In criminal justice, the instrumental theory is based on the idea that criminal justice and criminology is one of the main tools which help to control the poor. If this is true, socio-technical transformation cannot be conceived in terms of instrumental categories because the very act of using criminal justice reproduces what is supposed to be transformed. Instrumentalist theory shares the common-sense assumption that the subject of action can be defined independently of its means. Following Siegel (2007), “offenses designed to improve the financial or social position of the criminal” (p. 54). In contrast, the instrumental role of the criminal justice system is to control and prevent crimes. In this case, “the state is a tool of capitalists” (p. 58). Siegel underlines that most Americans believe that criminals commit their predatory and violent acts for what they get out of them, the advantages they receive. Often those benefits are obvious, as in the case of most property crimes. A person who breaks into a house and steals a television set does so because he wants either the television or the money that can be obtained from selling it. Even in the case of violent personal crimes, the criminal can gain something, whether it is perverse pleasure from inflicting pain, the satisfaction of having control over another human being, or the resolution of a problem by eliminating a person causing that vexation.
Hale et al (2005) share the same opinion stating that “Much of preoccupation reflects a particular, instrumental way of viewing these figures; that is, as an index of a real phenomenon (crime) calling for specific control measures” (p. 52). With practically every crime committed, the offender benefits in some way, typically at the expense of the victim. In its turn, the instrumental task of the criminal justice system is to control the population and prevent crimes. The main difference between Siegel and Hale et al is that Siegel concentrates on the poor and low social classes while Hale et al involves all classes and social strata in its definition. Hale et al underline that factors related to the individual’s socialization and environmental circumstances are also thought to contribute to the decision. But in each case the offender is perceived as having some choice; alternatives may be limited, and in some cases, a decision to commit a crime may be the easier decision to make, but almost never are life’s decisions cast for an individual so that no choice can be exercised. Similar to Siegel and Hale et al, Magnire et al (2007) state that the role of criminal justice is merely instrumental based on prevention and control functions. Thus, Maguire et al broaden this definition and apply instrumental theory to juvenile offenders. Similar to other authors, Maguire et al state that “offenses (it is alleged’) are strictly instrumental and offenders have much to lose from prosecution; prison” (488). Such thinking is consistent with criminological theory in general. Criminal justice is an achievement-oriented field that expects its citizens to act purposefully and productively. To do otherwise is considered impulsive, irresponsible, and sometimes evidence that the person is no longer in control.
Three books share the same opinion that crime control should be implemented in a manner consistent with beliefs about criminality. People assume that if the costs are sufficient, both in terms of likelihood and severity, then potential offenders will refrain from illegal behavior. This philosophy of crime control incorporates a relatively simple idea of cost-benefit. Offenders are assumed to be attracted to criminality by the benefits they may receive and are deterred from such activity by threats of criminal sanctions which pose potential costs that outweigh any benefits to be derived. If the gains fall short of the potential losses, it is assumed that people will refrain from the activity. Yet if the gains from crime exceed any potential losses, then crime makes sense. Rational choice is thus an important factor in criminality as well as in its control.
References
Hale, Ch. Hayward, K., Wahidin, A., Wincup, E. (2005). Criminology. Oxford University Press.
Magnire, M., Morgan, R., Reiner, R. (2007). The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. Oxford University Press; 4Rev Ed edition.
Siegel, L. J. (2007). Criminology: The Core. Wadsworth Publishing; 3 edition.