PDA

View Full Version : The Criminal Mind



TomOfSweden
09-17-2007, 05:13 AM
this is an off-shoot from the discussion we have on the history of guns.

This is my highly personal and non scientific opinion on the criminal mind. Feel free to call me a deluded moron and throw popcorn at me.

We all know that there’s no culture that is criminal, or any more criminally inclined than any other. Demanding honesty and decency from others and striving for it one self is a focal point in every culture in every corner of the world. Still we have criminals everywhere; people who willingly break the rules. And I’m not talking about the law here. The basic rules all humans carry with us from birth.

Is it really just greed? Is it really just wanting to get ahead without doing the work? Does really the opportunity make the thief? Or is it deeper? Is being a criminal really a rational decision based on personal gain? I don’t think so at all.

We all have needs and hopes. Some of us might have or perceive that they are outside our reach. At least if we follow the rules. I can only speak from personal experience, but I’ve met quite a few criminals to base this on. Off-course people with broken spirits might not turn to crime. Desperation might surface in a number of different ways. As we all know, the human mind is a wonky place.

What I meant with poverty breeding criminals is that in poor communities, people have fewer possibilities in meeting needs and have less of a chance in realizing their hopes. It’s also relative to the culture we’re part of. In the West our images of success and what it means to be a successful human is on a completely different scale than let’s say some poor village in Africa. We all want to feel successful. We all want to feel that we have achieved something with our lives.

Criminals always justify breaking the rules somehow. It’s always bollocks, but they lie to themselves to get by. I did. It was a bit like, I need it and therefore I have a right to it. Playing down the damage I did to others in my head. At the time I was never troubled by the fact that I was doing damage to others. That came a lot later.

Now here are my thoughts on fighting crime, which are based on above assumptions being true. People with broken spirits and damaged souls do not learn from punishment. There’s nothing more you can take away from a person who has nothing left. Once we’ve left the realm of the decent and honest we can’t really lose any more. Except our lives off-course.

All we can do is give these people hope, a hope to build something productive out of their lives. I know it sounds all hippie, and is far from fair. Since why should people who make their problems other people’s problems get help and support when the other pained people in our world who haven’t chosen the criminal path aren’t getting any help? I have no simple answer there. The shorter the punishments the less likely it is of the offender repeating their offence. This incidentally, also science can back up. Who ever thought of the “three strikes and your out” I’m guessing does not care about making the world a better place.

I’ve always liked the pragmatic approach. What ever benefits society the most is what we should aim for, which usually comes down to money. Putting people in jail is expensive and is only a loss for society. Harsh sentencing isn’t a deterrent, has never been and probably never will be. The part of our brains that cause us to or keep from committing crime hinges on something completely different than fear. Crime can only be combated effectively through preemptive action. Once the crime is done any punishment will just cost society even more. Fairness doesn’t really enter into it because life isn’t fair no matter what we do. So there really is no point in even aiming for it.

Guns will probably never be a deterrent either. If crime victims are all most likely strapped, all that will happen is that criminals will have not only guns but twitchy trigger fingers which will be more death all around. An innocent victim shot vs a pathetic excuse for a human is not a 1 – 1. The victim has more to lose. The innocent victim has a life. Is it really worth ripping your gun out and risk dying for some stuff?

No matter how much we may wish it isn’t. Punishing crime is a pointless waste of both money and life. If revenge is important for you then that is another matter. It’s just not very constructive.

My salvation was the fact that I was never convicted. That doesn’t make me less of a criminal. But I do think that society as a whole benefited from me not getting my due punishment. I have got a highly qualified and well paid job today which would have been impossible if I’d had a criminal record. Since my criminal “career”, just the taxes I’ve paid has covered any damage I ever did as a criminal probably a hundred times over. Probably more. Much, much more.

