Murder Puzzle: Defining Crime & Intentional Homicide - Essay Sample

Introduction

Crime is easily defined as an act that violates criminal law. The murder puzzle has been a controversial debate across the world as criminologists try to define crime in technical and social processes. When a person inflicts injury upon another that results in death, it is referred to as manslaughter. Moreover, in a scenario where the assaulter was aware of the seriousness of the injury, the act is called intentional homicide. However, society continues to pose proletarians in a way that causes premature or unnatural death. Social murder is a phrase used to refer to premature death that occurs due to individuals working conditions or lifestyles. Avoidable deaths result from harmful tragedies, accidents, human choices, and social and behavioral settings. In most cases, there is no one liable for the harms that lead to social murder and avoidable deaths. After analyzing the concept of responsibility, Drake and Scott claimed that unlike "intention homicide, social murder provides a way of considering a fuller range of avoidable deaths from which people may be at risk" Drake and Scott, 2019, p. 120). The authors develop different ways to consider how avoidable deaths are defined, and the effect of social inequalities on premature death. The topic also explores different ways of social responsibility and blame allocation.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The authors broadly analyze the idea of murder to bring the extension of more than the intentional killing. The authors consider different widespread harms that lead to avoidable death. It is important for criminologists to separate intentional homicide and unlawful killings from other types of deaths that can be avoided. The authors realized that the way in which murder are defined impact responses to avoidable deaths. Law enforcement agencies all over the world concentrate on arresting and punishing individuals who commit intentional murder in society. Therefore the definition of murder gives it much attention that the society forgets other harms or crimes that can be avoided or prevented, but cause death. Murder is not the only way one's life can be shortened as most people around the world die from illnesses that can be reduced or avoided. According to Drake and Scott (2019), most premature deaths do not result from murder. For instance, in 2016 only 723 individuals were murdered in the UK, but 6639 people committed suicide in 2015. Moreover, the Department for Transport reported that 1792 people died from road accidents in 2016. The Health and Safety Executive also reported the more than 12,000 individuals to die every year from a lung disease that can be linked to the previous exposure to harmful substances inhaled in the working environments (Drake and Scott, 2019 p. 6).

The statistics show that deaths are not necessarily caused by murder as society believes. In fact, preventable harms such as poor working conditions, road traffic accidents, and suicides cause many deaths compared to murder (Drake and Scott, 2019 p. 8). Avoidable deaths may also be caused by natural resources if necessary measures are not implemented. For instance, Hurricane Katrina that occurred in 2005 killed many people because the government of the United States failed to provide adequate support to the victims. The incident should be defined as murder because the deaths could be avoided if the state had prepared mitigation strategies. However, society continues to think that 'murder' is limited to the concept of the intentional taking of another individual's life. They also regard it as the most harmful act undertaken by inhuman people, but they forget that no matter the circumstance humans' lives are lost.

Drake and Scott (2019) analyzed the rates of homicides in different countries to determine the widespread of the issue. Although different jurisdictions vary in their reports and records of crimes, intentional homicide is the most consistently documented by law enforcement agencies. Therefore, the rates of intentional homicide widely used to compare international levels of violent crimes, and overall crime. However, the risk of harm (death) in a given country cannot be indicated by the number of murders as statistics shows that preventable accidents cause many deaths compared to homicides. The rates of intentional homicide depend on the economic distribution of resources. Drake and Scott 2019 demonstrate the relationship between avoidable homicides and inequalities. The economically advantaged countries such as Canada, the UK, and the United Kingdom have low rates due to reduced rates of inequality. However, although the United States is the richest country in the world, it has the highest rates of murder. The country has the highest levels of inequality because of the gap between the poor and the rich. Poor countries such as Venezuela, El Salvador, and Honduras with high rates of intentional homicide have relatively high rates of inequality (Drake and Scott, 2019 p. 30). The conclusions were considered based on poverty, education levels, working conditions and the probability of murder. International variations in murder rates offer insights into the social factors that may lead to intentional homicides. Likewise, these conditions may influence the probability of premature deaths.

Avoidable deaths are caused by harmful actions such as poor working conditions, suicide, state killings, poverty (lack of food, warmth, and shelter). Lower social groups meet premature and unnatural death because they are exposed to conditions that lead to death. In most cases, individuals or corporations that commit social murder are not held responsible for the crime due to a lack of a judicial system to convict them. The justice model should ensure that the perpetrator receives punishment similar to the pain or suffering inflicted on the victim (Lacey and Pickard, 2015 p. 10). However, there are many problems associated with blame application to the perpetrators of avoidable homicides because the law emphasizes on individual culpability. The criminal law system is not designed to deal with social murder because there must prove of intention to kill, which lacks in such cases. The chapter offers the solution to social harms through the introduction of social responsibility to eliminate damages of structural inequalities and hold the powerful to account. Drake and Scott (2019) emphasize that corporate social responsibility (CSR) should be a national demand with requirements mandatory and enforceable by the appropriate regulator. The firms should be made to provide towards social welfare at the expense of their profits. The CSR is a voluntary process of integration of environmental and societal practices in the managerial operations of a firm. The CSR should be mandatory because it is an obligation of the firm to ethically care for the community.

Conclusion

In chapter five on "social murder and avoidable deaths" Drake and Scott (2019), elaborate various ways of analyzing harm, blame, and liability of premature deaths. Criminal law definition of crime is based on the intention of the offender. Therefore the chapter questions whether criminal harm should be used when defining avoidable deaths in unequal societies. Developing a blame approach allow society to look at the causes of harm and assess ways to mitigate them. Corporate social responsibility is an effective strategy for companies to earn a competitive advantage and also reduce social harms.

References

Drake, D. and Scott, D., The murder puzzle: intentional Homicide, avoidable deaths and social murder

Lacey, N. and Pickard, H., 2015. To blame or to forgive? Reconciling punishment and forgiveness in criminal justice. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 35(4), pp.665-696.