changed and we treated modern day criminals as demonic figures who needed to die? It's almost like they had plan to serve their religion and rid of demons rather than deter and mitigate crime. It's a shame that people had to lie through this tie because it's like a tyrannical force that has all the power and call the shots on what's wrong and what's right.GVFF007
I think it is absolutely odd to hear that the old criminal justice system, the classical criminology challenged a more demonic perspective of crime. In the video, it said that the spiritualistic approach dominated European thinking for over a thousand years. It was associated with gruesome tortures and that the state claimed they were acting in the place of God. Beccaria was a protest writer and his writing was accepted by intellectuals. Although at first, he was not accepted by politically powerful groups through Europe. I found this extremely interesting because it is almost like they shunned him because he had different viewpoints and outlooks from them. It is also said that Beccaria's work may have influenced the American Revolution of 1776, as well as the French resolution. He was only 26 years old when he was asked to write this essay on penology. In his book, he stated that legislators should define crimes and specific punishments, judges should follow the law, excessive severity fails to deter crime and may actually increase it; the seriousness of a crime is determined by the extent of harm that it inflicts on society, punishments should be certain,and the purpose of punishment is to deter crime. Crime will absolutely always be a major issue and even with laws and punishments I think there are people out there that are just oddly programmed to not care at all of any punishment received. I think the fact that religion used to be thrown in the factor of why crime is a thing is just odd enough itself. Talking of spiritual and demons and why crime would happen and how we would handle it is just unsettling. In some cultures today, this is thought to be okay. But wide across the United States, this by no means is okay or even would be thought of to be allowed. -notacop007
I found the classical school paradigm video had a lot of facts that I wasn’t aware about. The criminal contrast theorists challenged the demonic perspective that was in Europe for over a thousand years. This in turn caused the basis of criminal justice policies throughout Europe. These policies were seen as a protest against the demonic perspective. The demonic perspective saw that it was sinful to do crime therefore the state had power to make gruesome punishments upon criminals. They did this because the state thought they were acting in the place of God to make decisions on punishments. To me, this would be a scary time to live in as a small “crime” could result in a brutal punishment. I found it interesting that Beccaria might of had a influence in the French Revolution in 1776 due to his political writings. He was seen as a protest writer. Beccaria’s points for how the criminal system should work is interesting. His first point is that Legislators should define crimes and what their punishments should be. His second point was that Judges should follow the law and he argued that judges should have no discretion among others. The most interesting point of his that I agree with is that excessive severity fails to deter crime, rather it might increase it. The last point I found interesting was that a crime seriousness should be determined by the extent of the harm caused by that crime on society. Overall, I thought this video provided a lot of facts that I didn’t know before and gave some insight into the roots of the criminal justice system. -CUBSFAN007
ReplyDeleteI agree with you knowing that I would not have wanted to live during this time period because in a sense it was a scary time. Basically a period of fear because most people were afraid to be punished for something so minor. So minor that it is probably considered a petty crime in our time. Even thought crime is considered a sin that gives no right to punish more severely then what the crime was. That wouldn't be the act of god, it would be showing more dominance and who has the power of the state. Obviously you wouldn't want to live in fear and that was probably shown during this time.
Deletehollywood007
I agree with you when you say that this would be a scary time to live in. Nearly every crime that was committed was followed by a horrible punishment of torture. People would have to go to bed and wake up every day/night of their lives hoping that some small thing that they did was not seen as a crime. What is even more crazy about this is the fact that the small crimes received the same punishment as the big crimes most of the time. It did not matter what the crime was, all that mattered was that someone committed a crime, so they would have to face their punishment of torture.
