C/D Blocks Social and Environmental Sciences - In the first part of class, we'll begin our look at Environmental Worldviews which are connected to Environmental Value Systems (that we'll look at tomorrow). People disagree on how serious different environmental problems are and what we should do about them. These conflicts arise mostly out of differing environmental worldviews—how people think the world works and what they believe their role in the world should be. Part of an environmental worldview is determined by a person’s environmental ethics—what one believes about what is right and what is wrong in our behavior toward the environment (also called an Environmental Value System).
Some environmental worldviews are human centered (anthropocentric), focusing primarily on the needs and wants of people; others are life- or earth centered (biocentric), focusing on individual species, the entire biosphere, or some level in between.
Consider these three words: Environment, Natural and Nature. Think about what they mean to you and quickly write down your answers and after a bit, share what you wrote with two classmates. What did you write that is similar / different? Can you think of other phrases or words that describe our relationship with the Earth? What do your phrases or words say about how you feel about or view nature and the environment? We'll see what a worldview is, how it is informed and how it shapes our actions. For the remainder of the class you may work on your Towhee Creek Watershed mapping activity.
A Block Criminology - To start today, you will need to set up a blog for the course. You may use Google's Blogspot, Wordpress, Live Journal, or any other blog creation site you choose (like Wix) . I would HIGHLY recommend staying with Wordpress, Live Journal or Blogger (Blogger is a Google product so it makes sense to use your G-mail account, if you have one, to create a Blogger site). Here are a few previous examples from past Criminology family members:
Criminology (Meryssa on Blogger); Criminology (Jacob on Wordpress); Crime Journal (Darion on Live Journal); Criminology 12 (Madison on Blogger)
After you create your blog (IF YOU GET STUCK on the blog creation portion, then move on and in a Google Doc or Word file), then as your first entry, you'll need to write your own theory as to why people commit crime. To help, use the brainstormed list we did in class last week along with the notes below...
After I mentioned that I'd like you to come up with your own theory about why people commit crime. To help, use the brainstormed list we did in class last week along with the Crime Theory Web Site found on this link and the notes below... To help you build your own theories about why crime happens - which is your first blog entry - below you'll find some notes on Choice, Trait, Social Structure, Social Learning, and Conflict theories:
Choice Theory (Chapter 4 in the Crim textbook) Choice theories assume that criminals carefully choose whether to commit criminal acts. People are influenced by their fear of the criminal penalties associated with being caught and convicted for law violations. The choice approach is rooted in the classical criminology of Cesare Beccaria, who argued that punishment should be certain, swift, and severe enough to deter crime. Today, choice theorists view crime as offense- and offender-specific. Offense-specific means that the characteristics of the crime control whether it occurs. For example, carefully protecting a home makes it less likely to be a target of crime. Offender-specific refers to the personal characteristics of potential criminals. People with specific skills and needs may be more likely to commit crime than others. Research shows that offenders consider their targets carefully before deciding on a course of action. Even violent criminals and drug addicts show signs of rationality.
Trait Theory (Chapter 5 in the Crim textbook) One area of interest is biochemical factors, such as diet, allergies, hormonal imbalances, and environmental contaminants (such as lead). The conclusion is that crime, especially violence, is a function of diet, vitamin intake, hormonal imbalance, or food allergies. Neurophysiological factors, such as brain disorders, ADHD, EEG abnormalities, tumors, and head injuries have been linked to crime. Criminals and delinquents often suffer brain impairment, as measured by the EEG. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and minimal brain dysfunction are related to antisocial behavior. An evolutionary branch holds that changes in the human condition, which have taken millions of years to evolve, may help explain crime rate differences. As the human race evolved, traits and characteristics have become ingrained. Cognitive psychology is concerned with human development and how people perceive the world. Criminality is viewed as a function of improper information processing. Individual reasoning processes influence behavior. Reasoning is influenced by the way people perceive their environment. Psychological traits such as personality and intelligence have been linked to criminality. One important area of study has been the antisocial personality, a person who lacks emotion and concern for others.
