Why Violence Leading Questions Regarding The Conceptualization and Reality of Violence in Society William E. Thornton Install Download
Why Violence Leading Questions Regarding The Conceptualization and Reality of Violence in Society William E. Thornton Install Download
https://textbookfull.com/product/why-violence-leading-questions-
regarding-the-conceptualization-and-reality-of-violence-in-
society-william-e-thornton/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-epistemology-of-violence-
understanding-the-root-causes-of-violence-in-schooling-beth-m-
titchiner/
https://textbookfull.com/product/why-we-are-losing-the-war-on-
gun-violence-in-the-united-states-marie-crandall/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-anarchy-the-east-india-
company-corporate-violence-and-the-pillage-of-an-empire-william-
dalrymple/
https://textbookfull.com/product/domestic-violence-and-criminal-
justice-1st-edition-lee-e-ross/
The Power of Memory and Violence in Central America
Rachel Hatcher
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-power-of-memory-and-
violence-in-central-america-rachel-hatcher/
https://textbookfull.com/product/intimate-violence-and-abuse-in-
families-fourth-edition-gelles/
https://textbookfull.com/product/engaging-men-and-boys-in-
violence-prevention-michael-flood/
https://textbookfull.com/product/cultural-perceptions-of-
violence-in-the-hellenistic-world-1st-edition-michael-champion/
https://textbookfull.com/product/politics-and-violence-in-
central-america-and-the-caribbean-hannes-warnecke-berger/
Why Violence?
2
Why Violence?
Leading Questions Regarding the
Conceptualization and Reality of
Violence in Society
SECOND EDITION
Lydia Voigt
William E. Thornton
Leo G. Barrile
Dee Wood Harper
3
Copyright © 2017
Carolina Academic Press, LLC
All Rights Reserved
Names: Voigt, Lydia, author. | Thornton, William E., 1946- author. | Barrile,
Leo G., author. | Harper, Dee Wood, author.
Title: Why violence? : leading questions regarding the conceptualization and
reality of violence in society / Lydia Voigt, William E. Thornton, Leo G.
Barrile, and Dee Wood Harper.
Description: Second edition. | Durham, North Carolina : Carolina Academic
Press, [2017] | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016057531 | ISBN 9781611637793 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Violent crimes. | Victims of violent crimes. | Violence.
Classification: LCC HV6493 .T48 2017 | DDC 303.6--dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016057531
e-ISBN 978-1-53100-005-9
4
Contents
Preface
5
Public Health Perspective
Human Rights Perspective
Corruption and Human Rights Violations
Commercial/Commodity Perspective
Debunking Violence Myths
Metaphorical Blindness
Conclusion
References
6
Legal Rights of Violent Crime Victims
Core Victim Rights
Victim Services
Theories of Violence Victimization
Sociocultural, Social Disorganization, and Social Ecological Theories
Victim-Criminal Interaction and Victim Precipitation Theories
Routine Activity and Lifestyles Theories
Social Strain and Interpersonal Conflict Theories
Symbolic Interaction and Learning Theories
Conflict/Critical Humanist and Radical Feminist Theories
Underserved Populations as Victims of Institutional and State Violence
Homeless Victimization
Sex Worker Victimization
Hate Crime Victimization
Bullying as Violent Victimization
Environmental Degradation as Violence
Human Rights Violations and Corruption as Violence
Financial Victimization as Violence
Conclusion
References
7
Characteristics of Offenders
Characteristics of Victims
Typologies
Assault
The Law
Patterns and Trends
Characteristics of Offenders
Characteristics of Victims
Typologies
Interpersonal Violence in Institutional Contexts
Family Violence
Intimate Partner Abuse
Child Abuse and Maltreatment
Child-Parental Abuse
School Violence
Violence in Primary and Secondary Schools
Violence on College and University Campuses
Workplace Violence
Community Violence/Hate Crimes
Conclusion
References
8
Harm and Blame in Corporate Violence
Corporate Violence and Dangerous, Unhealthy Consumer Products
Ten Characteristics of Corporate Violence
The Definition and Social Construction of Corporate Violence by Social Scientists
Social Construction of Corporate Violence in Law
Social Construction of Corporate Violence in the Mass Media and the Public
Corporate Violence in the Workplace
Organizational Culture as a Cause of Corporate Violence
Is There a Subculture of Corporate Violence?
