We might start to ask ourselves. What is it that makes someone criminal in the first place? And this depends on what is classified as being a crime.

There is something that we find are criminal in country contexts. Things like the prohibition/the need not to kill people. But there are other things that we find are criminal in someplace but not criminal in others. For example, We might have drugs, a criminal no matter taking drugs, or is it welfare matter? And these might change different country contexts. So there's often a question what factors lead people to commit a crime? We often find that certain groups tend to be over criminalized these might include for example people of lower socioeconomic status so people from poorer backgrounds. It might include people of ethnic minorities.

Men are over-represented in the criminal justice system and so on. This might lead us to ask: Do these particular groups are they more criminogenic? Are they more likely to commit a crime? Or we might say is the criminal justice system disproportionately affecting people of these groups? There are lots of theories in criminology to help us think about more.

We question how it’s possible that someone anyone could be capable of killing again and again seemingly without remorse in reality. We know that there are some common denominators that most of them have there are hundreds of recorded cases of serial murders dating back centuries but the term serial killer is actually pretty new the first known published reference found in a New York Times article from 1981 that described a serial or patterned murderer that was referring to Wayne Williams suspected in the Deaths more than 30 children the FBI defines serial killers as anyone who murders two or more people in separate incidents it means that they think about what they have done and they go out and do it again and serial killer typically have a few other traits in common he didn’t look like anybody’s notion of somebody. who would tear apart?

Young girls American serial killer Ted Bundy the subject of a new Netflix series murdered at least 30 women in the 1970’s Bundy fits the serial killer profile in several ways for starters he’s a Heath five out of six serials are men and he was a young man in his mid-20s when he committed his first murder serial killers some of them develop their fantasies as early as five years old and the average age that a serial killer first kills is 28 historian Peter Vronsky says most serial killers then retire in their 40s or early 50s as their sex drive and testronome declines which makes the case of Canadian serial killers.

Why is it that certain groups are more criminalized than others and what factors might be leading to this? So For example. Some might be biological. Does someone’s brain affect their tendency to commit a crime? Is it something to do with a genetic inheritance? Could it be something to do with intelligence?

These are all biological factors that have been used to explain crime. These theories were particularly prominent in the past and have gone under various forms of criticism. We also have another stand of a theory that looks at the social factors that might lead someone to commit a crime. For example, could it be to do with place or geography where someone lives? Are there certain things in our environment that lead us to commit the crime? Could it be economic factors? For example, someone being poor, could this be a factor? Is this why there’s an over-representation of socioeconomic people and people from disadvantaged backgrounds in the criminal justice system? Is there something to do with poverty that leads someone to need to commit a crime? Are they experiencing the strain or stresses of poverty? Other theories might look at cultural factors. Are there subcultures, criminal cultures, which lead people to be more likely. If they’re from that culture to commit a crime or does it have things to do with social control? There are not enough people around willing to stop and intervene in the crime. Is it to do with who our friends are and so on? So there’s often a debate which is termed as the nature versus nurture debate and this often comes up in craniology as well as other areas of sciences and social exploration. 

Is it nature or is it nurture?

Is what factors are leading to the reason for behavior or something occurring are they more social factors or are they more biological factors? So nature is the biological explanation and the nurture being focused on the social explanations so as we can see these already seemed to map out quite nicely on to the criminology theories and how these have developed? So the biological theory is finding an explanation of nature that’s within the person and that’s the reason why someone behaves criminally. Or is it the social factors from the environment and so on.

How does the nature-nurture intersect? How do these factors combine to lead to certain behavior? and this maps on very nicely to what we know in scientific discoveries as we’re making in epigenetics and how the environment leads our genes to express in different ways. So even in the most scientific areas, we’re seeing that it would be a mistake to completely not consider social factors and the same in the social areas.