#beccaria

[detournementsmineurs]

Luisa Beccaria, Pre-Fall 2016.

[innabesedina]

Cesare Beccaria

CESARE BECCARIA WAS AN ITALIAN CRIMINOLOGIST, JURIST, PHILOSOPHER, AND POLITICIAN, WHO IS WIDELY CONSIDERED ONE OF THE GREATEST THINKERS OF THE AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT.

[lios-archive]

Back at philosophy shit

[flyinbanachab]

Comfortember 23: Exhaustion

The desert had no roads, no landmarks, not even any scenery. Just an unending expense of yellow under an unending expense of blue.

As such, it took Rebecca longer than it should have to notice the growing hole in the center of her vision. It's just glare. It's just afterimages from the sun. It's nothing. It's fine. She blinked furiously and kept driving, willing it to go away, refusing to give in-- until phantom fireworks started flickering across the sky.

Read on AO3 or...

"Fucking hell," she spat, stomping on the break. The truck lurched to a stop and Rebecca dropped her forehead to the steering wheel. A fucking migraine. A fucking MIGRAINE. It had to be NOW, of all possible fucking times. Was it the brightness of the sand? Maybe the lack of sleep, as hard as they'd been pushing since they'd received the call. Or maybe it was just the general stress of, you know, plotting to overthrow the government. The irony of the stress-triggered migraine... 

...could suck it.

"FUCK," she said into the steering column. It had been years, literal years, since the last one, so long she thought she'd outgrown them. Now maybe, maybe she'd get lucky today: her vision could clear after a few minutes and that would be that. No pain, no nausea, just feeling a little out of sorts for the rest of the day. But... that hardly ever happened. More likely she was ten minutes away from fighting not to puke all over the truck. And that could last all. Fucking. Day.

Best to wake Maria before she was completely incapacitated. On the off chance it was a false alarm, well, she'd understand. Rebecca hated to do it--Maria was only 3 hours off a 10-hour stint--but they couldn't afford to stop. No telling what was going on at Central. Every minute counted.

Rebecca looked for the door handle and saw only a vaguely swirling mass of darkness. Goddammit. Finding it by feel instead, she stumbled across the sand--already hot, god the desert sucks--and somehow fumbled open the latch on the trailer. A blast of cool air greeted her and she eagerly climbed up into it. This refrigerated truck had cost more than she would ever admit, but during this crossing it was literally a life saver. 

Maria lay on the makeshift pallet at the front of the trailer. The past months had sent them all over Xing, from lavish mansions to shadowy alleys, finalizing deals brokered from an unremarkable general store in east Amestris. Maria's Xingese had been a real asset-- hell, Maria had been a real asset. Smart, capable, determined, eager...

        Jean leaned forward in his wheelchair. "Ross isn't just another piece of cargo to pick up. She's your partner on this operation."         "You're seriously going to make me work with a stranger on this? It's just gonna slow me down."         "Don't worry," he said with a wink. "You'll get along great."         "Listen, just because YOU get along with everyone--"         "Becca. Trust me on this one."

For once, Jean had been right. The more Rebecca got to know her... the more she wanted to get to know her. Maybe once this whole thing was over... if they survived... and weren't in prison...

"Becca?" a groggy voice sounded from the haze.

"Sorry- it's only nine am. But we've got a situation." Before Maria could leap up with gun drawn, Rebecca hastened to add, "We're safe. But... I've got a fucking migraine coming on. I can't see to drive."

She was rubbing at her right temple, she realized. Yeah, it was starting to throb. And her ears were starting to ring. Suddenly she found herself sitting on the floor of the truck. 

"Woah, hey! Here." Maria's arms were around her shoulders, helping her up, guiding her to the pallet. Rebecca flopped onto it like a fish and threw an arm over her eyes. Here came the nausea.

"What can I do?" Maria asked, concerned but not panicky.

"Nothing, unless you've got migraine meds on you." Easy to get at any drug store. Not so easy to get in the middle of a giant fucking desert. "Can you drive?" A pause. She'd gotten, what, three hours of sleep, after ten hours behind the wheel? It was a terrible idea. Maria should be sleeping. But what choice did they have? Every minute counted.

"Of course." There's that steel. Rebecca nodded minutely. But the doors didn't close. "There's really nothing else I can do?"