The “Dark Side” of Organizational Culture: The Challenger and Columbia Disasters
The BP Disaster: Employee Safety and Environmental Destruction
Harming the Environment — The Most Criminalized Corporate Violence
State Corporate Crime: Violations of Migrant Workers
Preventing Corporate Violence
Conclusion
References
9
Organized Crime and Violence
Definition and Nature of Organized Crime
History of Organized Crime in the United States
Contemporary Transnational Organized Crime Networks and Activities
Trafficking in Persons
Smuggling of Migrants
Cocaine and Heroin Trafficking
Counterfeit Products
Maritime Piracy
Environmental Resource Trafficking
Cybercrime — Child Pornography
Control of Transnational Organized Crime
Conclusion
References
10
Sovereign Citizen Militias
Intergroup Political Violence
Anti-Black Hate Crime
Lynchings
Anti-Abortion Attacks
Sexual Orientation Hate Crime
Conclusion
References
11
Differential Association and Social Learning Theories
Social Control and Social Bond Theories and the General Theory of Crime
Humanistic/Critical Theories of Violence
Defining Legitimate and Illegitimate Violence
The Political Economy and Violence
Violence and the Reproduction of Power Control
The Social Geometry of Conflict and Intensity of Violence
Structural Production of Violence and the Cycle of Violence, Suppression of Freedom, and
Inequality
Conclusion
References
Index
12
List of Boxes, Images,
Figures and Tables
Image 1.2 Media shooter, Vester Lee Flanagan, using his phone camera to video his shooting of Alison
Parker.
Box 2.2 NIBRS Crimes against Persons, Property and Society: Group A Offenses
Box 2.3 NIBRS Crimes against Persons, Property and Society: Group Incident Report
Box 2.4 Types of Data and Potential Sources for Collecting Violence Information
13
Figure 2.2 Behavioral and Health Consequences of Violence
Table 2.1 Violent Crimes in the U. S. by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 1990–2014
Table 2.2 Theories on the Crime Decline (Based on Brennan Center Analysis)
Table 2.3 Violent Victimization by Type of Violent Crime 2005, 2013, and 2014
Table 2.4 2012 Self-Report Survey of Violent Activity of 14,343 High School Seniors
Table 2.5 Homicide Cause of Death — ICD Codes: E960–E969
Table 2.6 Global Homicide Statistics: Rate and Total Volume by Region for 2012
Image 3.1 Protestors seek recognition for bias crimes against the homeless and better protection.
Image 3.2 Deepwater Horizon oil rig burning.
14
Image 7.1 The machine gun effectively put an end to cavalry charges in World War I.
Image 7.2 Infamous entrance building to the Auschwitz II (Birkenau) death camp in Oswiecim.
Image 7.3 Jewish Neighborhood of Paris: Infants murdered by the Nazis with the complicity of the Vichy
government.
Image 7.4 Lethal Injection Gurney. The death chamber of the new lethal injection facility at San Quentin
State prison in San Quentin, California, September 21, 2010.
15
Preface
Why Violence? Leading Questions Regarding the Conceptualization and Reality of Violence in Society presents a
comprehensive discussion of violence that is organized around overarching questions that have perplexed
human beings since time immemorial. Using the lens of the social scientific perspective and analytical tools,
this book provides a broad, interdisciplinary understanding of the complexities and controversies/debates
surrounding the problem of violence, especially in democratic societies, with special emphasis on the
antithetical relationship between violence and democracy. This book not only examines the relationship
between violence and the violation of democratic principles, such as human rights violations, but it also
engenders the idea that a greater commitment to democratic values, including equality and freedom and the
preservation of human rights as well as a demonstrative preference for non-violence, is arguably the most
effective way to prevent and reduce violence. Drawing upon sociology, criminology, anthropology,
psychology, political science, economics, and history as well as professional specialty areas including criminal
justice, law, and public health, Why Violence? is designed to enhance appreciation for scientifically constructed
knowledge and the application of critical thinking and analytical techniques in assessing various databases,
theories of causation, social policies, and solutions related to violence. Special emphasis is given to social
policies that are intended to prevent and control violence in democratic societies, paying particular attention
to the underlying theoretical assumptions and their social justice and human rights implications. The
relationship between science and social policy, as well as questions associated with the ethics and politics of
scientific theory and research related to violence, are considered on state, national, and international levels,
with careful attention given to the patterns of violence in democratic societies with respect to differential life
chances, poverty, gender and racial inequality, and the consequences of changes taking place in the world.
