ZIMBABWE REPUBLIC POLICE ACADEMY

An associate college of the University of Zimbabwe

DEPARTMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE LEGAL STUDIES

ASSIGNMENT MARK FORM

SECTION A
NAME : NYAMUDEZA
STUDENT NUMBER : 089070P
PROGRAMME : DIPLOMA IN POLICE STUDIES
MODULE NAME : CONTEMPORARY POLICING
MODULE CODE : DPS
LECTURER : SGT MUSIKAVANHU
DUE DATE : 16/11/22

ASSIGNMENT QUESTION: DISCUSS THE CRIMINOLOGY UNDER PINNINGS

BETWEEN CLASSICAL AND POSITIVISTS SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY

SECTION B
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

DATE RECEIVED:.................................DATE
MARKED:................................................................

MARKER’S COMMENTS
………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……

MARK AWARDED:................................... MARKER’S

SIGNATURE:............................................

TO STUDENT: PLEASE COMPLETE SECTION ‘A’ IN DUPLICATE AND ATTACH BOTH

COPIES TO THE ASSIGNMENT. THE TOP COPY WILL BE RETURNED TO YOU WITH THE
MARKER’S COMMENTS AND GRADE, ATTACHED TO YOUR ASSIGNMENT.
The classical school of thought was premised on the idea that people have free will in making
decisions, and that punishment can be a deterrent for crime, so long as the punishment is
proportional, fits the crime, and is carried out promptly. In the late 19th century, involved an
attempt to correlate criminal behavior with certain physiological traits arose. This led to the
identification of a genetic criminal type, an idea that is now wholly discredited. Later,
psychological positivists used detailed studies to link personality traits with particular crimes and
to identify those formative experiences that might produce a general predisposition to law-
breaking. It is said that the fathers of classical school of criminology are Cesare Beccaria and
Jeremy Bentham and the father of positivist school of criminology Cesare Lombroso, Enrico
Ferri, and Raffaele Garofalo. Therefore the essay below is going to explain or highlight the
difference between classical school of criminology and the positivist school of criminology.

Merriam-Webster (2014) defines crime as an illegal act that is considered punishable by the
government. Merriam-Webster (2013) defines criminology studies the non-legal aspects of
crime. The non-legal aspects of crime include the causes and preventions of crime. Brotherton,
(2013), defines criminology includes the study of crimes, criminals, crime victims, and
criminological theories explaining illegal and deviant behavior Classical policing according
Burke, Roger Hopkins (2001) usually refers to the work of 18th-century philosophers of legal
reform, such as Beccaria and Bentham, but its influence extends into contemporary works on
crime and economics and on deterrence, as well as into the rational choice perspective.
According to oxford dictionary the positivist sees the root causes of crime in factors outside the
control of the offender. These are to be identified using empirical methods, in particular the
analysis of statistics.

.Firstly, classical school of criminology explains crime as a free-will decision to make a criminal
choice. This choice is made by applying the pain-pleasure principle people act in ways that
maximize pleasure and minimize pain. The classical view in criminology explains crime as a
free-will decision to make a criminal choice. According to although people are pleasure seeking
they are also rational creatures, thus although people generally act on their own selfishness they
are however capable of judging and using the more appropriate approach in a given situation.
Henceforth classical school of criminology defines people as moral creatures with unqualified
freedom to choose between right and wrong, as well as that people commit crimes and the
committing of crimes is assumed to have been done on their free will that is without force or
intimidation.

Secondly, classical school of criminology believes that humans should be held accountable of
their wrongful acts, thus a well- rounded government should enforce punishments and laws that
allow people to properly asses the actions they can take in a given situation. Bentham believed
that crime was committed on the outset, by individuals who seek to gain excitement, money, sex
or anything of value to the individual, whereas Beccaria (1764/1963: 93) stated that; ‘It is better
to prevent crimes than to punish them’. This is at the heart of the classical school of criminology.
Beccaria believed that laws needed to be put into place in order to make punishments consistent
and in line with the crime. He believed that crime prevention in its effectiveness is down to three
main ideas, these being the certainty of the crime and how likely it is too happened, the celerity
of the crime and how quickly the punishment is inflicted and also the severity of the crime, and
how much pain is inflicted. Beccaria thought that the severity of the penalties given should be
proportionate to the crime committed and no more than what is necessary in order to deter the
offender and others from committing further crimes.

Additionally, the introduction of the classical school of criminology and classical thinking, the
use of capital punishment, torture and corporal punishment has declined. Neither Beccaria nor
Bentham believed in the death penalty, apart from, Bentham argued, in the case of murder. The
second half of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries also saw the establishment and growth of
the prison, as a major system of punishment, the idea and concept of prison was to take
punishment away from the body and instead punish the mind and soul, and these are the keys to
changing a person’s outlook and views of their criminal behaviors. Many elements of classical
ideas are very useful in modern society and these show the strengths that the theory does have.
Deterrence continues to underlie all judicial systems and indeed underpinned the principles of
the first commissioners of Sir Robert Peel, in the creation of the Metropolitan police. Prisons are
also used as major deterrents and also to try and reduce rates of crime.

