Taft College Criminal Justice Criminals Behaviors Discussion
Description
Having Trouble Meeting Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on Taft College Criminal Justice Criminals Behaviors Discussion completed on time. avoid delay and – ORDER NOW
A 100 word repsonse to the following paragraphs
Part 1
The idea of “hard determinists” is one that I feel is accurate enough. I mean people are capable of making their own decisions and realizing that they are capable of committing a crime or not. Since everyone does for themselves. I believe people can be forced to commit crimes but, they choose to act upon it and commit it. Of course legally if someone is being forced to commit a crime and can be proven. Then other legal matters come to play. Yet, people are capable of making their own decisions. I personally do not think people are born criminals. Since everyone is who they choose to be. Anyone can be born in a bad community and be surrounded by dugs or alcohol. Yet, the way one decides to be is who they will be. I mean no one forces someone to be otherwise. Of course with years and experience one should understand the idea of right and wrong and should be mature enough to see what is a crime and what is not. I think criminals are different then those who are not criminals. Since, of course maybe their mentality is different and the way they understand crime.
I do not think it is okay to incarcerate people who could or have the crime gene. Since they have not committed any type of crime. I think people should be incarcerated if they have committed a crime but, not if they have not. I mean it would be a big legal issue. Since, what if those tests go wrong and what if people are incarcerated and then they realize that there tests were wrong? I mean that would be a big issue. It would cause more problems, in my opinion. I think this whole idea is complicated alone. I mean how would one be treated differently just because they do not have a crime trait. A crime is a crime not matter who committed it. I think this trait should not have an impact of society or the way people are being incarcerated.
I honestly think the theories for this week do not really go along with why I decided to engage or not engage in criminal behavior. Since, I believe last weeks theory was the one who really went with why I did what I did. This weeks theories states something else, that crimes are committed because one decides to. Which is why but at the same time its not why I decided to engage in criminal behavior. I wanted to fit in. I did it basically to win something back. To be part of a group one I could call friends. I did decide to do it. It was my decision but, I feel like I go ore with the hedonistic theory then this weeks.
part 2
the nature vs. nurture debate is basically stating that if criminals were either born to be criminals or were they nurtured to become that way. In my honest opinion, I believe it’s both. I have seen evidence that shows that biological futures in the brain can cause criminal acts or at least higher statistically to make impulsive acts. Which ties to having more of a tendency to being a criminal. But evidence also prove that people have the same biological futures but come out way different lifestyles. I watches a video of a professor explaining that his brain scan resembled that of Ted Bundy’s and yet he’s not a serial killer. Which is why maybe it’s more true that it is has a lot more to do with nurture than is does with nature. I of course do not believe people are born criminals, but I do believe people (even starting from infants) have different problem solving skills/emotional control. I think that can add to how a baby is nurtured, and if done poorly, I think that can statistically raise the percentage that that baby may commit criminal acts as a minor or even as a adult. So I think that goes to show I don’t think that criminals are biologically different than non-criminals, like law abiding citizens. “Law-abiding citizens” just haven’t “been caught”. In my opinion it is NOT ethical to pre-emptively punish individuals for having biological traits associated with criminality, it is far from it. I don’t believe in a “crime-gene”. But more or less i do believe in poor parenting. I think the theory of a “crime-gene” is the most weak mentioned this week. I just could not imagine someone incarcerating my child (having two) just because they have same biological features as criminals. That’s just insane.