The fact that I’m part of the IT work force doing work which evidently few can or are willing to do I’d say is proof alone of that my value to society is greater having me where I am now than doing time in jail. As we all know, the more people who work and make money, the more money, (or rather value for money) for everybody all around. …which arguably is better for society as whole rather than settling various revenges. Justified or not.

For me my lacking needs where very immediate. I needed somewhere to call home where I felt safe. Once the authorities stepped in and provided it I underwent the mental shift needed for me to start obeying the rules of society. I stopped believing that what ever happened, people always had it coming. I understood what people meant with wanting to be a valuable and contributing member of society. I had other joys in my life other than just stimulating my genitals or getting drunk. It could simply be that for the first time in my life, obeying the rules where in my best interest, since I now had stuff that I valued and which could be stolen. Who knows?

I’m also very well aware of the fact that I might be projecting. I might just be assuming that every criminal mind works just like mine did. I can’t really understand the motivations of those well off people with cushy jobs who start embezzling. What’s going on there? Is that really only greed? I suppose wealthy people can feel unfairly treated to. Just because people feel that they have to break the rules to succeed doesn’t mean it’s in any way a rational feeling.

….and I certainly don’t understand criminals who act on compulsion. But I doubt those serial killers all acted because they thought it was just fun or even a good idea. I’m more leaning toward them being insane. And if we agree that it is a form of insanity, then they’re sick people and shouldn’t sick people be treated rather than punished? We don’t send people with infectious diseases to jail if they spread it unknowingly do we?

To sum up: We could judge people solely based on their actions and punish them because we want revenge. But all we’re doing is spreading the misery around and making it a lot harder for the criminals to ever repay their debt to society in any meaningful way. Forgetting that all we’re doing is adding to the damage that the crime caused to begin with. The hard-line attitude is not very practical or helpful to society and certainly doesn’t make the world a better place. Any consolation it offers to the victim is very superficial, if we remember that all it’ll lead to increasing the criminals inclination to repeat the offence in question. Even if we might find it counter intuitive and therefore hard to accept that fear isn’t a useful deterrent for crime, research in the field is undeniable.

I still haven't touched on how crime can be combated. As the attentive reader can tell, I personally don't think it can be alleviated by simply selecting appropriate policiary measure and punishment. It's an issue that stretches through every part of our society. If we aren't willing or able to take away the causes of crime, how do we deal with the crime that does surface? It's far from simple and far beyond any ideological theories. No matter our belief we all know that we can't simply throw money at it, and it'll go away.

Thoughts on this? Did I miss anything? Are any of my assumptions baseless? Conclusions wrong? Are the people who aren’t criminally inclined in the minority? What keeps you from breaking the law?

Ozme52
09-17-2007, 12:33 PM
There's really too many ideas up above... and too many concepts... I don't think your conversation will stay on target...

So let me just answer one of your final questions.


What keeps you from breaking the law?

The consequences of getting caught... and mostly the consequences to my family. Pure and simple. How do I know? I had to weigh the pros and cons of getting caught doing a murder. The person I considered killing certainly deserved it, I was concerned he was a psychopath and would hurt my wife, (I already knew he was a sociopath.)

One difference between the "common criminal" and someone like me is I'm smart enough to know I'm probably not smart enough to get away with it. So my decision to do the deed or not had to include presuming I'd get caught. I chose not to put my wife and family through that pain.

Now just so you realize how serious the situation was... it turned out I was absolutely correct. He was a psychopath. He ended up doing a contract murder (at least one...) and himself died in prison.

Maybe if I killed him myself all those years ago, a mother and baby would be alive today... but then again... there are plenty of people who think they're smart enough to not be caught... and the husband would have found someone else to do the deed.

I think there are a lot of people who ride the fine edge of law abiding because they don't want to do the time.

PS. I think being a criminal is harder work than being "gainfully" employed. I therefore think a lot of people who commit crimes feel they are forced to do so because they can't get gainful employment. (So I guess I addressed more than one concept.)