Beccaria felt that that the punishment of the crime should be proportional to its seriousness. In
other words, “time should fit the crime. According to Schmalleger, (2014), Beccaria thought that
the purpose of punishment should not be retribution. He instead, believed punishment should be
based on deterrence. He felt that if people saw punishments being carried out, it would allow
onlookers to be deterred from criminal activity. Vold, Bernard, & Snipes,(2002) alluded that
when the harshness of the punishment exceeds the necessity to achieve deterrence, Beccaria
believed that it was unreasonable Beccaria thought torture was inappropriate and allowed for the
weak to incriminate themselves and the strong would be found innocent before they were
adjudicated. (Schmalleger, 2014) This unjust punishment inflicted on offenders allowed crime to
be increased instead of deterred. (Vold, et al (2002) further explain that Beccaria also called for
adjudication and punishments to occur quickly. (Vold et al (2002) alluded that he felt that if a
crime was committed and the offender was adjudicated in a prompt manner that the concept of
crime and punishment would be associated with each other. (Vold et al (2002) Beccaria thought
if a punishment was certain then society would have a better impression of the criminal justice
system. (Vold, Bernard, & Snipes, 2002) states that this therefore allowed potential offenders to
know the punishment before making a rational decision to commit crime.

More so, positivist school of criminology has linked criminal behavior to physiological traits.
They used detailed studies to link personality traits with particular crimes and to identify those
formative experiences for example parental neglect that might produce a general predisposition
to law-breaking. Sociological positivists have sought the causes of crime in factors external to
the offender such as poverty, alienation, high population density, and exposure to deviant
subcultures such drug-takers or gangs. One particularly influential approach was that taken by
the Chicago School of the mid-20th century, which used ecological methods to study the
breakdown of social order in inner-city neighborhoods. Other social positivist approaches
include Marxist criminology, which sees crime as an inevitable product of class conflict and the
capitalist system, and critical criminology, which focuses on the role of power elites in defining
what and who is regarded as criminal.

The positivist school of criminology takes a different position as it establishes a rational

independence for the qualification and measurement of criminal behavior. Lombrosso believed
that there are three major classes of criminals that are born criminals, insane criminals, and
criminaloids. According to Vold, Bernard, & Snipes,(2002) born criminals were thought to be
one-third of the criminals which were a more primitive evolutionary form of development. old,
Bernard, & Snipes (2002) alludes that insane criminals were the idiots, paranoiacs, and those
affected with dementia, alcoholism, hysteria and other types of mental complications. old,
Bernard, & Snipes (2002) explain that criminalists are considered a large general class without
specificities on physical characteristics or mental disorders, but sometimes tend to be involved in
rancorous and criminal behavior. The criminals or offenders were to be punished according to
the gravity of the offence.

Lombroso explained positivist criminology as divided into biological, psychological and

sociological theories. Biological is based on a person’s biological and hereditary identity. These
theories imply that it is not entirely the criminal’s fault, but their biological make up that makes
them identify with criminality. Lombroso suggests what he feels is a typical criminal in his book
the criminal man, in which he describes traits and characteristics of prisoners that he identifies
with criminality. Psychological theories deal with a person’s mental being. In psychological
theories the individual is the unit of analysis. According to Seiken, (2014) it is believed that
crimes are the result of abnormal, dysfunctional, or inappropriate mental processes within the
personality of the individual. Seiken (2014) alludes that therefore, it is believed that criminal
behavior may be purposeful for the individual because it addresses certain felt needs. Lombroso
explained that sociological theories associate a criminal’s behavior with the social constructs
surrounding the individual. Sociological theories are structured and based on the environment
around the individual. This is the people that are in close or intimate contact with the individual,
the environment in which the individual is in constant contact with, and the way the individual
has been taught. Social structure and context, as well as sociological theories are an important
part of analyzing a criminal’s behavior.

In conclusion, the classical school of criminology is based on freewill and determinism, while
the positivist school of criminology is based on the biological, psychological, and sociological
aspects of a criminal. The above essay has managed to bring out the differences between the
classical and positivists school of criminology.
REFERENCE

Brotherton, D. (2013, 12 14). What is Criminology? Retrieved from John Jay College of
Criminal Justice: http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/departments/sociology/about_criminology.php

Burke, Roger Hopkins. An Introduction to Criminological Theory. Willan Pub., 2001.

Oxford dictionary 2022 edition

Merriam-Webster. (2013, 12 14). Criminology. Retrieved from Merriam-Webster Dictionary: An

Encycolpedia Britannica Company: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criminology

Merriam-Webster. (2014, 1 25). Crime. Retrieved from Merriam Webster: an Encyclopedia

Britannica Company: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crime

Schmalleger, F. (2014). Criminology. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc

Seiken, D. (2014). Three Theories of Criminal Behavior. Retrieved from HubPages:

http://seiken2.hubpages.com/hub/Three-Theories-of-Criminal-Behavior

old, G., Bernard, T., & Snipes, J. (2002). Theoretical Criminology. New York: Oxford
University Press.