Social Structure Theories (Chapter 6 in the Crim textbook) Social structure theories suggest that people’s place in the socioeconomic structure influences their chances of becoming criminals. Poor people are more likely to commit crimes because they are unable to achieve monetary or social success in any other way. Social structure theory includes three schools of thought: social disorganization, strain, and cultural deviance theories. Social disorganization theory suggests that the urban poor violate the law because they live in areas in which social control has broken down. Strain theories view crime as resulting from the anger people experience over their inability to achieve legitimate social and economic success. Cultural deviance theories hold that a unique value system develops in lower-class areas. Lower-class values approve of behaviors such as being tough, never showing fear, and defying authority. People perceiving strain will bond together in their own groups or subcultures for support and recognition.
Social Process Theories (Chapter 7 in the Crim textbook) Social learning theory stresses that people learn how to commit crimes. Social control theory analyzes the failure of society to control criminal tendencies. Labeling theory maintains that negative labels produce criminal careers. Social learning theory suggests that people learn criminal behaviors much as they learn conventional behavior. Control theory maintains that all people have the potential to become criminals, but their bonds to conventional society prevent them from violating the law. This view suggests that a person’s self-concept aids his or her commitment to conventional action. Social reaction or labeling theory holds that criminality is promoted by becoming negatively labeled by significant others. Such labels as “criminal,” “ex-con,” and “junkie” isolate people from society and lock them into lives of crime.
Conflict Theory (Chapter 8 in the Crim textbook) Social conflict theorists view crime as a function of the conflict that exists in society. Conflict theorists suggest that crime in any society is caused by class conflict. Laws are created by those in power to protect their rights and interests. Marxist criminology views the competitive nature of the capitalist system as a major cause of crime. The poor commit crimes because of their frustration, anger, and need. The wealthy engage in illegal acts because they are used to competition and because they must do so to keep their positions in society.
Once you've done this, then find an article about a recent crime here in Canada, make a link to the news article on your blogsite and then write how your crime theory explains why the crime happened. An excellent crime news website is the CANOE CNews Crime site...or the Toronto Star Crime site...or Global News Crime site...or the Huffington Post Canada Crime site...or the Vancouver Sun Crime Blog
And to help you here is an example from a previous Criminology family member Mariah Barth...
Crime happens for many reasons, however I believe that one of the main reasons people commit crime is because of social structures they are immersed in and the people they associate with. Obviously there are many other contributing factors such as brain chemistry, gender, drug usage, inner conflict and just plain choice, the list could go on and on, but the people we surround ourselves with play a huge role in how we behave. I know personally I act differently around my parents then I do when its just my friends and I. others play a huge influence in our lives. As children we learned everything from our parents and mimicked their behavior, then as we entered school we made friends and copied their behavior as well. If we ended up making friends with bad apples then we will most likely be doing and acting the way they are, all feeding off each others behavior in a sense Peer pressure from these same people we hang around with has a major influence on whether or not we are committing crime. For example in this article you have a 13 year old boy planning on robbing a convince store with no previous criminal record and 3 accomplices older then him, I don't personally know the kid but something tells me he was not the one to come up with the idea, maybe robbing the store what he had to do to become a member of the "Indian Posse" gang or just to impress the older boys either way it was most likely him trying to be tough and to impress someone else. I personally know a kid who at the age of 15 tried to shoplift something from a mall, I don't know what it was he was trying to steal but what I do know was he got chased and tackled by mall cops then spent a few hours in jail waiting for his mother to bail him out. This kid is not a bad kid I know that he is a good human being, comes from a good stable he's just your average teenage boy trying to fit in, but the kids he was hanging around with are kind of shady guys, I know for a fact that this boy regrets doing this, and in the long run getting caught for him turned out being more embarrassing then being too chicken to shoplift whatever it was he was attempting to steal. It just goes to show how far people will go to feel some sort of belonging in society and when they themselves feel uncomfortable with the fact that they might be different in someway or defy social norms people can go to extreme lengths to feel loved and important.
I will need your blog/web addresses next Monday, when this entry is due.