Guest 91108
09-17-2007, 01:31 PM
ToS, It's also been shown that repeat offenders have very little chance or desire to rehabilitate And will commit more if given the chance.

Also, I do not view a person who has commited a crime to be a member of that society once they choose to break the rules. I think that is a common perception and a fix. In ancient times they were expelled from the society.. that not being very realistic anymore. the choices are very limited as to what to do with them but remove them from society.
The problem is there are so many that they can't be housed. Send them to another planet? laughs.


add this to the thread for consideration.

The common view is that the environment in which children were raised plays the major role in predicting criminal behavior. Adoption studies show that the major effect is derived from a combination of "bad genes" and "bad environment," not a bad environment per se. Placing a non-genetically predisposed child into a bad environment has relatively little effect on criminal outcome, suggesting that if the seed is not "bad," it will not grow. By contrast, the "bad seed" will grow in either environment but it sprouts fastest in a "bad environment." Two conclusions seem reasonable. First, social programs will have a maximum effect by targeting the combination of genetic and environmental effects. Second, problems with criminal behavior would be most effectively addressed by eliminating the effect of the genes rather than the effect of the environment.

David E. Comings in his chapter, "Conduct Disorder: A Genetic, Orbitofrontal Lobe Disorder that is the Major Predictor of Adult Antisocial Behavior"

Ozme52
09-17-2007, 01:43 PM
Out of context. Earlier in the same review it says:


Critics are quite right, there are no genes "for" crime, and no biosocial scientist claims that there are.

Here's the whole review... and the associated books. A very complex topic not to be used, in my opinion, to pick the individual pieces you want to support. One needs to look at all of the complexities in total.

A Crime Times Book Review (http://www.crimetimes.org/04c/w04cp8.htm)

TomOfSweden
09-17-2007, 10:22 PM
One difference between the "common criminal" and someone like me is I'm smart enough to know I'm probably not smart enough to get away with it. So my decision to do the deed or not had to include presuming I'd get caught. I chose not to put my wife and family through that pain.


If you've got nothing lose, risking it all can also be "smart". It's the difference between putting all your money on 22 black or someone else's. We did plenty of shit that wasn't about personal gain. When we had taken the leap to the place where we didn't worry about our own safety or life, (which I think is necessary) taking risks is no big deal. No matter how big it is. I took the leap to begin with out of desperation...and then I kept going.

TomOfSweden
09-17-2007, 10:47 PM
ToS, It's also been shown that repeat offenders have very little chance or desire to rehabilitate And will commit more if given the chance.

Also, I do not view a person who has commited a crime to be a member of that society once they choose to break the rules. I think that is a common perception and a fix. In ancient times they were expelled from the society.. that not being very realistic anymore. the choices are very limited as to what to do with them but remove them from society.
The problem is there are so many that they can't be housed. Send them to another planet? laughs.


I do consider myself a part of this society. And it feels a lot like this society has accepted me back in, especially when I pay taxes. So I'm not sure if your solution is very practical. Australia stopped taking in criminals ages ago. And even if you feel strongly about ostracising elements from society you don't think deserves being a part of it...you can't. You're stuck with them. Sure you can babysit them in jail, but as we've already established. Doesn't really work, and is very expensive. You agree that rehabilitation, (ie after prison) works very badly. So what do you think we should do? Execution?

Rehabilitation works so seldom because criminals have very little options once they get out. Especially once they've been convicted. I have a close friend who sat in jail for ... awww ... I forget. He was supposed to be in for 7 years but got out a bit early. Anyhoo. Anyway, once he got out he went legit. That's a long time. And he had a similar background to me. I think he got a woman pregnant and that was that. But he is in a really shitty spot in life right now.

edit: ...my point is that I think a major factor is what you've got to lose. If a person has nothing to lose it might be difficult for them to make the necessary mental shift. All of my old gang and old criminal friends who I today know anything about have all gone legit by now, no matter if they ever got caught or not. At least the ones who haven't died from drugs. So it does look a bit like all that might be needed is growing older. So if just given some patience most guys might come around. And being hard on them will most likely just prolong their criminal "career".