"Just gotta--" deep breath-- "wait it out now. No time. Drive!"

A hand on her shoulder. "Ok."

Then the doors slammed shut, agonizingly loud, and a moment later the truck roared to life, choked into gear, and lurched into motion.  Time blurred into a haze of misery. She focused on her breathing and hoped Maria was staying awake up there.

At some point the truck jerked to a stop and the doors opened. "Becca? How are you?" 

"Extremely fucking bad," she groaned, making Maria laugh sympathetically.

"Have you had any water lately?"

"... no." Definitely hadn't thought about that. Who could think? A canteen was pressed into her hands. 

"It's open," Maria said. Rebecca grunted and managed to drink without opening her eyes.

"Still ok to drive?" Rebecca asked. 

A pause. A long pause.

"I'm starting to doze off," Maria admitted.

"Shit."

"Yeah." Another pause. "I just needed to get up and walk around, I'm sure it'll be--"

"Too risky. Come on." Rebecca scooted as far as she could to the edge, gingerly turning her back to Maria. Even moving slowing, the world rushed and swirled around her like it was made of water, and she had to take three deep breaths before she could speak again. "Naptime."

"But we can't afford to--"

"We can't afford to crash either." They both knew it was true. They both knew it sucked. But. Sometimes you don't have a choice. Bodies give out. "Come on. The sooner you sleep the sooner we'll be back on the road. Or the. Whatever the fuck. Back on the sand."

"I don't want to bother you, I can sleep in the cab." Rebecca tried to keep her reply professional. "It's a hundred degrees in there. It's fine." Better than fine. "Come on already."

"If you're sure..." Maria carefully sat down next to her, gently stretched out next to her, back to back. Oh, she was sure.

And then-- it was quiet. And still. And dark. And Maria's back pressed warmly against hers, breathing softly. Hardly how she'd imagined their first time in a bed together. She didn't even have time to enjoy it; Rebecca dropped to sleep almost immediately. Central would just have to wait.

[the-amateur-criminologist]

#1. Deterrence Theory: Three Characteristics

By Cesare Beccaria

This is probably the first theory you’ll learn about in a criminology class since Beccaria contributed a lot to the classical school of thought to which deterrence theory is apart of. Remember: Deterrence theory assumes that humans are rational, calculating, and hedonistic (self-interested).

Here’s the first proposition that we will explore today: Punishments should be severe, swift, and certain to effectively deter someone from crime.  

So, first off, what does it mean to be deterred? Well, put simply, it means that someone refrains from doing something. In the context of this post, someone decides not to commit a crime by weighing the costs and benefits of their actions (because only rational people can do this). 

Cost-benefit analysis in regards to deterrence theory is basically someone looking to see if the consequences of their criminal behavior are greater than the benefits they could get from engaging in the act. 

Example:

So let’s say I want to steal a candy bar from a grocery store. Being a rational human being, I would stop and ask myself whether this $0.50 piece of chocolate is worth, let’s say, a potential $100 fine and a ban from this store (which is close to, and most convenient to me and my household). According to Deterrence theory, I, as a logical person, would probably say that the costs outweigh the benefits, and that I will not commit the crime. To me, a $0.50 candy bar isn’t worth a potential $100 fine and a ban from a store close to me. Not to mention my peers would know me as a thief. Here, I was successfully deterred by the consequences.

As an extension, let’s say if I get caught, the punishment would be a slap on the wrist and that all the associates will know my face. Let’s further say that I am in a different state and that it is a known fact that the cameras don’t work in the store. As a rational person, I would steal the candy bar because the costs (slap on the wrist and my identity known to associates) do NOT outweigh the benefits (a chocolate candy bar). What’s more, I don’t live in the state so my reputation will not be negatively impacted, and security is not as tight. Here, I was not deterred.

You’ll notice that this is a very simple explanation of the term “deter.” We will discuss the types of deterrence in a different post. 

So now let’s move on to the three characteristics of deterrence! Let’s start with their definitions:

Severity

The magnitude or intensity of punishment

Celerity (Swiftness)

How quickly punishment follows the commission of the offense

Certainty

How likely it is to be caught and punished if one has committed a criminal offense

To be deterred, a punishment must be swift, certain, and severe. This means that you have to have all of these characteristics for a punishment to be effective. If one is missing, crime will continue to occur. Why is this?