The book begins with the question of what is the meaning of violence. The relative ubiquity and ambiguity
of the term has made it difficult to find a definition of violence that captures its complexity and often
contradictory forms of expression. Violence refers to various acts such as homicide, rape, robbery, and assault
as well as collective violence, war, and terrorism; it may be found in our homes, workplaces, schools, places of
worship, and communities, both locally and globally. In everyday life, the concept of violence seems to draw
its significance more from the ways it is used to categorize certain types of behavior and certain types of
people or countries than from the ways it is applied to describe concrete phenomena. As a consequence, the
concept is typically employed as a pejorative label or negative “summary symbol” serving mainly as an
intensifier of emotions or judgments which leads to mistrust or fear of others. Through its ubiquitous and
ambiguous application, violence has become the quintessential metaphor that we all live by; that is, it is
symbolically ingrained in our language, thinking, and behavior. Due to its lack of specificity and function as a
symbolic intensifier, it has lent itself to being politically exploited. As a result of the challenges associated
with violence, its study calls for a very cautious and critical approach.
Why Violence? explores the many manifest and latent expressions of violence and the numerous ways in
16
which violence is understood in contemporary society, ranging from common parlance, everyday perceptions
and myths to governmental proclamations and scientific claims. It covers age-long questions such as why
some human beings, under certain circumstances, react in violent or aggressive ways and others do not, and
why some social forces/institutions tend to encourage or exacerbate violence and others do not. The book also
treats questions that have not conventionally been associated with violence such as: why are acts of social
injustice, environmental degradation, and gross abuse of power not considered acts of violence per se? In this
sense, the book serves to fill a gap in the literature by raising not only the enduring questions of violence, but
also new questions about the conceptualization and reality of violence. For example, should the recent
financial crisis stemming from mass fraudulent acts that have adversely affected the lives of millions of people
be considered acts of violence? Should homeless populations be considered victims of violence? Should
unchecked and blatant air and water pollution be considered forms of violence? Unlike many books on
violence that focus on narrow depictions of certain types of perpetrators and victims, this book offers a
broader consideration of violence extending beyond criminal violence at the interpersonal level to include
discussions of violence at the institutional and structural levels.
The book begins with the question Why Violence? and ends with the question Why not peace? In addressing
the leading questions about violence and ultimately peace, the book introduces readers to the complexities
associated with violence and violence studies as well as with non-violence and peace studies and their
implications for the future of democracy. State-of-the-art thinking and associated research/knowledge-base
on violence and non-violence are discussed, providing a critical analysis of the interplay between popular
questions of why there is a “disconnect” between the public's understanding of violence and non-violence,
including official responses to violence and peace and related scientific evidence.
Special thanks must be expressed to Rae Taylor, who has contributed to the chapter in this book that deals
with victims of violence. We would also like to thank our many colleagues who have written on the topics of
violence and peace and human rights over the years and have inspired us in ways that would be difficult to
enumerate in a few words. Finally, we would like to extend our appreciation to all at Carolina Academic Press
for their support on this project.
