Violent Criminals

I have continued reading 'Why they Kill' by Richard Rhodes, and I have found many very interesting things. I am about halfway through the book.

It is mentioned in the book that many sociologist have speculated or stated that many acts by criminals are spontaneous, they don't think about what they are about to do or make plans to act in violent ways. Athens and Rhodes suggest just the opposite of this. They think that a criminal may not extensively plan, but that they do think about and finally decide to participate in violent crimes. This is completely against previous notions that a violent criminals actions are mainly impulsive. Athens collected interviews from violent criminals in which they reflect upon their crimes and tell about their thought process. And many of them talked as if they did think through their actions before partaking in the violent crimes.

The book then goes into detail about the four different interpretations that criminals may have. They explain how the criminal interprets that situation and reacts. Athens places these criminals in four different categories. (Physically defensive frustrative, interpretation malefic, and Frustrative malefic.)

Something that seemed kind of confusing to me was the book talking about phantom communities. From what I understand this is something that goes on in the criminals mind, like a conversation with himself?? I will have to go back and read that section again in order to fully understand what Rhodes is trying point out.

I also thought it was interesting that the type of self image that the offenders held correlated with the interpretations of the events in which they committed violent acts. If they thought of themselves as tough then they would not 'put up with' someone calling them names and would act violently toward the person that offended them.

I think a VERY important statement was made in this book. People who commit violent crimes feel they have nothing to loose AND something to gain. For example a criminal might be someone who steals a DVD, because they have nothing to loose, no money etc. But a violent criminal is someone that for instance might have been beaten by their father. They have nothing to loose by reacting back and killing him, and they have something to gain because that father won't abuse them anymore. I think this distinction is very important.

I also found it amazing that most if not all of the criminals that Athens interviewed were brutalized as children or at a young age. I think this proves the point that the social life in which a child is raised is extremely important. Ignorant and heartless people that beat, specifically I mean abuse their children and cause a lot of physical harm, could be turning them into future violent criminals that are a danger to society. Rhodes describes some of the cases that Athens studied and how the criminals turned violent to get away from other violence in their life. The book describes how these criminals are coached in violent ways, raised in violent ways, and taught that violence is the way to deal with things in life. These criminals eventually reach a breaking point and resort to violence to get away from abuse or other violent things in their life. It is the combination of many variables that lead to a violent criminal, but each of these variables is still very important. The combination of all of these factors is called by Athens, Violitization.

I am about half-way through the book, which is on time according to my schedule, but there is so much information in this book that seems very important. I think much reflection on what I have read will prove helpful, especially with the phantom communities idea.