If you are certain to get a punishment in a timely manner (swiftly), but the punishment is not severe enough, then the person will continue to commit the crime

Think of stealing a car and almost immediately getting arrested and convicted (certainty) and being quickly punished (swiftness) with a $10 fine (lack of severity).

If you are certain to get a severe punishment, but it is not enacted swiftly, a person will continue to commit crime.

Think of stealing that same car and almost immediately getting caught (certainty), and then being punished with a 3 year prison sentence (severity). But instead of a being immediately punished (lack of swiftness), you are likely to be punished in about 2 years.

If you are likely to get a severe punishment in a timely manner, but these are not certain (you’re unlikely to get caught and punished), the person will continue to commit the crime.

Think of that same car being stolen. You will get caught and punished swiftly with a 3 year prison sentence, but you are not always guaranteed this due to... let’s say the police’s horrible response rate in the area of question.

So that’s about it in regards to the three characteristics of Deterrence Theory. Let me know if you have any questions or corrections for me! 

[What’s next?]

Reference

Paternoster, R., & Bachman, R. (2001). Essays in Contemporary Criminological Theory: Explaining Criminals and Crime. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc. 

[frassino]

luisa beccaria fall 2019

[the-real-cesare-beccaria-blog]

Beccaria: Thoughts on the Justice System

Anyone who read my treatise On Crimes and Punishments should know that I believe the death penalty as well as torture should be condemned. The right to a fair and speedy trial, as well as to be exempt from any cruel and unusual punishment I feel are both inherent human rights that should not be violated. The right to avoid double jeopardy when being prosecuted for crimes is also something that should not be overlooked. I see people everyday forgetting that criminals are people too, only one misstep away from us law-abiding citizens.

[the-amateur-criminologist]

#1. Classical School of Thought

This is probably the first paradigm (school of thought) you will be introduced to in a criminology class. This post will give you a general idea of what theories under this paradigm look at to explain crime. 

Themes:

Free will and rational deliberation 

You commit crime by choice

Cost-benefit analysis

Does the cost of committing crime outweigh the benefits?

If so, no crime will be committed

If not, crime will be committed

Principle Themes

Human beings are

Rational

Calculating

Hedonistic (self-serving)

Maximize pleasure and minimize costs and pain (for society)

Well known philosophers include Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. Both were utilitarian philosophers who believed that social benefits should be maximized for society.

Cesare Beccaria contributed a bit to the Classical Paradigm:

Wrote Essay on Crimes and Punishment

Condemned 

Obscure laws

Unlimited judicial power

Confessions by torture

Punishments that exceed the harm caused

Important components

Rebuked

Irrationality

Cruelty

Capriciousness of existing laws

The judicial and penal system

Proposed a series of reforms that were more humane, rational, efficient, and fair

Codify laws

Write laws down

Reduces discretion

Use of sworn and freely given testimony

Elimination of the death penalty for select crimes

Equal treatment of citizens

Create a system that is swift, certain, and severe enough so that costs outweigh benefits

Thomas Hobbes was actually pretty important too.

He said that if everyone were “free,” then there would be a “war against all.” This meant that if everyone was free to do what they wanted, people could not only rob others, but they could be robbed by the person who robbed them. Because of this, he argued that people were actually not free because they were in fear of others.

  He created the social contract

Posited that we should give up some of our freedom to a governing body to obtain protection 

Basically lose some liberty to not get your ankles broke

Hopefully this sounds familiar (we let the criminal justice system - police, courts, corrections - to enact “justice” instead of taking it upon ourselves to do so)

The state’s function is to use as little force as possible to ensure compliance with the terms of the social contract

The point is to minimize pain and maximize utility

Here are a few other philosophers

Rousseau

Voltaire

Montesquieu

Lock

Three of the most well known theories under this paradigm are (If I have started a series on any of these, I’ll link to the first post of those theories.):

Deterrence Theory

Rational Choice Theory

Routine Activities Theory

So there it is. This is an overview and generally what I learned in class. 

Reference

Paternoster, R., & Bachman, R. (2001). Essays in Contemporary Criminological Theory: Explaining Criminals and Crime. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.