17
Chapter 1
PART 1
Common Definitions
• Violence as Physical Force
• Violence as Violation
• Scientific/Criminological Definition of Violence
° Violence and the Law
° The Measurement of Violence
° Violence Victims
° Violence Typologies
° The Etiology of Violence
° Criminology and the Study of the Criminal Justice System and the Public Order
• Levels of Violence
° Interpersonal
° Institutional
° Structural
PART 2
The Social Construction of Violence in Society
• Informal Consensual Reality v. Formal Consensual Reality
° Common Stock Knowledge
° Violence as a Social Problem
• Cultural and Symbolic Expressions of Violence: Language and Metaphors
° Arguments and Debates Framed as War/Violence
° Violence as a Summary Label
• Media Images v. Reality of Violence
° Media Construction of Violence
° Old Legacy Media v. New Media
18
PART 3
Competing Perspectives on Violence
• Criminal Justice Perspective
• Public Health Perspective
• Human Rights Perspective
° Corruption and Human Rights Violations
• Commercial/Commodity Perspective
Conclusion
References
—————
Violence is the foremost social problem confronting human beings in democratic societies, particularly in
the United States. The problem of violence extends beyond its expression as a criminal justice or a public
health or a human rights issue and requires a holistic, integrated understanding of various perspectives as well
as a critical consideration of approaches and solutions. Why Violence? offers a broad, interdisciplinary
treatment of the complexities and controversies surrounding the problem of violence with special emphasis on
violence as a violation of democratic/constitutional values and principles threatening human beings living in
democratic societies today. The book advances the idea that in addition to rhetorical affirmation of democratic
ideals, a greater demonstrable commitment to and compliance with democratic and constitutional rights and
values (including a commitment to nonviolence and acknowledgement of the antithetical relationship
between violence and democracy) is arguably the most effective approach or remedy to the problem of
violence. Drawing upon criminology, sociology, anthropology, psychology, political science, economics,
history, philosophy, and law, Why Violence? has been designed to enhance an appreciation for scientifically
constructed knowledge and critical thinking and analytical techniques in assessing various databases, theories
of causation, social policies, and solutions.
We begin this book with a consideration of questions related to how violence is understood in democratic
societies, especially in the U.S. How is violence commonly defined? What are the distinguishing
characteristics of the scientific construction of violence? What are the different levels of violence and their
corresponding forms and patterns? What is the relationship between legitimacy of violence and power? What
is the relationship between violence and democracy? How is violence socially/culturally constructed? How
does the media construct violence? How do we explain various and often conflicting interpretations of the
meaning and uses of violence? How do we explain the disconnect between political or public perceptions of
violence and scientific evidence? What are the key perspectives on violence in society? What are the leading
myths related to violence?
19
20
PART 1
Common Definitions
Violence is a conceptual enigma wrapped in a social paradox, making it particularly difficult to define. Few
concepts are so widely used, representing such a broad range of meanings and interpretations, and referring to
such a vast spectrum of phenomena. For instance, Table 1.1 (below) lists a small sample of acts/behaviors that
both commonly and less commonly come to mind when we hear the word violence, which together illustrate
the extensive variety of acts/behaviors that may be associated with the concept of violence and only represent
the tip of the iceberg.
Even though some incidents of violence may be dismissed or ignored because they are considered “normal”
(e.g., sibling fighting or criminal violence in urban areas with high crime rates) or because they are seemingly
invisible (e.g., psychological violence) or escape public attention (e.g., injury resulting from corporate
violation of safety regulations), yet our society appears to be preoccupied with violence and oversaturated with
violent images. Violence has countless forms of expression and may be found in all social settings—in our
homes, workplaces, schools, places of worship, and in communities as well as in recreational sports,
entertainment media, and across all levels of public and private institutions. Violence signifies many different
things to people in different historical periods and in different cultural contexts. Indeed, violence conjures up
many images of reality and is frequently associated with other actions, behaviors, events, or concepts such as
crime, terrorism, and war. It has also been argued that violence is explicitly or implicitly a form of justice—
expressed as punishment, retaliation, resistance, or revenge (Black, 1983). Other scholars have linked it with
injustice and exploitation (Bufacchi, 2009).
Violence has been noted not only for its ubiquity (pervasiveness) and ambiguity (lack of clarity and
uncertainty), but also its political exploitation (Imbusch, 2003; Keane, 2004). In fact, particular acts of
violence may be considered legitimate and illegitimate at the same time, usually depending on who is
applying the label and who is being labeled (Apter, 1997; Barak, 2003; 2007). For instance, during the war
with Iraq, people in the U.S. referred to Iraq's military defense arsenal as weapons of “mass destruction” while
referring to their own weapons as “peacekeepers.” Tony Platt (1992) writes that “the happy combination of
relatively vague descriptive content, coupled with a negative moral and emotional connotation, makes the
word violence ideal for use in polemic discourse” (pp. 187–188).