Delete-Fozz007
This video had a lot of facts to offer, and classical theory was in the background. In Europe, religion was the dominating influence in people lives. The church was looked to as the decision maker when it came to punishments. Punishments were severe, and were believed to be deemed appropriate to fit the crime. People were either imprisoned, tortured or both, often to till death. All under the auspices of this is God’s will, and God’s will must be done. In all instances the punishments did not fit the crime, and people were needlessly tortured, killed, or physically maimed the rest of their lives. Yet, all this is unnecessary because Becaria said that excessive punishment does not deter crime. The church had too much influence on society because there was no real separation of church and state. People had rough lives, and committed crimes just to survive. The thing to keep in mind is that fear is tool that has constantly been used to keep people in line.
DeleteBecaria came along, and said that state and federal governments are responsible for creating laws and punishments for breaking those laws. Judges interpret those laws and sets the punishment to fit the crime. Therefore, punishment has been taken out of the hands of the church and placed within the legislative body of government. This had no effect in preventing or deterring crime. In a way, nothing deters crime except being vigilant and alert.
Criminal Justice has evolved since the time when the church was, judge, jury, and executioner. The criminal justice system is a work in progress. There is always more than one way to look at problem or an issue. Having solutions are important, but learning how to reach those solutions are what is truly important. In the end the goal, is to better humanity.----YouMustAcquit007--
I agree that the criminal justice system is still a work in progress, but I am so thankful that it has come this far in todays society. I can not even imagine how terrible it must have been living back in that day and age when the church was in charge of punishments for crimes. It is insane how crazy sever their punishments were. Sometimes even torturing a person to death. Im so thankful for out criminal justice system. -KiiNG007
DeleteThere were many facts in this video that made me think a bit more about the classical theory. First the spiritualistic approach dominated european thinking for a thousand years. Which was the basis for most criminal policies. The thing that shocked me the most was that since crime was a sin to god this gave the criminal justice system the right to do gruesome tortures to people who committed crime because it was acting in the place of god. This was appalling to me because what if someone did a small crime that hurt no one in the process. They could possible be hurt worse than there crime. So basically the punishments were not fitting the crime which is shocking. I believe no one would have wanted to live during this time period. Becaria created a book that had a few key points that should be taken into consideration. The first point is that legislators should define crimes and define specific punishments. But the role of judges should determine the guilt of the person but have no discretion among others. There job is to follow the law. The biggest point he made and what made his book important was that severity doesn't deter crime but rather increases it. Which is a big point to be made. His last point he made was that the serious of the crime should be determined by the harm that it made to society. Which is also a big key point to take away because it is only right that the punishment fits the crime. A big thing from this book is that severity is not very important. It is certainty that is the most important for a criminal. So by this he points out that laws obviously should be published so the public will know. Throughout the years his theory has fallen in and out of favor until it was actually tested in 1968. This video pointed out a lot of good facts and points that are important to know for the classical theory. It is important to know these key facts when studying this major because it is a big part of the criminal justice system.
ReplyDeletehollywood007
I found the spiritualistic approach in Europe interesting. It was especially interesting because they used this approach to inflict grousom tourture. I wonder If when the American constitution was written they included that cruel and unusable punishment would be outlawed. I also found it interesting that Baccaria thought capital punishment should be abolished with one exception. I wonder how Baccaria felt about the tourture methods used with the spiritualistic government. -11Bravo
DeleteI learned many new things that I did not know about classical criminology thanks to this video. The first thing I learned was the fact that state viewed criminal acts as sins for the devil towards god. Because of this, the state took their own action against crime. If a crime was committed, the state would actually torture the criminal to try and act in the name of god. So, someone who got caught stealing would face some form of horrible torture. Also, someone who killed an individual would face either the same or a different form of horrible torture. Regardless of the severity of the crime that was committed, torture was the punishment that would be enforced onto the person. Another thing I learned was the fact that excessive severity failed to deter crime, as it actually increased it. Criminals knew that no matter what criminal act they did, they would have to face a horrid punishment. So, instead of committing just one crime, criminals would go out and commit some of the worst crimes ever seen, knowing that they are going to receive the same punishment as they would have received just by committing one crime. This would have been an absolutely horrible time to be alive during. People would have had to live in fear every single day of their lives, fearing for the horrific punishments that they could possibly receive. Going to bed and waking up, hoping that they were not found guilty of something that could not even be remotely close to being a crime. Even the simplest of crimes, even acts committed by the people could have been seen as a crime, which the state viewed all crimes as sins. Therefore, the smallest possible thing that could have been considered a crime would still have to face a punishment involving torture. Thanks to this video, I learned how criminology started and how it has evolved and become what it is today.