And don't forget that a lot of criminals are morons. Stupid people don't see an opportunity when it bites them in the ass. They could be stupid for many reasons. Extreme low self esteem I think is pretty common among ex-cons.



add this to the thread for consideration.

I read a German scientists research where he established that immigrants are more likely to commit crime because they have an active risk taking gene. The same gene responsible for prompting them to move. Something to do with endorphins. But the same gene is also responsible for starting companies so it's not all bad.

Ozme52
09-18-2007, 11:39 PM
If you've got nothing lose, risking it all can also be "smart". It's the difference between putting all your money on 22 black or someone else's. We did plenty of shit that wasn't about personal gain. When we had taken the leap to the place where we didn't worry about our own safety or life, (which I think is necessary) taking risks is no big deal. No matter how big it is. I took the leap to begin with out of desperation...and then I kept going.


I can see how you might get to that perspective. I was fortunate to find other avenues when I was unable to find work. I never went hungry and I had several options regarding shelter. So I never had to make that choice.

TomOfSweden
09-19-2007, 01:26 AM
I can see how you might get to that perspective. I was fortunate to find other avenues when I was unable to find work. I never went hungry and I had several options regarding shelter. So I never had to make that choice.

I'm not sure I had to make that choice. I think the desperation I felt was on an other level than simple starvation.

The difference between us might be that, 1) I was 16 and thought I'd figured it all out. An idiot in other words. 2) I was a real little obnoxious shit who equated the fact that people liked following me around with that what I said had merit.

I also think that I was a bit loony at the time. I'd been under tremendous mental stress for such a prolonged period, that at the time that I was on the brink of snapping. After the state took custody I did have quite a mental break-down of sorts. So chances are that I wasn't well adjusted mentally enough to keep a job even if I wanted to. I'm not sure.

I can't blame anybody else, because most, (if not all) of the shit we did was my ideas. I still remember my biggest issue at the time. I was mostly living in fear that girls would figure out that I wasn't as cool as I was pretending to be. I can't recall a single fraction of a second pondering moral issues. I was just not in that mental space at all. We still did follow certain moral laws, so we weren't completely out of control. It's just that I can't really recall any system to it. Most probably we adjusted our morals according to what we wanted. Some morals where easier to adjust than others, depending on how ingrained they are. It's a theory.

Regarding choices. The thing I liked about crime life was that, there was rules to it I could understand. I'm only talking about logical rules. If you played the game right you got what you wanted....straight away. Grown-up/legit life is a lot more complex.

I was basically living in the streets at the time. Not street streets. I never actually lived in the streets, but I never knew where I'd end up sleeping each night. And I had to hang out with friends every single night, or I'd be sure not to find somewhere to sleep. It makes it very hard to keep to any regular day-time activities, like showing up on time each day to a job. Sure, I could have gone home to my parents at any time. But I thought that sleeping in the streets was better for my well being. And it probably was.

Not having anything stable in life to grab onto can bring the feeling of desperation even though in truth, there's plenty of options.

Uncle_Ed
09-19-2007, 05:04 AM
This has given me cause for thought, Tom.

I have been so fortunate in my life as I have never been desperate enough to seek gain of a possession or gain of an advantage over another person by law-breaking. So my perspective is very limited.

I was brought up to respect rules and laws and saw no reason to break them, even when going through my teenage years. I should perhaps add that I did break minor rules-as most of us do when faced with one which appears petty or ill-advised. I did so mostly in the heat of the moment and without prior planning.

