Lecture notes, lecture 10 PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Lecture notes, lecture 10 PDF

Description

Chapters 17 & 18 Chapter 17: A Sociological Analysis of the Law of Vagrancy - William Chambliss did his PhD at University of Indiana with Sociology - Chambliss thinking changed over the years, his 1964 analysis of vagrancy laws in England is clearly consistent with the conflict Crim tradition in that it focuses on how social and economic changes and class conflict can lead to changes in the law. - In 1973 with “The Saints and the Roughnecks” he observes the Saints (higher class boys group) were a well-respected group and given much leniency, the roughnecks on the other hand (lower class boys) were regarded as troublesome, and arrested often (no Marxian thinking) - In 1974 article, “Toward a Political Economy of Crime” Chambliss announces attempt to develop a Marxist theory of crime and criminal law, and he uses Marxist Terminology in this paper - 1975 in “the political economy of crime”, he examines crime data and a clear shift in Chambliss’ thinking is shown o Chambliss’ sociological analysis of the vagrancy laws in England sets out to demonstrate how social settings, economic changes and interest groups all contribute to changes in the law  his approach is a contrast to the consensus perspective - Chambliss provides his opinions on the first vagrancy law appearing in England in 1329 due to events like the crusades and the Black death  basically these laws came into existence as a result of the then current social circumstance (lots of death) and economic needs of wealthy landowners - Amendments to vagrancy law were intended to make its progress more punitive. o This again was the result of changes in the economic and social structures of society (feudal system was breaking down, serfs were leaving, commerce and industry were flourishing) - Chambliss’ analysis of 13-15th century England of Vagrancy law is an example of Critical Crim. (and the application of sociology in the study of law) A Sociological Analysis of the Law of Vagrancy (William J. Chambliss) - With Jerome Hall’s exception of the analysis of theft there is a severe shortage of sociologically relevant analyses of the relationship between particular laws and the social setting in which these laws emerge, are interpreted, and take form. o To analyze these would be to systematically analyze particular legal categories, observe the changes in the categories and explain how these changes are related to and stimulate changes in the society.  By Chambliss this paper analyzes the law of vagrancy in Anglo-American Law Legal Innovation: The Emergence of the Law of Vagrancy in England - First full-fledged vagrancy statue passed in England, 1349. These statues (like many others) were preceded by earlier laws that established this law change. o The 1349 Law of Vagrancy was preceded by 1274 statue (its purpose was to provide religious houses and space with financial relief to provide food and shelter to travelers – basically to give ‘alms’ to the poor - but over the years the philosophy or law went under many changes) the changes underwent by the 1274 religious houses established the first vagrancy statue in 1349  This new Vagrancy law wanted to let go of idleness or people who would go to the providing religious houses and now get them to work and be profitable. Forcing people, as long as they were capable – basically not dying – were supposed to serve, work be not idle.  In 1351, state was strengthen by stipulation: “as none shall go out of town where he stayed in the winter, to serve the summer, if he may serve in the same town” (basically forcing people to stay where they at) - Vagrancy statues were not made out of whim but from changes in parts of the social structure. o Reasons include: the Black Death which occurred in England 1348 (along with other disasters that garnered consequences), cheap labour (poor people) were no longer in ready supply. The Crusades and other wars hurt English economy and social structures  Serfdom and feudal system was falling apart.  World was becoming industrialized, and urbanized. - Results of these major events in 1300s: wages for the free man, but standard of living decreased, leaving landowners, serfs decided ‘flight’  altogether these conditions established the 1st vagrancy statues emergence. o Purposed of vagrancy = to force labourers to accept employment and at low wages, no matter what age or condition/state they were in, you can work you were working, you couldn’t leave, basically vagrancy was a substitute for serfdom. - Innovation in the law was: a direct result of the afore-mentioned changes which had occurred in the social setting (changes here were located in the economic institution of the society)