ReplyDelete-Fozz007
I also like that in the video they talked about how the excessive punishment hardly ever was able to deter crime and it even could increase the amount of crime. I also learned a lot I did not know about Classical criminology from this video and one of those was that the state was able to act as God upon criminals by giving out very harsh punishments even if it was something as simple as stealing on one end and as horrible as murder on the other often times the gap between those two punishments would not be as great as it is today.
DeleteRHB007
ReplyDeleteI found this video very interesting and very informative because it shared a lot a facts from how many criminal justice organizations have been derived from. It’s not shocking that the first form of so-called criminal punishment was based purely off of spiritualistic views in England. Religion back then essentially govern everything in their lives including how they treated their criminals. Crime back then was a sin to God and this gave their criminal justice system the right to do gruesome things to people who have committed a crime and it was said in the video they took the place of acting as God when punishing people for crime. Often times the punishment the crime the offender could have Committed a small crime that did not hurt any person and the punishment might inflict pain on the offender even though no pain was inflicted on anyone by the offender. It was very interesting that the video said Beccaria’s writings may have had an effect on the French revolution 1789. He was very popular and inspirational because he wrote about fair punishments and why people commit crimes. This is why many new criminal justice organizations at the time used and builded off of his theories. Our founding fathers even took into account his publications when establishing forms of punishment. Just like we had talked about in class and in the book he points out that oftentimes excessive punishment does not in fact deter crime. This just really stood out to me because we talked in class the other day about how and why strict punishment does not deter the crime goes with and often times it leads to even more.
RHB007
I see where you are coming from in that you did not find it surprising that the criminal justice punishment in England was based off spiritual views. From many history classed that I have taken I also do not find it surprising that they delivered punishment on spiritual views. I do not find it surprising but I do find it interesting that they did. They were supposed to be a highly sophisticated society so it is interesting to me that they were basing punishment on spiritual beliefs. I also found it really interesting that Beccaria’s book might have had an in the French and American revolutionary war. -ClarkKent007
DeleteI agree with you on the point that in that time period religion ruled most peoples lives and became an issue in and toward society itself. That is essentially the sole reason that the concept of church and state was de eloped in our current day justice system and has helped to improve our society in monumental ways.
DeleteGray007
I had watched the video with Jacob Cooper before this one, they had a similar approach to the information they gave. Even though I had watched the video with Jacob Cooper I still learned more interesting facts that I had no idea of. What was interesting that this video states is how long demonic perspective on crime lasted. It lasted over a thousand years, in that period the state could inflict punishment that was cruel and unusual because they saw crime as a sin. They could inflict these types of punishments because they said they acted in the place of God. By giving the back story of how Classical criminology came to be it helps shed light on how impactful it was back then and now. With Classical Criminology the punishment cannot exceed the weight of the crime committed. This helps stop biasness in harsh punishments. It also helps stop people from trying to get out of a crime by saying they were possessed. When Beccaria published his book in 1764 there was evidence that it gave influence to our founding Fathers for a new criminal justice system. That is interesting that one man can influence our nation and even France. With this new criminal justice system influencing the United States and France it then spread throughout the rest of the industrialized world. An interesting point that he makes is that the severity of the crime does not deter the crime itself but actual increases it. Before I watched this video I would have thought it to be the other way around. That the severity of the crime would stop a criminal from doing such act. After I watched this video I now agree with that logic that the severity of the crime does not stop the crime. Criminals are going to commit more crimes because they are already going to get in trouble so why stop just for that one. -ClarkKent007
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. And out of both videos I got that people didn't feel that the crimes that they committed were because of them. They felt that factors, or higher powers were the reasons that they committed criminal acts. I also agree with your statement " the severity of the crime does not stop the crime". I feel that if these criminals are not stopped for what they do, they'll just keep doing it since punishment was not received. okurrr007