21
While violence is mainly known for its pejorative connotation and association with destructive and lethal
consequences, the creation of fear, and as a cause of social disorganization and anomie, it is also used to
respond to or rectify a problem, to justify action, and to mobilize publics or bring communities together. For
instance, politicians are always fighting violence with violence (e.g., “war on crime” or “war on drugs” or “war
on terrorism”). In fact, the distinction between the legitimate and illegitimate use of violence is often blurry.
For example, Ray Surette (2007, p. 113; 2015) observes: “In today's media the distinction between the crime
fighter and the criminal has all but disappeared in regard to who initiates violence and how much force is
used.”
Since the concept of violence lacks concrete specificity and often functions to emotionally charge and
politically define debates or the legitimacy of actions, it is important to approach any discussion of violence
cautiously. This chapter, which serves to introduce the book, considers some of the most enduring questions
related to the phenomenon of violence and explores multiple socially manifest and latent expressions of
violence, including the symbolic ways in which violence is understood in contemporary society. So, let's start
with a review of the definition of the term/concept of violence and how it is expressed in common parlance,
everyday perceptions, and common myths as well as governmental proclamations and scientific claims.
Violence is one of those “elephant” concepts that everyone recognizes when one sees it, but is hard-pressed
to define it. Indeed, no single definition of violence has been proffered that meets with broad agreement. No
definition successfully captures the complexities of its many forms and contexts. In everyday speech the term
is used very generally and is often interchanged with other words such as aggression, anger, hate, physical
injury, and killing. Most English dictionaries draw the origins of violence from the Latin root words violentus
or violentia (meaning physical force) and violare (meaning violation of the law). The definition of violence as
physical force is one that is most commonly used. For example, the initial entry for the word violence/violent
in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary (www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violent) is: “using or involving the
use of physical force to cause harm or damage to someone or something: showing violence.” The Oxford
Dictionaries (www.oxforddictionaries.con/us/definition/english-thesaurus/violence) definition is: “Behavior
involving physical force intended to hurt, damage or kill someone or something: showing violence ...”
including “the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force.”
22
At first glance, the definition of violence as physical force may appear to be adequate, but on careful
scrutiny it turns out to be too narrow. The definition implies the direct application of force as well as physical
contact between the aggressor and victim or object. As a result, it leaves out many acts of violence. For
instance, this definition of violence would exclude acts such as robbery. Under this definition the mere
“pointing” of a gun when committing the crime of taking or attempting to take anything of value from
another person or even “pulling” of the trigger of a gun in a homicide may not itself represent “physical force,”
yet given the consequences of such an act, it would not make sense to exclude the use of a gun (whether in a
robbery or homicide) from a definition of violence. It is important to note that it does not take “physical
force” per se to initiate a computer command to expel a guided missile (Alvarez and Bachman, 2008) or guide
a drone and launch an attack, yet this, too, is considered a violent act in terms of its consequences. The typical
dictionary definition, as it stands, also omits the act of suicide since the aggressor and the victim are one and
the same.
An important question, which is raised in connection with the definition of violence in the context of
physical force, is whether the definitions include both physical and nonphysical injury/harm. Some scholars
make a strong argument that both physical and nonphysical injury, such as psychological damage, should be
included in definitions of violence. General bias against recognizing nonphysical forms of injury (thus
denying victimization and ultimately justice) has been associated with cases of abuse such as intimate partner
abuse (Bartol and Bartol, 2005). The United States military has only recently recognized brain injuries as
“real” injuries in its award of the Purple Heart Medal for valor (Garamone, 2011).
Broader definitions of violence, such as “all types of behavior either threatened or actual that result in or are
intended to result in the damage or destruction of property or the injury or death of an individual,” are also
problematic (Moyer, 1983, p. 1618). They encompass not only the different classes of homicide
(premeditated, negligent, accidental, and justifiable), but also psychological or nonphysical harm and
aggressive behaviors found in sports such as football or hockey. These broad definitions may actually be too
inclusive, subsuming behaviors that may not be considered violent, per se.
Violence as Violation
Defining violence as violation, i.e., “to fail to keep or observe the law or to violate the law,” however, is also
not without complications (see Waldenfels, 2006). First, most legal violations are not violent; this is also true
of violations of the criminal code—most criminal offenses are not violent. Second, there are many forms of
violence that remain outside the law and are unsanctioned. Even by invoking legality in the definition of
violence as physical force, e.g., by adjusting the definition above to read: “all types of [illegal] behavior either
threatened or actual, that result in the damage or destruction of property or in the injury or death of an
individual” (Moyer, 1983, p. 1619), many forms of violence would still escape this legal definition (see Figure
1.1, below).