-

As would be expected the function of the statute would no longer be important for the society and would be eliminated, but this DIDN”T happen. The vagrancy statues have remained in effect since 1349 and had been taken over in colonies and remained in USA too! o However the vagrancy statues remained but they changed. Ex: 1360 – violators of statue would be imprisoned for 15 days and in 1388 the punishment put offender in the stocks and kept him there until he found surety to return to service. In 1495 saw again an increase in punishment.  The tendency to increase punishment severity is seen as a tendency to define the criminal law better

A shift in Focal Concern - In 1381 a change occurred, the services of the serfs to the lord were becoming less pronounced, and by the sixteenth century there were hardly any bondmen in England (no people forced to be tied to a lord or landlord) o 1575: Queen Elizabeth granted Manumission.  Vagrancy changes are correlated to these changes as well, beginning with punishment lessening in 1503. BUT the vagrancy statues didn’t remain dormant only experienced a shift in focal concern. - The first state which indicates this change was in 1530 (this change is a shift in focal concern of vagrancy laws instead of their abolishment or dormancy) which is the first statute to specifically focus on criteria for adjusting someone a vagrant. The punishment outline in this new vagrancy was a more harsher punishment outline o Depending on the 1, 2, and 3 time of offending the offender would be subject to differing and more sever levels of punishment o This statute:  Makes a distinction between offender types and applies the more severe punishment to those who are clearly engaged in criminal activities  Mentions a specific concern with categories of unlawful behaviour  Applies a type of punishment which is generally reserved for offender who are defined as likely to a fairly serious criminal - 5 years later, death, is used as a punishment against a vagrancy statue offence (the statute’s terminology changes) - Commercial emphasis in England at the turn of the sixteenth century is important in the development of vagrancy law (because traffic bearing valuable items came, and England became depended on this commerce) o This all caused trouble (citizen attacks) o Therefore: situation called for enforcement of existing laws but also the creation of new laws which would facilitate the control of person preying upon merchant transporting goods  The vagrancy statute here was then made more general - V branded for vagabond and S branded on forehead for vagabond run-aways. - By 1571 in the statute of 14 El. C. 5 the shift in focal concern is fully developed (the list of possible offenders against the statute is very long as well, p. 345, more offenders than before!) o More money is provided to attain and maintain these new statute goals - With minor variations the statute remains essentially the same until 1743. Again here was an expansion of the types of persons included in the offender designation  by this date the vagrancy statutes had been sufficiently reconstructed by the shifts of concern so as to be once more a useful instrument in the creation of social solidarity, has continued to present day England. - * the vagrancy statues underwent a shift in focal concern as the social setting changed, the shift in focal concern isn’t meant to imply that the later focus of the statutes represents a completely new law – the possibility of criminal activities resulting from persons who refuse to labour was recognized even in the earliest statute. o The criminal respect here originally held no importance but it progressively became very important, this is seen from the changes between 1349 statutes to the 1743 statutes. Vagrancy laws in the United States - In general, the vagrancy laws in England (in the 18th century) were adopted by the US. Of course there were some restrictions (like no ‘free’ negroes) o Since 1800s debate on which vagrancy laws should be applied is pretty constant - The lack of change of using vagrancy laws has some explanation = is seen as a reflection of the society’s perception of a continuing need to control some of its ‘suspicious’ or undesirable members - The use of vagrancy laws in USA is no longer to control labourers (since society’s are urbanized, industrialized and use commerce) rather vagrancy laws seen in USA today are for the control of the undesirable, criminal and the nuisances. Discussion

-

-

-

Vagrancy laws is demonstrated to be laws that were of a legislative innovation which reflected the socially perceived necessity of providing an abundance of cheap labour to landowners during a period when serfdom was breaking down and when the pool of available labour was depleted. o Due to: breakdown of feudalism, a dependency of commerce and industry with bigger economy sense. Vagrancy laws were subjected to a considerable alteration through a shift in the focal concern of the statutes. o Focus here was on roadmen or highway men who would steal and prey upon innocent travelers and merchants.  The increased concentration of commerce forced England to increase protection engaged in commerce and therefore vagrancy statues provided one source for such protections Chambliss: his analysis of the vagrancy laws also indicates that when changed social conditions create a perceived need for legal changes that these alteration will be effected through the revision and refocusing of existing statues. Remember the period of dormancy – probably a time where people didn’t apply the statutes, just too overwhelmed or selfabsorbed to care what happened in their society (England). o Laws can be applied but remain dormant until someone with legislative power takes the step to establish its ruling, to make it happen. Be enforced.

