I agree with Wojtek when he writes
> BUt having said that, we must also recgnize the fact that
>social or environmental factor are only half of the story, the other half
>is human agency.
In fact those leftists who think that criminality is a sickness that should be treated rather than willed action are colluding in a repressive trend. In Britain, for example, a new law allows the police to imprison those deemed a danger to society, on the basis of what they *might* do, rather than what they have done.
All of this was explained seventy years ago by the soviet lawyer EB Pashukanis, in his critique of what he calls Hans Kelsen's 'legal positivism', in General Theory of Law and Marxism, Pluto Press. Having just seen Leslie Nielson on the London stage performing Clarence Darrow's life I can well understand that such a view of criminality has long been part of the stock of the US left, as it was of the European (see for example Fritz Lang's 'M'). However, it is a theoretical step backwards.
However, I disagree with Wojtek when he says the following. Criminals are more often pathetic than evil. There are, I admit, some special circumstances when criminal activity displaces legal economic activity. Also, the drug laws in the US do appear to those of us outside to be draconian, to say the least.
>
>Far from being Robin Hoods of romantic populism, criminals are usually a
>violent, manipulative and opportunistic lowlife that victimize their
>neighbors for purely personal gain, such as gaining respect of their
>cronies, sex, drugs or money. They are the worst scum because they exploit
>and terrorize not the rich and powerful but those who already got the short
>end of the stick under capitalism - and they do it by perosnal choice - for
>otherwise anyone facing similar social conditions would be a criminal.
-- Jim heartfield