fandomhigh | Sociology 201: Criminology 2nd Meeting

Entry tags:

sociology

Sociology 201: Criminology 2nd Meeting

Hello, class. Please take a seat. I hope you are working on your reading for next Monday.

Grissom gives an introductory lecture, and hands out lecture notes

As a class exercise, I would like you to do the following -

Outlined in the lecture are 9 different types of crime. Please refer to the chart in the middle of the packet for more details. I would like for you to rank them in order of what you believe to be the worst type of crime, to the least.

Crimes against the state
Crimes against persons
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against property
Crimes against public order
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against public morals
Crimes against nature
Crimes against environment

Your participation will be noted, and discussion is anticipated.

Partner List for Class

lauraholt &

_steele_

cameronmitchell &

whitedeathpod

rosefern_todd &

maias_notebook

chloe_sullivan,

timothy_drake,

darkchylde_,

call_me_red_ac and

emo_knight do not yet have partners. I will assign them randomly on Monday if you do not choose your own. If you are not on this list but want to take this class, let me know immediately and I will add you to the roster.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Is registration still open? It looks like my workload is going to be pretty light, and I think I need this class at this school.

Yes, registration is still open. I will add you to the roster. Why don't you introduce yourself to the class?

Angela stands next to her chair and fiddles with her notebook.

"Um ... my name is Angela, and I'm from near Pittsburgh. I'm taking this class because I was with the student who got arrested yesterday, and I think I;d like to know more about crime and the police."

[OOC: Thanks.]

Welcome, Angela. I hope this course will help you understand the role of crime and law enforcement in our society here at Fandom High.

Cameron enters the class and takes a seat. He makes notes for the assignment and then sets to work on the list.

Crimes against the state
Crimes against persons
Crimes against public morals
Crimes against public order
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against property
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against environment
Crimes against nature

Okay, I tried ordering them, but I don't think it's as simple as this. For example, while I placed public order under public morals, I do think that rioting is worse than gambling. I think you have to look at each crime individually.

Ah, you have stumbled upon a very important point. That is why our judicial system is structured the way it is. We must classify crimes for clarity and understanding for the public, but this is why each crime is tried separately and there are several factors in deciding punishment - judge, jury, and law.

Good work today, Cameron. Feel free to discuss your list with other members of the class.

*nods in understanding* That makes sense. Thanks.

John's List

Crimes against persons
Crimes against the state
Crimes against nature
Crimes against public morals
Crimes against property
Crimes against public order
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against environment
Crimes against administration of justice

*John turns in his list*

That is an interesting list, John. Thank you for sharing.

Crimes against persons
Crimes against the state
Crimes against public morals
Crimes against public order
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against property
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against nature
Crimes against environment

As for my class partner, I don't really have a preference, so if there's anyone else who doesn't either, we could probably work together.

That's fine, Chloe. Perhaps Angela would like to work with you, she is new in class today.

As for your list, interesting analysis. I can see similarities and differences with your classmates' lists which I find intriguing. Thank you.

*smiles to Angela* That would be great.

That's fine with me. Thanks, Chloe.

Um, I guess my list would be:

Crimes against persons
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against property
Crimes against public order
Crimes against environment
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against nature
Crimes against the state
Crimes against public morals

Thank you for participating in this class period, Angela. I am encouraged you have caught up so quickly. If I may be of any more assistance, let me know. Good work.

Can I ask, why person above state? I saw Crichton had the same.

Those two were actually the hardest to rank for me. Because, in my opinion, they almost coexist.

State usually houses (for lack of better term) person and persons make up the state. Crimes against one usually affect the other.

*nods* I think in the end I went with state first because I reasoned that if the state gets compromised, there is no one to protect the individual. But yeah, without citizens there is no state to begin with.

Yep. It's hard to rank one in front of the other because they go hand in hand. Without state, the citizens are unprotected and could descend into something like anarchy without a government or something similar to set guidelines.

Without citizens, there is no military, industry, or commericialism that the state thrives on.

*agrees ~~and admires your brains~~*

*smiles and loves it when Cam shows his smarts*

If I could have put them on the same line, I probably would have, but I don't think that's an option. Crimes against both can be equally bad, but in the end, I put persons above state because crimes against individual persons are far more common than crimes committed against the whole state, so collectively, that makes it worse.

*nods* That's another way of looking at it. But wouldn't you say that an attack on an individul affects only one person while an attack on the state can have an impact on a lot of people, if not an entire nation?

Yeah, that's true. The number of people affected depends on how "state" is defined, but no matter what, yeah, that's a lot of people.

I suppose in the end, it both sucks.

Definitely. And we can certainly agree that they both belong at the top.

I do. I can see enough reasons for either to go on top. I was just wondering if maybe I missed another reason why you all picked person over state.

*walks in, unhappy that

_steele_ isn't there yet, sits down silently and begins to work*

Crimes against persons
Crimes against the state
Crimes against nature
Crimes against environment
Crimes against habitation
Crimes against property
Crimes against public order
Crimes against administration of justice
Crimes against public morals

I believe Ca persons and state are obvious: without a state, the people have no structure and without the people, there is no state. Sort of the chicken or the egg debate.

Ca nature and environment are similar in means of public health. A contaminated water supply could lead to thousands of sick people, clogging hospitals and becoming very costly for the state.

Habitation and property are ones own self: the means to separate ones self from another and the ability to feel safe in ones own environment. Whilst costly, it isn't (without intruding on other crimes) fatal, whereas the previous 4, are. Unfortunately it's hard to focus on anything else but the physical side of things, the emotional trauma experienced (as I myself have) far outweighs the actual loss.

I was going to put administration of justice last, with the seemingly petty crimes at the bottom. But it's linked with keeping public order. As I mentioned before, keeping the structure is critical in running a system/government. Without peace, there's war and conflict and looking at the past, no system ever runs smoothly during war. It would be like the domino effect, one slip and everything falls down.

Morals are important, just like everything, but there has to be a bottom of the list somewhere.

Like

cameronmitchell said, it's difficult to group things accordingly and each crime needs its own punishment. Like trying to punish a class of 3rd graders when it's only a few in the back row who did anything wrong. And even though our system doesn't always get it right, there aren't any 100% full proof ones that will. Least to say its difficult to hold one crime higher than the other, because not everyone has experienced it all.

Excellent work today, Ms. Holt. I can tell you will enjoy your participation in class, as I enjoy hearing your insights. I agree with a lot of your points, and it helps me find a direction for the lectures. Thank you.

Thank you sir, I've really enjoyed it so far.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Sociology 201: Criminology 2nd Meeting

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

Re: Chloe's list

no subject

no subject

no subject