Is it the fault of the criminal that he's a criminal or is it the fault of society.?

Question

Is it the fault of the criminal that he's a criminal or is it the fault of society.?

Answer 1

the former, unless your black, then you CAN blame society and get a free ride.

Answer 2

People are ultimately responsible for their own actions.  I know that poor or unfavorable economic & social conditions make it harder for people but most poor people do not become criminals.  Then, there are those that make there choices to commit crimes.   I wonder when a person commits a crime if they wonder, "how will this benefit me?" or "Will this benefit anyone that is important to me?"

Anyways, this issue is NOT the Western way of thinking of either/or...its and/both.  Both come into play...

Answer 3

It depends, so here is two cases:

1. Imagine a government that made up laws, which were quite ordinary and but not enforced too often in the society: 'Every person who sleeps any less than 22 hours per day will be fined 1 cent out of $1.00' and 'Excessive blinking of the eyes in any one day period while one can be clearly seen in public is punishible by ticket' et cetera...

I think that most people would, thereby, be criminals. However, although we are criminal, this is not say what we did was 'wrong' all that it amounts to is that our actions (or inactions) were inconsistent with the prevailing statutes, and any person whose actions are incosistent with the law are performing acts that are illegal: hence, we would be criminals.

Now, it seems like in the aforementioned case, the 'fault' - if by 'fault' we mean ' the one who is responsible for such & such act ' would be us. But, I think by 'fault' you mean to imply some deeper notion. That is, it is the 'fault' of the people who came up with the silly statutes that so many people are criminals. This is correct as well, to some degree. It is 'of their creation' and their 'imposition' but, if we can help not to perform the act deemed illegal (if we can physically refrain from performing the act that is contrary to law), then I think, sadly, it is still our 'fault,' strictly speaking.

Of course, it is implied by you question that the answer ought to be "yes" for trivial reasons: i.e. " is it the fault of the criminal that he is a criminal." Well, it seems here the example person whom you identify as 'criminal' is definately a 'criminal': this is just a tautology. This is akin to saying: is it the fault of the baker that he is a baker - well, for one the person is a baker according to one half of the sentence, and according to the other half it is open as to whether or not the fact that the baker is a baker can be claimed to be faulted for this - irrespective of what the decision is, the fact remains that the baker is a baker.

Similarly, the fact that we have identified this person, say J, as a criminal, asking whether or not it is J's fault that he or she is a criminal does nothing to the fact that J is a criminal.

Conclusion!

If it is the criminal's fault that he or she is a criminal, then he or she is blameworthy and if it is not the criminals fault, then he or she is not blameworthy, but someone or something else is.

We cannot decide with exactness whom is really blameworthy in the United States for the abundance of criminals, but I think the sketched shema above can roughly characterizes some important aspects.

Thanks!

Answer 4

If you look at the pathological approach of deviant behavior, our society is "sick" rather than the criminal is "sick" for committing the crime.

According to the Anomie theory: Deviance occurs when one comes to accept that the legitimate goals of society can not be met by legitimate means.

So yes, it very well could be the fault of society. It just depends on how you look at it.

Answer 5

Example please?

Things like manslaughter out of self defence are not the fault of the person, they are the fault of society, if a criminal attacks someone and the person kills the criminal, he should not face possible penalization for it.  Some people do not deserve to live and society has to realize that and needs to stop protecting every single life no matter how evil it is.

The laws created (like no stealing, no rape, no underaged drinking, no murder for revenge or pleasure) are made for the good of humanity, they need to be enforced and is it the criminals fault he resorted to such things.

Answer 6

There's a lot of blame to go around.  Society can always do better in educating its citizens.  Our overcrowded prisons are monuments to the failure of society to educate its citizens property.

One of the main problems with capitalism in general is that it  creates winners and losers; nearly everyone works, but some people earn several times more an hour than others.  For example, my neighbor makes 4 times more per hour than I do.  If I worked 24 hours a day I'd still only make 75% of what he's making.  Is his job really 4 times more important than mine?  Does he really work 4 times faster or harder?

At any rate, numerous studies have shown that it's not possible to afford the very basics of life (food, clothing, housing) on minimum wage, and yet millions of Americans are only making minimum wage.  People who don't earn enough to pay the rent and buy food are constantly tempted to break the rules and steal some money from those who don't need it as desperately as they do.

Obviously the law is the law, but when rich people get robbed they cry about it and move on.  When poor people get robbed they have to decide which one of their kids deserves to eat food that night.

Most people are too dedicated to the ethics of honesty to break the law, even in extreme situations, but a few can't take the pressure and occasionally steal what they need.

The truly bad criminals are the ones who break the law when they don't even have to.  It's one thing to steal a TV so you can sell it and buy food for your kids.  It's another thing to steal a watch because you want it.

So the short answer is: there's a lot of blame to go around.  The long answer is: 1) it depends on how hard the society tries to educate and provide for its citizens and 2) it depends on whether the criminal breaks the law out of necessity or whether they break the law because they suck.