The Classical School Of Thought Has Influenced Criminal Just

The classical school of thought has influenced criminal justice practices the most

The debate between the classical and positivist schools of thought has profoundly shaped the contemporary criminal justice system. The classical school, emerging in the 18th century, emphasizes rationality, free will, and the deterrent effect of laws. It posits that individuals commit crimes voluntarily and that legal systems should focus on creating clear, consistent laws that discourage wrongful behavior through fear of punishment. Conversely, the positivist school, which gained prominence in the 19th century, attributes criminal behavior to factors beyond individual control, such as biological, psychological, or environmental influences, advocating for rehabilitative and scientific approaches to crime prevention and justice.

Among these, the classical school has had a more pronounced influence on the development of modern criminal justice practices. Its principles underpin many laws and policies that emphasize punishment as a deterrent and uphold notions of legal consistency and rationality in law enforcement, courts, and corrections. The influence of the classical school is evident in foundational criminal justice practices, including the formulation of penal codes, judicial procedures, and sentencing guidelines aimed at deterring criminal behavior through certainty and swiftness of punishment.

Legal systems rooted in classical principles prioritize the creation of laws that are clear, predictable, and proportionate to the crimes committed, fostering a sense of fairness and justice. For example, statutes such as the Model Penal Code in the United States reflect classical notions by establishing clear definitions of crimes and prescribed punishments that aim to deter potential offenders by instilling fear of sanctions. This approach has significantly shaped how laws are written, emphasizing crime prevention through marginally harsher penalties that act as warnings to potential offenders.

Law enforcement agencies embody classical principles through policies emphasizing deterrence and crime control. The use of visible policing, rapid response, and strict enforcement of laws aims to prevent crime before it occurs. For instance, zero-tolerance policies in urban policing are grounded in deterrence theory, asserting that strict enforcement and predictable punishments will discourage criminal activity. Moreover, the court system relies heavily on deterrence: judges impose sentences that reflect the severity of the crime to prevent reoffending, aligning with classical ideas of legal certainty and rational punishment.

In the realm of corrections, the classical influence is seen in the emphasis on incarceration as a primary means of punishment. The goal is to remove offenders from society to protect the public and serve as a deterrent for others. While rehabilitation gained popularity later, the classical influence persists in policy debates about the efficacy of incarceration in reducing crime rates and recidivism, often emphasizing the importance of proportionate sentences and swift judicial processing.

Furthermore, policies rooted in classical theory have contributed to the development of “three strikes” laws and mandatory minimum sentences, designed to increase the certainty and severity of punishment for repeat offenders. These policies aim to send a clear message that criminal behavior will meet with predictable, harsh consequences, thereby deterring future offenses and promoting public safety.

Though the positivist school introduced important insights about the biological and psychological factors contributing to criminal behavior, its influence on the general practices of criminal justice—such as punitive laws, deterrence-focused policing, and sentencing—has been somewhat limited. While rehabilitative and tailored interventions are increasingly used, they often coexist alongside classical-inspired deterrent policies rather than replacing them entirely.

In conclusion, while both schools have contributed to shaping modern criminal justice, the principles of the classical school—rationality, deterrence, and legal consistency—have had the most enduring influence on laws, law enforcement, the court system, and corrections practices. The emphasis on deterrence and proportionate punishment reflects established classical ideas, and these elements continue to underpin many aspects of criminal justice policies aimed at reducing crime and recidivism.

References

• Bohm, R. M. (2017). Introduction to Criminal Justice (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Cesare Beccaria. (1764). On Crimes and Punishments..
• Chevigny, P. (2003). The Criminal Court System. In J. Q. Wilson & J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime and Public Policy (pp. 169–192). Oxford University Press.
• Friedman, M. (2013). Crime and Punishment: An Introduction to Criminal Justice. Routledge.
• Hood, R., & Morris, N. (2015). Principles and Practice of Criminal Justice. Oxford University Press.
• Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (2007). Crime and Justice: A Review of Recent Developments. Crime & Justice, 36(1), 239-310.
• Siegel, L. J., & Worrall, J. L. (2018). Criminology: The Core. Cengage Learning.
• Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken Windows: The police and neighborhood safety. The Atlantic Monthly, 249(3), 29-38.
• Zimring, F. E. (2012). The Cultural Causation of Crime. Oxford University Press.
• Beccaria, C. (1764). On Crimes and Punishments.