B Block Legal Studies - Since we didn't get to Oakes last Thursday. From the Ontario Justice Education Network...Section 1 of the Charter establishes that every Canadian is guaranteed the rights protected by the Charter while simultaneously providing for the possibility that these rights be limited by the government if such a limit could be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. As such, it both guarantees and limits Charter rights.
This means that Freedom or Liberty are not absolute
The Charter is in place to ensure that the rights and freedoms of Canadians are protected. Requiring the government to justify Charter infringements ensures that these rights and freedoms are not arbitrarily limited by the government. The government has the burden of proving that any limit is justified.
So, to start, in partners, I'll have you work on the R. v. Oakes (1986) case (discuss it in partners do not write the answers) which established the "Oakes Test" in Canadian law which allows reasonable limitations on rights and freedoms through legislation if it can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. 
So, the Oakes Test is a two-step balancing test to determine whether a government can justify a law which limits a Charter right. The government must establish that the law under review has a goal that is both “pressing and substantial.” The law must be both important and necessary (Step One). Next, the court then conducts a proportionality analysis using three sub-tests (Step Two). The government must first establish that the provision of the law which limits a Charter right is rationally connected to the law’s purpose. If it is arbitrary or serves no logical purpose, then it will not meet this standard. Secondly, a provision must minimally impair the violated Charter right. A provision that limits a Charter right will be constitutional only if it impairs the Charter right as little as possible or is “within a range of reasonably supportable alternatives.” Finally, the court examines the law’s proportionate effects. Even if the government can satisfy the above steps, the effect of the provision on Charter rights may be too high a price to pay for the advantage the provision would provide in advancing the law’s purpose.
David Edwin Oakes was charged with possession of drugs, and possession with the intent to traffic. At the time of the trial, a person charged with drug possession was automatically charged with possession with the intent to traffic. If a person was found guilty of possession of drugs, s. 8 of the Narcotic Control Act (NCA) (now called the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act) placed the onus on the person charged to prove that there was no intent to traffic. If the accused could not prove lack of intent, the accused would automatically be found guilty of the charge.Mr. Oakes challenged this section of the NCA as an infringement of his s. 11(d) Charter right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The SCC found that s. 8 of the NCA violated s. 11(d) of the Charter. The Court then considered whether the government could justify this infringement under s. 1 of the Charter. Section 1 requires the government to show that the law in question is a reasonable limit on Charter rights, which can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. The Court found that the government failed to satisfy s. 1 of the Charter, and as a result, held that s. 8 of the NCA was of no force or effect
We'll chat about it afterwards using these questions:
- Do you think there should ever be limits to Charter rights? Why or why not?
- Describe a situation where an infringement of a right would be justified.
- Describe a situation where an infringement of a Charter right would not be justified?
- What do you think about the courts’ role in deciding whether an infringement of a right can be justified?
- What happens if the government cannot show that a Charter infringement is justified (i.e. it does not satisfy the elements of the s. 1 analysis)?
After, we'll identify what our fundamental freedoms are (section 2 a-d of the Charter).
So, what about what happened with the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Federal and Provincial Government restrictions and mandates including the events in Ottawa? It's pretty clear that some aspects of the pandemic response have infringed upon rights (including our Fundamental Freedoms). But, because the charter allows for limitations on rights, that does not mean the policy or law or regulation is unconstitutional. It goes back to the Oakes Test and is a question of proportionality..."Is the rights-restricting policy or law doing more harm or more good on balance?” It's a balancing act between individual rights and freedoms versus our responsibilities to society. The interests of society must be balanced against the interests of individuals to see if limits on individual rights can be justified. Serious threats to Canada and Canadians, like a national public health crisis, obligate the government to ensure our safety and security during an emergency. That is why the government is authorized, with Parliament supervising, to take special temporary measures that may not be appropriate during normal times. So yes, our rights have been limited, temporarily because of proportionality, but they will end because at some point the proportionality issue will swing the other way.
FMI Check out:
I'll have you complete on your own questions 1-5 on page 40 of the All About Law text.
2 comments:
https://youaredednotbigsouprice.blogspot.com/
https://criminologyismydaddy.blogspot.com/2022/09/inside-criminal-mind.html
Post a Comment