DeleteThe demonic perspective was a concept held in Europe that essentially allowed law to be enforced to the fullest extent upon any punishment. They believed that since its written that god saw all crime as a sin it justified unnecessarily harmful and severe punishments. This is an insanely outdated concept rightfully so for more reasons than one. Sentencing a shoplifter to the death penalty for example is a little absurd and in my opinion its slight overkill. Bacardi played arguably the largest role in changing these ideals. One of the many points he argued was that the more severe the punishments are the more severe the crimes develop to be. Meaning for example if someone is going to receive the death penalty upon any and every crime committed, rather than just robbing the bank they may also kill every witness because at that point they have nothing to lose. The punishment will, in theory, be equally as severe either way so to the criminal it may seem safer to eliminate any witnesses as a way to keep himself from being caught. This in turn condtradicts the goal the demonic perspective has intended. Bacardi believed that the punishment of the crime should match the nature of the crime and no more or less, otherwise it wouldn’t yield results. Three things that have been proven to help produce results in lowering crime rates are the certainty, celerity, and severity of the punishment, none of which matter without the other two. They need to maintain a healthy balance for it to be effective. The certainty of the punishment wouldn’t matter if it were just a slap on the wrist, but the severity wouldn’t matter if it wasn’t certain, and neither would matter if the punishment is delayed. There needs to be balance.
ReplyDeleteGray007
Hi, I like what you had to say in regards to people being ruled by the church. In how to live, what they are allowed to do and not do. There was no proper logical explanation for why torture was carried out other than it is punishment for doing things that God does not like. Something clicks that whatever is happening needs to change. The times change and so do the punishments that reflect the changes in laws. Society is full of people who are going through different phases of their life, therefore the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems are in existence. –YouMustAcquit007--
DeleteWhat I'm getting is that both of these criminology terms do not feel that the individuals feel that they are the reason that THEY committed the crime but someone else made them? This is saying that the devil is the reason crimes are being committed? In this video, unlike the other I got that people did receive punishment. I do agree that the crime that you committed should be equal to the punishment. You committed a criminal act so accept the punishment. There indeed should be a type of penalty for what you did. Watching these videos I feel that people should take up for their own actions. I agree with him when he says "the severity of punishment of itself emboldens men to commit the very wrong". I interpreted that as saying basically if they are not stopped for certain crimes, they are going to continue to do whatever they want to until they receive some type of punishment for THEIR actions. I'm very religious and do not agree with the devil being the cause of their actions. If you're a true believer of God, the crimes would not have been committed in the first place. I also don't feel that this type of criminology should've been around because in the video it basically said if harm wasn't done to anyone during the crime people should be able to be let go. That's what I got out of this video. Cost of crime exceeds rewards. Best statement in this video to me. This video gave me the idea that people did get some type of punishments for their crimes. They felt that the punishment given were as if they we given from God. Crimes were compared as sins. Doing wrong, receiving the punishment. In Europe classical criminology was practiced for thousands of years. okurrr007
ReplyDeleteThis video made me think hard about how the punishment should definitely always fit the crime. Watching this short documentary also made me realize how lucky we are that cruel and unusual punishment is no longer allowed, although death penalty is sometimes considered cruel and unusual. Punishments in medieval times were usually very cruel and inhumane and often resulted in a painful death. These punishments often didn’t fit the crime, but back then a prison system probably was not a thing, and if it was then it likely did not have room for a lot of people, so they just killed offenders. Additionally electricity was not really a thing, and chemicals, IV lines, and the like were not around yet either. This left your options to being stabbed, beheaded, etc, but even then that is better than some of the other punishments. In addition to the the banning of unusual punishments, today’s punishments do fit the crime (usually). A speeding ticket does not end with your death. Maybe the death of your bank account but, that is recoverable. If I understood correctly this video taught me that the church was against Beccaria’s ideas, which means the church was for the old style of doing things. Redranger007
ReplyDeleteWe are so lucky to not have these cruel punishments. It's crazy to think of the situations people had to go through, back in the day. I do believe they had prisons back in the day. Just because Beccaria had to write an essay on it, but I agree that they probably didn't have a lot of room, or money to keep people in. It was probably worst to be incarcerated then to be killed honestly. The church was very weird, and really needed to be reformed. The whole, faith and laws go together crap really messed up a lot of good peoples lives.