Employing a strictly legal definition of violence, the Nazi Holocaust, which resulted in the deaths of over
six million people, would be considered “nonviolent” on the grounds that the acts constituted legal policies of
the time. Currently, there are many forms of violence that are not part of any legal or criminal code, for
instance, a wide range of regulatory violations committed by corporations, businesses, and public officials
23
resulting in serious public injury and even deaths (e.g., safety violations, toxic waste dumping, and political
corruption and human rights violations), which many argue should be considered forms of violence (e.g.,
Barak, 2003, 2007; Geis, 2007; Barrile and Slone, 2012; and Iadicola and Shupe, 2003, 2013).
In addition to the issue of legality, debates over what is necessary to include or exclude in various
definitions have involved other considerations including whether such definitions should take into account
intentionality and considerations of subjective or emotional context, i.e., whether such acts are instrumental
(means to an end) or expressive (emotionally motivated actions). Some definitions incorporate emotional
qualities such as anger, hate, rage, or vehemence along with physical force. However, this does not solve the
problem of eliminating acts that should be considered violent by definition (e.g., the physical injury/killing
perpetrated by a gunman or killer-for-hire, whose action may be instrumental, i.e., for monetary gain), which
would still be excluded from such definitions, particularly if intentionality is not factored in. According to
most codes of law, intentionality plays an important role in determining degree of responsibility or liability.
Unintentional violent acts generally carry lesser penalties or may be excused from criminal liability.
24
political response separating myths from facts and perceptions from reality. Criminology includes a wide
range of studies related to violence in many contexts including the following subareas: law, measurement,
victimology, typologies, and etiology, as well as the study of the criminal justice system and the public order
(Gibbons, 1979; Voigt, et al., 1994). Criminologists produce the largest number as well as the greatest variety
of theories and research that pertains to violence in the U.S. and in the world. Presumably criminological
knowledge is developed by experts and professionals associated with nonprofit academic institutions (e.g.,
universities) and other research organizations (public or private establishments) whose main goal is to further
knowledge. The research/information infrastructure and institutional network is enormous and unlike any
other in the world. Moreover, it is also assumed that the development of knowledge on this level is subject to
the scrutiny of professional peers and scientific communities whose role it is to check the process and results
as well as critically review any conclusion or theories. Consequently, the dissemination/distribution
mechanisms of scientific knowledge follow a unique course, one that involves a process of careful evaluation.
The fact that scientific or criminological studies include a reviewing/critiquing process conducted by
professional peers and scientific/criminological communities represents an important ingredient or element
often missing in other types of knowledge, especially violence information created for commercial purposes.
Since, the criminological or scientific study of violence necessitates conceptual clarity and precise
measurement, rarely is the general concept of violence (referring to a wide range of phenomena) the subject of
attention in scientific investigations. Some scholars argue that “in the United States in the late twentieth
century, violent crime has become the proxy for all violence” (Brownstein, 2000, p. 10). The FBI Uniform
Crime Reports (UCR) definition of criminal violence (i.e., homicide, rape, robbery, and assault) is a commonly
used operationalization (empirical definition/measurement) of criminal violence in many studies. However, it
is important to keep in mind that the distinct forms of criminal violence such as homicide, rape, or robbery
have unique legal definitions and suggest very different profiles of perpetrators and victim as well as different
types of perpetrator/victim relationships, fact patterns, motivations or causes, and solutions or responses. As a
result, some criminologists, who have studied the history of criminal violence or international trends of
criminal violence, usually empirically define/measure or operationalize the concept using homicide as a proxy
(e.g., for historical studies see: Cartwright, 1996; Lane, 1997; Roth, 2009; Pinker, 2011; and, for
international studies see: Terrill, 2007; Van Dijk & Kangaspunta, 2000). Even though legal definitions of
homicide vary historically and culturally, homicide is used as the proxy for violence because homicide records
are among the oldest and most comparable over time and across cultures.
