THEORIES AND THEORISTS

In a research, theory describes the boundaries to how the objects of a study are determined, and provides the lenses with which subject matters are filtered to clarify complex issues (Creswell, 2009, p. 51).  Accordingly, it further provides those systematize perceptions on which research ideas are set, serves as guide to academic interpretations, and moreover, in criminal justice, it is inevitably the means of establishing policies in crime, practice, and decision making. Essentially, in criminal justice, theory is ideally centered on crime and crime rates (Kraska, 2006). The theory of punishment and the broken window theory, have characterized the criminal justice field for the last half a century. The theory of punishment is both retributive and utilitarian and a part of Rawls’ work on social justice (Robinson, 2010). 

 

Accordingly, the theory of social justice is based on the pretext that if democratic societies treat citizens fairly and equally, then what issues are central and ideal to them? The question is based on the assumption that democratic systems strive to treat all citizens fairly, and as social equals—against the backdrop of justice (Rawls, 2003, p. 79). Social Scientists James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling introduced the Broken Window Theory in an article published in the Atlantic Monthly back in March, 1982. The argument in the broken window theory is that, leaving the broken windows to an unoccupied building unrepaired has the tendency of inviting hooligans to break additional windows. 

Sooner or later, those same vandals may try to break into the property. And once nothing is done, they will eventually attempt to squat on the property, if it continues to remain vacant. Wilson and Kelling (1982) argued subsequently that the broken window theory may be applied to a number of real life situations. Take an unattained sidewalk for instance. If trash is not immediately picked up on littering, it eventually adds up, and soon people will start leaving bags of trash from restaurants like McDonald that offer drive-through option.

The rationale for the theory, the authors stated, is that a good way to prevent crime, is to address them immediately and not when it gets out of hand. Take care of a problem earlier than later. A fixes for the theory of broken window, is the, Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities by Kelling and Coles (1996), in which it is argued at length that to prevent deviant social behaviors and crime in societies, immediately address those issues that give rise to the social problems. 

In criminal justice, there is a close link between crime prevention and punishment. According to Kraska (2006, p. 168), theories in criminal justice are mostly used to find ways in solving crimes. Thus, like the broken window theory, the punishment theory is also meant to prevent crime. The use of punishment to prevent crime is further reinforced in the Stanford Encyclopedia, that those laws, which prescribe punishment for the commission of crime, are designed in ways that prevent future criminal behaviors. As a result, the crime prevention is precise and broad. In order to prevent others from committing crimes, the options must be broad based. In precise terms, punishment serves as clear indication that those who commit crimes will be punished. 

Consequently, the preciseness of punishment prevents offenders from recommitting crimes. Additionally, Creswell (2009, p. 69) also alluded that theory may be broad or narrow in scope—at the broad level, punishment is retributive. It goes to justify that people are punished because they deserve to be punished for their crimes, and to restitute the harm done to society (Davis, 1992). 

The theories of punishment and broken windows are quite important to our American justice system, how crime is prevented and solved, and moreover, they resonate with the American democratic governance. 

Besides, a number of scholarly debates in the social sciences in general, that seeking to understand the why of crime control, and the entire gamut of criminal justice, is not only academically demanding, it is quite fascinating, and rewarding than the factors that influence crime (as cited in Kraska, 2006, p. 171). Nonetheless, seeking to investigate the essence of these theories as they relate to criminal justice is extremely important to the development and realization of policy reforms (Crank, 2003). 

Since punishment and crime prevention are important elements in criminal justice, they therefore serve as the theoretical lenses that guide my effort to investigate the factors influencing the rise in terrorism. Central in my research, are the issues of justice and fairness as constituted in the theory of punishment. One question that my research will attempt to answer is whether or not the recent rise in terrorism activities, especially since September 11, 2001, is due to the severe punishment meted against terrorists by the US and its allies to combat the spread of terrorism globally? 

The question also exists whether the fight against global terrorism is an unjust one, especially with how information is extracted from those branded as terrorist suspects? How consistent is this fight to end terrorism with Rawls’ expectations of democratic societies, that they are guided by rules and procedures, and moreover, just? This expectation as speculated in his theory of punishment is meant to shape the supporting notion of justice and detailing the fairness, reasonable and rational manner that all men should be treated (Rawls, 2003, p. 7). In addition to Rawls theories of social justice and punishment, are the classical thoughts of John Stuart Mill’s theory of utilitarianism, Cesare Beccaria, Jeremy Bentham, rationale choice theory and finally, the deterrence theory.                   

Reference

Bedau, Hugo Adam and Kelly, Erin, "Punishment", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Available here http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2010/entries/punishment/.

 

Crank, J. P. (2003). Imagining Justice. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Davis, M. (1992). To Make the Punishment Fit the Crime: Essays in the Theory of Criminal Justice, Boulder, CO: Westview, pp. 42–68.

Kelling, G., & Coles, C. (1996). Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities. Touchstone, New York, NY.

Rawls, J. (2003). Justice as fairness: A restatement (2^nd ed.). Boston, MA: Belknap Press. 

Robinson, M. (2010). Assessing criminal justice practice using social justice theory. Social Justice Res, 23(1), 77-97.

Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken windows: The police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic, NJ. Available at http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/_atlantic_monthly-broken_windows.pdf.