Explain the statement that “by blaming the individual for a crime, the society is acquitted to of the charge of complicity in that crime”. (Reiman, 2009). Drawing on at least two perspectives from the module, demonstrate how this argument reflects the concerns of critical criminology more generally.

When Reiman talks about the individual in the above statement, he is referring to the idea put forward by individual positivist criminologists in the late nineteenth century that the source of crime is located within the individual (The Open University, 2013a). This idea is based on positivists holding the belief that criminal behaviour is distinct in its characteristics to that of non-criminal behaviour, thus making it abnormal. This abnormal behaviour can be determined either by biological and psychological or social factors, and was spearheaded by the works of Cesare Lombroso, Enrico Ferri and Raffaele Garofalo (The Open University, 2013a). Their aim was to focus on establishing the causality of crime by asking questions, such as whether criminals are born or made and whether the factors of crime are individual or social, through the use of natural scientific methods in order to produce objective and quantifiable results to support the prediction of future crimes. As a result, positivists have only been concerned with the measurable and observable, and have consciously neglected the more abstract ideas of the causes of crime (The Open University, 2013a).
In more recent times, however, this argument is generally not accepted as sufficiently addressing the root of crime and criminal behaviour. Positivism and the use of quantitative methods of data research has its advantages in attempting to establish causal relationships and providing statistical analysis on which to build crime-reduction policy, and has introduced the emphasis on criminal behaviour rather than how