25
patterns of behavior/actions/events that may not be obvious to most people or well understood. For example,
cyber violence (referring to mediated violence in electronic space) for which laws have not yet been fully drafted
and for which the severity and deadly consequences are still largely unforeseen, will require greater awareness
and understanding on the part of law makers and law enforcement agents in order to adequately prevent its
real consequences (e.g., electronically manipulating computerized railway clearances that can potentially cause
horrific, massive train collisions across state and national borders) or to identify and respond to the originators
or perpetrators of violence that may be unknown and unlikely to be tracked down (Wall, 2007; Wittes and
Blum, 2015).
One of the great challenges associated with the study of violence is that there is no general repository of
information regarding violence in society. As a result, different forms of violence present varying degrees of
difficulty in obtaining data. For this reason, criminologists often must conduct studies using their own
derived datasets.
Violence Victims
Until relatively recently, most of the emphasis in the field of criminology has been on the offender. It was
not until the 1970s that the field of victimology (i.e., the study of victim-offender relationships) became an
area of concentration for criminologists. It was during this time that the National Crime Victimization
Survey (NCVS) was introduced as an alternative data set to the UCR. However, even with this alternative
data set, which employs different strategies of gathering information and includes much more information
regarding victims, the emphasis has still remained largely focused on criminal violence (excluding homicide)
as defined by the UCR. The benefits of the NCVS is that it includes additional information on victims and
public perceptions of criminal justice as well as studies focusing on various subtopics of violence such as
intimate partner violence and sexual assaults. The main problem that victimization researchers face is the lack
of information related to many forms of victimizations stemming from different levels of violence, on the
26
interpersonal, institutional, or structural levels (which will be discussed further in the chapter).
Violence Typologies
Criminologists have long sought to find a violence typology, i.e., an organizing device for categorizing large
amounts of information into mutually exclusive categories (as in the biological system of taxonomy or the
chemical periodic table). A number of typologies have been suggested. However, to date, there has not been a
universally accepted typology of violence or criminal violence or violent offenses offered. Most typologies are
based on legal (e.g., UCR typology of criminal violence) or semi-legal definitions of criminal violence
typology. There are also numerous violent offender typologies that have been developed based on information
related to such factors as the seriousness of the offense, the psychological characteristics of the offender, the
motivations of the offender, the victim-offender relationship, and the career patterns of the offender. For
example, rapists may be classified as sadistic, power control, or opportunistic (Groth and Birnbaum, 1979);
rampage school shooters have been categorized into three types: traumatized, psychotic, and psychopathic
(Langman, 2009); and workplace violence has been categorized into intrusive violence, consumer-related
violence, relationship violence, and organizational violence (Vaughan, 2002, p. 6).
An example of a more general typology of violence has been offered by existential psychologist, Rollo May,
in his well-regarded book, Power and Innocence: A Search for the Sources of Violence (1972/1998):
May's five varieties go beyond actions by individuals and groups to include acts/behaviors related to the
institutional and structural foundations of society that result in harm.
To this day, however, no definition or typology of violence has been offered either conceptually or
empirically that has been widely accepted. John Keane (2004) writes: “The search for definitions may be
fraught, but at very least it shows that the ambiguous term ‘violence’, like all concepts within human sciences,
is idealtypisch [ideal type], which is to say that it selectively highlights certain aspects of reality, which
nowhere exist in the pure form suggested by the concept” (p. 39).
27
violent behaviors or events occur.
“What causes violence?” is a very difficult question to answer. It is important to keep in mind that each
form of violence refers to actions that differ significantly in a number of ways. As noted earlier, each form of
violence (e.g., rape, mass murder, child abuse, or terrorism) suggests unique sets of aggressors and victims
with varying motives and emotional states, different social contexts or situations, varying social definitions or
response patterns, as well as different strategies of research or sources of data.
The relative strengths and weaknesses of different explanations are mainly determined by scientific merit,
with propositions and theories supported or dismissed on the basis of the reliability (i.e., referring to the
degree of consistency of findings) and validity (i.e., the degree of certainty in accuracy of measurements) of
evidence. Since no perspective has the market on truth, all the perspectives taken together enhance our
understanding of the problem of violence. Theories of violence are extremely important and must not be
taken for granted because they underlie the fundamental ways in which violence is understood in society and
how we respond to it and, ultimately, what we think of one another.
