#1 Even without the application of academic knowledge of theories of criminal law, human beings own the ability to identify a criminal from a noncriminal. From my point of view, that may appear contradicting to the common belief; one can evaluate people’s character by merely looking at them. Hence, there are fallacies that have been disapproved to be empirically true like “don’t judge a book by its cover” because in real life situations, people do judge books by their covers, but instead people will have a perception of a person who appears nasty to be nasty and someone who seems smart to be smart. However, it is not easy to tell from the looks of an individual what type of crime they commit even though assumptions are made that one individual who can commit one crime is likely to engage another. For instance, one who is a murderer is likely to commit rape as well. Therefore, the feeling to tell and sample out a criminal from a noncriminal by the looks is a natural feeling.
#2 I, believe that the study of theory has significance to the field of criminal justice and are worth studying even no longer used in the area . The review of arguments in crime does influence the things that are done in the real world. For instance, the positivist school of thought of states that the understanding of the people of the right versus the wrong and reasons for committing a particular crime became the weighing scale for castigation. Hence, it is the person who was to be reprimanded and not the crime, a circumstance that often applies in the real world. The study of criminal theories is essential because almost all the arguments contain within them the propositions for criminal justice policy. Some philosophy of crime at least implicitly guides some of the things done in criminal justice policy . For instance, the retribution theory of criminal justice that would support the execution of convicted murderers.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