Chapter 18: Critical Criminology in the 21st Century - Title is the name of Jock Young’s book and is one of the original, self-styled ‘critical criminologists’ - Jock Young worked with Ian Taylor and Paul Walton in the “New Criminology” in 1973 and co-edited “critical Criminology” in 1975  The New one concerns itself with Marx - Jock Young announces that the strategy of radical Crim is to show up the law as the instrument of the ruling class and to demonstrate that the rule-makers are also the greatest rule breakers. - Richard Quinney argues in “class, State and Crime” that crime is linked to the capitalist mode of production, saying that predatory crime like robbery or drug trafficking are caused by high unemployment and the creation of a large industrial reserve army composed of marginalized, unskilled workers who are living from hand to mouth. - Steven Spitzer writes an article (1977) called Toward a Marxian Theory of Deviance. He talks about “the production of deviance in capitalist society” (agrees with Quinney’s surplus population – created by capitalist mode of production. o Essentially critical criminologists say that capitalism was the cause of crime, and if capitalism could be replaced with socialism crime would then be reduced and disappear altogether even!  This thinking is called ‘left idealism’ by observers, - Critical criminologists were criticized for failing to recognize that most crime involves members of the working class victimizing other members of the same class - Jock Young says that while crime may be exaggerated and sensationalized on the media, crime really is a problem, and that offenders and their victim come from the same social class and ethnic background. o Today’s criminals are no modern day robin Hoods, they steal for themselves from the poor, not from rich to the poor - In Jock Young’s “Critical Crim in the 21st C., he argues that Critical Crim is relevant today and its existence is necessary to counter the recent shift toward administrative, PSYCH Crim and cognitive behaviour programs. o The left realism approach he is now advocating is more policy-orientated, and concerning itself with remedying the capitalist problem and attempting to replace it. - Young argues that the main causes of crime are marginalization and economic deprivation o As a solution Young suggests raising minimum wages, creating meaningful job training programs, providing more day care facilities and giving financial recognition to the value of housework/raising children/caring for elderly o He also argues that critical Criminologists need to debunk notion that welfare recipients, drug addicts an illegal immigrants are the main source so crime an social disorder, by demonstrating that crime is more evenly distributed throughout the society Critical Crim in the 21st Century: Critique, Irony and the Always Unfinished (Jock Young) - Critical Crim is the Crim of late modernity, it began late 60s, many things were brought to light (oppressiveness in class, gender and ethnicity) and where the pluralism, ambiguity and shift of values heralded a society where migration and hum creativity created a diversity of cultures in close propinquity and interaction. - NDC = National Deviancy Conference  was pivoted around deconstruction and anti-essentialism. dwelt on social construction of gender, sexual proclivity, crime, suicide, drugs and mental state o Young a part of these conferences of Academics that began in the 1900s (Sire Leon Radzinowicz) - NDC took no notice of disciplinary boundaries, it was important for cultural studies area, anti-psychiatry and critical theory, sociology of sexualities as it was for the sociology of deviance - The US unlike Britain has given longstanding sociological tradition to crime, Crim is not really a discipline, more like a field

-

-

Despite an overwhelming obvious tendency for Crim, particularly in its more practical and administrative manifestations, is to cut itself off from grand theory- this was paramount in Britain in the post-war period and in turn or should we say reconnection of Crim to sociology was a major 1st step out of empiricism o A second phase (Downes traces back to the foundation of NDC in 1968 took on the New USA sociology of Deviance and considerably radicalised it, it is this phase which gave rise to the new or critical Crim The following are ironies which served to turn establishment Crim on its head (by Critical Crim) o Self-fulfillment, seriousness, ontology, decentring, selectively, Counter-producing, contradiction, Socialisation, Function and Secondary harm.