Causal models of criminal violence, derived from the field of criminology, are among the most numerous.
This may be due to the great cultural popularity of crime topics, the relative ease of obtaining crime data
(police reports and statistics), and the specificity of legal definitions (i.e., criminal codes). However, critical
attention must be given to the underpinning assumptions of the nature of human beings and society, the
operationalization or empirical definition of key variables, the relationship between the theory and supporting
research, and the appropriateness of generalizations and ethical application of results. For instance, some
researchers vaguely make violence equivalent with all crime (including public order and property offenses). By
today's standards, such vague references are considered scientifically useless. Nonetheless, when reviewing
criminological theories and research, one must be mindful of the limiting effects of certain definitions of
violence upon generalizations and policy applications.
The history of criminology suggests that no one theory has been able to explain violence. As a result, many
rival etiological theories of violence, or one of its more specific forms, have been developed from a wide
variety of disciplines and perspectives, including biological, psychological, sociological, and humanistic or
conflict approaches. Since no one vantage point or theoretical perspective can claim superiority, the
development of a more holistic, critical analysis of the complexity of the subject matter of violence is essential
in fostering understanding that can lead to effectively addressing human needs and ultimately improving the
quality of life on earth.
Criminology and the Study of the Criminal Justice System and the
Political Order
Another integral part of criminology is the scientific investigation of the criminal justice system (CJS)
including the study of its major components: (1) law enforcement, (2) courts, and (3) corrections. Since it is
the criminal justice system (including practitioners such as police, prosecutors, judges, attorney generals,
probation officers, and correction personnel) that actually responds to most acts of interpersonal violence and
deals with violent offenders, criminologists' vigilance over its functions and operations is vital. Every aspect of
the criminal justice system has been widely studied and analyzed by criminologists.
28
Criminologists working from the humanistic and conflict perspective have been particularly vigilant over
criminal justice system practices and the law and order orientation of the field. They have been especially
critical of mainstream criminology for its selective attention to interpersonal violence with relatively minor
consideration of institutional and structural patterns and causes of violence. For example, their work has been
successful in exposing some of the dangers of this biased understanding of violence, which has resulted in the
public's relative lack of awareness of significant acts of violence such as the violation of human rights,
environmental degradation, and endangerment of all living creatures on earth (Pepinsky, 1991; Friedrichs and
Friedrichs, 2002; Platt and O'Leary, 2003; Agozino, 2004; Wollford, 2006; Roth, 2010; Pawlett, 2013).
For example, it has been observed that public opinion is often formulated without full understanding of the
many complexities related to empirical evidence and scientific research surrounding various national debates
of key issues related to the administration of justice, such as capital punishment. In is interesting to note the
historical pattern of fluctuation of public opinion related to capital punishment. The Gallup Poll's
measurement of public perceptions (i.e., opinions for and against the death penalty) go back to 1937 (which
registered 59% in favor and 38% against) and extend to the present. Over this particular poll's 75-year history
the lowest point of 42 percent in favor and the highest point of 47 percent against were registered in 1966;
the highest point of 80 percent in favor was registered in 1994 and the lowest point of 16 percent against was
registered in 1995 (Gallup Poll, 2016a, www.gallup.com). (See Figure 1.2, below.)
According to the most recent Gallup polls, conducted in October 2015, the level of support for capital
punishment (61%) represents the lowest point of those in favor and the highest point of those against (37%)
over the past 15 years (2001–2015). These trends have remained stable despite vigorous debate and scientific
evidence on different aspects of the arguments, such as evidence suggesting that the death penalty is applied
unfairly. For example, there is evidence suggesting that arbitrary differences in trial procedures may be related
to trial outcomes (Bohm, 2012a; 2012b; Innocence Project, n.d.; Culbert, 2008); there is also evidence of
racism and wrongful conviction (Hawkins, 2006; Bedau, 2009). It is interesting to note that while public
opinion polls suggest majority support for the death penalty, in reality capital punishment is rarely used.
Moreover, according to 2015 data (see Figure 1.3 below), 19 states (and the District of Columbia) have
29
Other documents randomly have
different content
The text on this page is estimated to be only 27.85%
accurate
Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
textbookfull.com