Delete^~^Itis007
Wow! Okay, this video was really informational on a lot of things. First off, I honestly didn't know how bad our justice system was back in the day. I knew that he had the death sentence used a lot, but I had no idea that we would torture people. Or, that we would have some many unjust, or unfair punishments for certain crimes. In today's world that would be unheard of, and would get people into a lot of trouble! The times before, we focused way to much on “evil beings” or “spirits.” Although, it seems the people implementing these punishments were under the control of an evil spirit. Beccaria is a really good person who could see how bais the justice system was at the time. I truly do believe he did play a part in the revolutions that happen, along with a lot of other factors as well. The pages of his book this video covered is exactly how he structure our own justice system today! It’s crazy to think that people would find what he said to be wrong! Other thing as well, it seems that people in the justice system were looked at as above average citizens, another mistake. These people, or judges were unfairly punishing people, in my opinion, on biases. Main thing to take away from all of this is that, the punishment should match the crime. Otherwise we got kids getting hanged for stealing candy bars! Also, the crime should be considered serious if it is a danger to the public as a whole, and not to just a singular person. Otherwise, its hard to take the whole, everyone is equal statement serious. I see how he is found to be one of the cores to classical criminology. Although, I don’t like the whole “you know what you are doing when committing a crime, and no outside forces should be involved when deciding if you are guilty.” So if someone threaten to kill me unless I killed someone else, then I don’t believe the same punishment should be followed as if I just killed someone for my own desire.
ReplyDelete^~^Itis007
I found that this video was very informative on a lot of things! Knowing that our justice system was that bad way back when is sad and scary. I'm happy we have it some what figured out now. Also knowing that crime was a sin to God and that our criminal justice system took advantage of it and tortured people because they were acting in place of God is strange. I knew we had punishments for criminals but I didn't know they tortured people gruesomely. Their punishments were to gruesome to even begin with. If someone got caught stealing they would face terrible punishment even if it was little. This would have been an awful time to live in just knowing that they didn't have the resources we do now and that their punishments were way out of pocket. The church did not want Beccaria's ideas and that they wanted to continue to gruesomely harm people. The church was not matching punishment with crime and that is all Beccaria was trying to do. I personally do not agree that the devil is the cause of their actions, if you believe in what you say you do then no crime should have been committed in the first place. How do they feel that punishment was given from God? When it was said to be a sin? freckles007
ReplyDeleteI also said that it seems like they were pushing their own agenda rather than deterring crime as far as religion is concerned.You would think that a peaceful god would not want to see someone be punished for something they were taught. Its human nature to do wrong and if they really did read the book then they would have known the he forgives sinners. They were wrong for acting on the part of God because they had no right to take people's lives from them or critically injure them over very minute offenses. It's a good thing we have modernized. GVFF007
DeleteThis video gave me a broader perspective of classical criminology and how many different things play into it. For instance, in the video it stated that punishments for crimes were decided by the churches because committing a crime was a sin. Back in this time, the people of the church believed that depending on the crime, the punishment should be just as harsh. So pretty much the punishment should fit the crime was a fair way to go about an equal punishment. One thing I liked about this video is that it stated that not every crime that is committed deserved a punishment that would fit the crime because not all criminal acts were strictly that individuals fault one hundred percent. Also the fact that the church had so much power and authority to make decisions whether or not a person should be put to death or imprisoned is insane and wrong in my eyes. Often times the punishment would not fit the crime and the punishment would be severe when the crime was not. In my opinion, I can totally understand why this was a huge issue that they were dealing with. Watching and listening to this video was very eye opening and I am glad that I watched it. It gave me a different viewpoint on the topic. Listening to how they treated people and punished them for their crimes shocked me. I would have hated to live back in that day and age. Anything and everything that you do could be judged and you as an individual would have to be extremely careful everyday to make sure you did not create a sin. I like how our government handles situations a lot more now. I appreciate our government system and their ways of handling punishment. This video was a real eye opener and was very interesting to learn about. -KiiNG007
