Different criminal schools and their contribution to Criminology
We will review the different criminal schools their contribution to Criminology, its main exponents and briefly comment on their contributions.
All action leads to a responsibility.
It is convenient to make clear the fundamental objective of this discipline, the study of theories and the explanation of antisocial behaviors, why these actions are committed that have always been not only in the history of man but also in their nature, manifesting inAll societies around the world, considering it as an abnormal phenomenon of a social and normal nature, in the human being. Dynamically evolved according to the social, economic and political environment of its time. In this sense, the different psychological-legal-political schools, to the analysis of the nature of the crime and about the purpose of knowing how to act either by repressing or preventing it, preventing it.
This tenor must be considered the teachings of the Marquis of Beccaria and John Howard, considered the parents of criminal law, it is not to go back but move towards the future, since it avoids us to fall into the spiral of the recoil, and thus avoid falling into thebarbarie and continue feeding on the wisdom of classic and enlightened schools.
The classical school in Boca del Marqués de Beccaria, its main representative Plasma in its "Treaty of Crimes and Penalties" there are no immemorial words remain. "So that all sorrow is not violence of one or many against a particular citizen, it must essentially be public, prompt, necessary, the smallest of the possible in the current circumstances, provided to crimes, issued by laws" this rationalizationof the penalty has an orientation towards the effectiveness of the penalty. And that later it would serve to base the theory of natural election, Beccaria always worried about humanizing criminal law through respect for laws, individual guarantees and the limitation of the absolute power of the State.
Beccaria, affirms that the right to punish must be considered as an original right to civil society, in addition that the penalty is destined to give peace of mind to society, which influences the infringer and whoever wanted to imitate the criminal act, imposingA condition greater than the utility obtained, imposing prolonged detention so that the citizen does not have to fear the offender.
Beccaria affirms that it is preferable to prevent that suppressing, and base the positivist doctrinal currents in the sense that the penalty to impose on the subject should not be a goal, but a means, is the appeal that can be worth it to get the subject to leaveThe prison without intention of committing a crime. This valuable contribution has been very frequently repeated in our justice system, preventive detention is privileged but leaving prevention aside, since it is better to prevent than punish and continue beyond, ensuring that good legislation is leads men to the maximum ofhappiness.
In our legal system, this objective is not being achieved by leaving it to prison as the end and not as a means, and at the end of the conviction the inmate comes out with more grudge towards society than with which it entered, much less our legislation isThe best falling only in the punishment and the maximum it has achieved is a gross negotiation.
On the other hand, Eysenck’s theory explains the personality of the individual based on three dimensions, proposing first-order factors or traits where anyone can be located, (p) Psychoticism- (e) extraversion- (n) Neuroticism, these dimensionsThey will be treated as non -exclusive categories
These personality variables, says Eysenck, have a genetic determination, therefore it is a psychobiological model of personality. The value of this theory lies in its contribution in the study of personality and its determined biological ones, unlike other disciplines that study the activities of living organisms, lacking only the relationship of the causal stage, which could well complement each other with othersTheories to continue explaining in criminal behavior.
The theories of Cesar Lombroso open a new alternative with its anthropological concept, establishing in the criminal subject the key to the issue of crime, criminal, contemplating the offender and not the crime. The Cesar Lombroso doctor contributes with these theories a great tool in fighting crime, affirms that repressive crime ideas have a changing stage that is necessary to consider, and that is where the degree of danger of the subject andThis form guarantees the effectiveness of state action. With this anthropological vision it intends to determine the profile of the criminal man.
Part of the subject’s behavior to establish why, of the criminal act, and at the same time measure the level of danger of the individual, in proportion to the mobile that motivates him to commit crimes and thus determine the level of persecution that the State has to dedicate. Conceptualize the crime, and take the necessary measures against the criminal subject, this is the anthropological approach is he proposes Lombroso, to contemplate from the conception of the crime, to reach the measures taken against the offender. His great contribution was his book "The criminal man" marking the need to study the criminal subject, he teaches us that there are born criminal nature, emanating from a society that supplies the necessary conditions, this criminal “born” is characterized by its caporales characteristics, in the form of the skull, the brain, and some parts of the body.
On the part of the sociological, Gabriel late, develops the laws of imitation, identifying that these are normal individuals who learn to commit crimes, in their theories it performs a representation of the behavior of the unconscious mechanisms of these behaviors. It is aware that it would be wrong that every social phenomenon can rely on external factors, that imitation goes from the interior to the outside, that the superior judged things will be imposed to those lower courts, often linked to fashion creating a modus operandi.
Conclusions:
We must not continue to fall into the error of continuing to see in criminal phenomenon as an isolated phenomenon as something that is foreign to man, we have the obligation to learn from the experiences and wisdom of who already learned it. We have the obligation to build a fresh, objective, real and analytical knowledge of the criminal phenomenon.
All these teachings give us a reality of how to apply knowledge and make the theoretical framework of crime to establish a reality of the criminal phenomenon. We must understand that learning is often done through imitation, this obvious technology, applied to the positive side will lead us to be the best professionals and the best criminologists, learn to be better.
Leave feedback