Critical Crim in the Subsequent Years - Stanley Cohen talks of the institutionalism of that which once iconoclastic. Critical Crim has officially been established and accepted (unlike it once wasn’t) 1. The Hegemony of the Practical o Garland sees history of Crim, as something that emerged around the institutions of control. Starting from correctionalism with stress on individual positive and then subsequently the ‘crime control complex’ with stress on rational choice and situational control, going to the Crim of every day 2. The Critical Moment o 1970s saw a challenge against modern Crim in favour of more radical social politics. Crim became more reflexive, critical and more theoretical but it was not long lasting o Critical Crim is really just a phase from the past, Garland mentions that in his blurb… pg. 358 3. The critical Midwife o Was a movement initially aimed to enhance prisoner’s rights, minimize imprisonment, restrict state power and predictive restraint o This radical Crim was short but radical! The NDC, with USA mounted a scathing criticism of the CJS and the prisons in particular (pointing out its failures) Wait a Moment - Young’s problem with Garland’s revisionist history of Critical Crim is that it doesn’t correspond to reality, he argues that Critical Crim (what he supports) and its developments and saying that radical Crim have only a standard of progression - The 10 ironies he listed are important today, and all the more so with growth of the American gulag, the penchant for the scapegoating of poor, the immigrant and drug user and the way in which crime control has become a major currency of politics - As to the role of Critical Crim as the midwife of reaction the criticism in the 70s were directed against the fact that prisons failed to rehabilitate and a quasi-medical model was growing with notions of treating offenders The Flourishing of Critical Criminology - Young: that critical Crim in this age of the Gulag and the punitive turn is massively needed, it is the counter-voice to neoliberalism and conservatism  many works support the flourishing of the Critical Crim - The CJSs expansion means a larger amount of studies, papers, research, and other works done on Criminology The Illegitimacy of Critique - Thinker and writers still say that late modernity has brought a new predicament wherein the space for fundamental critique is rapidly shrinking = seen in George Pavlish example, says that for a critique to work must fulfill 2 strategies: o First the subject of diluting pragmatism, interesting itself in matter of crime control and technical efficiency o Basing itself on emancipatory rhetoric within untenable belief in universal progress and the possibilities of a utopian future - Critical Criminologist is advised to dip a deep and impenetrable moat around the ivory tower within which the exuberant discourses of unreason reign – whilst outside a plethora of cruel and insistent practices occur which systematically limit human emancipation whilst being justified by false technical and administrative reasons o The exposure of irony depends on this^ to critique the practices of present day system The Coordinates of Order: Class and Identity in the Late Modernity - There is a distinction between the sphere of distribution and that of recognition o Distributive justice: notion of fairness of reward and a meritocracy o Justice of Recognition: notion of respect and status allocated to all



-

Both have the notion of a basic equality but rather than a general equality of outcome: a hierarchy of reward and recognition dependant on the individual’s achievements Genesis of crime and punishment: o That a major cause of crime lies in deprivation o A common argument is that widespread economic and ontological insecurity in the population engenders a punitive response to crime and deviancy

The Journey into Late Modernity - Last third of the 20th century has witnessed a remarkable transformation in the lives of citizens living in advanced industrial societies, post-war settlement with high-employment, stable family structures, and instead of a consensus of value there is now a burgeoning pluralism and individualism - These changes has been brought about by market forces which have systematically transformed both the sphere of production and consumption (shift from Fordism to Post-Fordism) - The world of leisure is transformed form one mass basic consumption to one where choice and preference is elevated to a major ideal and where the constant stress on immediacy, hedonism and self-actualisation has had a profound effect on late sensibilities o Shift in relative deprivation from being a comparison between groups to that which is between individuals The Identity Crisis and the Attractions of Essentialism - In the “exclusive society” young discusses the attractions of essentialism to the ontologically insecure and denigrated - It is the very nature to feeling that the human condition is one of shifting sands, and that social order is feckless and arbitrary o To essentialise oneself is to negatively essentialise others, Crime a...