ReplyDeleteI thought that was super odd as well. How it is almost like the church took over our courtroom today but back then. I think since there was just not as nearly as much information then as there is now, I believe that is the main issue. Because they probably thought people were committing the acts they were because it was all psychological and that it was a demon possessing them or would come up with a choice to believe it to be that because they could not rationalize why these people that did crimes were so different from the ones that did not. Which in a sense is understandable but to an extent. They thought these people needed punished in such graphic harsh ways as if it almosts proves a point. -notacop007
DeleteWell, needless to say the justice system has improved for the better. It's crazy to think that criminals were referred to as demons and the punishers claimed they were acting as God by giving the punishment. When I read this, I could kind of see the relation between the old school and new school because it is the duty of the peace officers to instill fear into criminals in hope that they correct their attitude but I wouldn't go as far to call them demons or relate them to demons. I think the problem in the old justice system was that the enforcement officials did not recognize that it is human nature to do wrong. We all were born knowing that we would mess up somewhere along the line because we would have no other way of knowing whats right or wrong. It is merely a lack of scientific knowledge of how the human body works that fueled this theory and that's also why crime has loosened up lately because there is actual scientific evidence as to why humans act the way they do. The brain is a strange place and not all people learned the same so this frightened the ones who had the rank and officialness so they decided to strictly enforce laws they created and most of the time the punishments were cruel and unusual as if they were actually punishing demons. Could you imagine if the system never changed and we treated modern day criminals as demonic figures who needed to die? It's almost like they had plan to serve their religion and rid of demons rather than deter and mitigate crime. It's a shame that people had to lie through this tie because it's like a tyrannical force that has all the power and call the shots on what's wrong and what's right.GVFF007
ReplyDeleteI think it is absolutely odd to hear that the old criminal justice system, the classical criminology challenged a more demonic perspective of crime. In the video, it said that the spiritualistic approach dominated European thinking for over a thousand years. It was associated with gruesome tortures and that the state claimed they were acting in the place of God. Beccaria was a protest writer and his writing was accepted by intellectuals. Although at first, he was not accepted by politically powerful groups through Europe. I found this extremely interesting because it is almost like they shunned him because he had different viewpoints and outlooks from them. It is also said that Beccaria's work may have influenced the American Revolution of 1776, as well as the French resolution. He was only 26 years old when he was asked to write this essay on penology. In his book, he stated that legislators should define crimes and specific punishments, judges should follow the law, excessive severity fails to deter crime and may actually increase it; the seriousness of a crime is determined by the extent of harm that it inflicts on society, punishments should be certain,and the purpose of punishment is to deter crime. Crime will absolutely always be a major issue and even with laws and punishments I think there are people out there that are just oddly programmed to not care at all of any punishment received. I think the fact that religion used to be thrown in the factor of why crime is a thing is just odd enough itself. Talking of spiritual and demons and why crime would happen and how we would handle it is just unsettling. In some cultures today, this is thought to be okay. But wide across the United States, this by no means is okay or even would be thought of to be allowed. -notacop007
ReplyDelete