I suppose that would indicate that my behaviour is as a result of both nature and nurture? These days I can rationalise my keeping to rules and especially to the law of this land as I have a very keen awareness of the consequences of law-breaking on others-the victims. I rigidly keep to the speed limit, for example. I have been in the Motor Trade and have worked for one of the major car manufacturers in the type approval department. There I saw the results of crash tests. It was not a nice thing to consider that the vehicles would contain fragile human beings.

I have posted before that I consider a major malaise of society to be the lack of consideration for others. Perhaps I am therefore saying that the criminal mind is this inconsideration taken to extremes-ergo the answer should be to either remove the criminal from the society or re-educate them into feeling part of that society and thereby wanting to consider the results of their actions on others?

It is a complex problem. I'm intrigued by the points of view here.

TomOfSweden
09-19-2007, 05:50 AM
the answer should be to either remove the criminal from the society or re-educate them into feeling part of that society and thereby wanting to consider the results of their actions on others?


...and then both of these you mentioned are all brought upon the criminal from an external source, and as we all know, personal change can only come from within. Beside being a bit commie for my tastes ;) And there's no guarantee that any measure will lead to any permanent change in the mentality of the criminal.

It's a very difficult subject. If not impossible. The simple truth might be that even though sending bad guys to prison, might be a very bad solution. It might be necessary for society as a whole just to make it function at all. I mean, we can't have a system where criminals decide on which rules to conveniently break, no matter how useless it might be to punish them.

gagged_Louise
09-19-2007, 06:43 AM
Really intriguing discussion and I know I'll be returning to this thread, both for you guys' points of view and for the glimpses of your past and formative experiences. I do agree prisons don't really make people better and that it's a great failure of modern society that it's so hard for most people exiting a long jail term (or a long time of going without work) to be allowed in again, to launch a new life or return to the ordered life they once had.


I think there are a lot of people who ride the fine edge of law abiding because they don't want to do the time.

PS. I think being a criminal is harder work than being "gainfully" employed. I therefore think a lot of people who commit crimes feel they are forced to do so because they can't get gainful employment. (So I guess I addressed more than one concept.)

I agree, moving within crime is anything but a "safe" dayjob and it strikes me as utterly stupid when people compare life in prison to ordinary city life and say "hey look, these guys get their food and lodging and everything for free" Jail isn't a place where you can walk around and trust other people by default or believe it's a safe life; plus it's also often a place with no privacy.

TomOfSweden
09-19-2007, 07:07 AM
I agree, moving within crime is anything but a "safe" dayjob and it strikes me as utterly stupid when people compare life in prison to ordinary city life and say "hey look, these guys get their food and lodging and everything for free" Jail isn't a place where you can walk around and trust other people by default or believe it's a safe life; plus it's also often a place with no privacy.


I've spoken to a few close friends who've been in jail. It's all the same story. The fact that they can't leave is the major trauma. I don't think it really matters how badly they're treated inside the prison. None of it can compare with the un-freedom inmates feel of being locked up. That feeling that freedom ends at the green door. Which is the colour of the exit door in Swedish prisons. Anybody saying that we treat prisoners too good and that it's a resort lack serious empathy skills. I'm willing to bet that nobody thinks life inside jail is better than outside no matter of how comfortable it is. There's plenty of stories of inmates escaping just to have a few days extra freedom.

Even if they'd have jacuzzis' and free massages each evening, I still don't think anybody would think it's worth it.



I do agree prisons don't really make people better and that it's a great failure of modern society that it's so hard for most people exiting a long jail term (or a long time of going without work) to be allowed in again, to launch a new life or return to the ordered life they once had.

...if they ever had it.

gagged_Louise
09-19-2007, 07:22 AM
Yes I mean, it's not like a guy sentenced to five years in a high.-security jail can say "if anyone would dare kick me down from behind or point a gun at me - why, I'll phone the police!" (or call the guards) "or my buddy will do that" That kind of ease which we mostly take for granted doesn't exist in the pen. And of course the feeling of being fenced in and looked at. Bullshit, saying that "they're living a luxury life".