What do you think?
Rate this book
Criminal: The Truth About Why People Do Bad Things
There are two myths about crime. In one, the criminal act is a selfish choice, and tough punishment the only solution. In the other, the system is at fault, and perpetrators will change only when society reforms. Both these narratives are wrong.
Interweaving conversations and stories of crime with findings from the latest research, Tom Gash dispels the myths that inform our views of crime, from the widespread misconception that poverty causes crime, to the belief that tough sentencing reduces it. He examines the origins of criminal behaviour, the ebb and flow of crime across the last century, and the effectiveness of various government crack-downs - and in doing so reveals that crime is both less rational and much easier to reduce than many believe. Can we suspend our knee-jerk reactions, let go of cherished myths and embrace the truth about crime?
Interweaving conversations and stories of crime with findings from the latest research, Tom Gash dispels the myths that inform our views of crime, from the widespread misconception that poverty causes crime, to the belief that tough sentencing reduces it. He examines the origins of criminal behaviour, the ebb and flow of crime across the last century, and the effectiveness of various government crack-downs - and in doing so reveals that crime is both less rational and much easier to reduce than many believe. Can we suspend our knee-jerk reactions, let go of cherished myths and embrace the truth about crime?
352 pages, Paperback
First published March 22, 2016
36 people are currently reading
362 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
July 29, 2016
Tom Gash sits down to breakfast. His wife asks “Would you like salt for your scrambled eggs?” Tom pauses. “Several studies show that adding salt to scrambled eggs definitely enhances the experience; but other studies, such as the famous Paerrt-Tiomkin experiment conducted in Murmansk between 1978 and 1982 shows that people can very easily accommodate the loss of added salt in scrambled eggs, and after a few weeks, accept the salt-free version as normal.”
“So is that a yes or a no?”
“Hmmm. What do you think?”
**
One line summary of the whole book for the impatient :
These questions are at once vitally important and far harder to answer than we might think.
Actually, if you are an impatient person, we have a marshmallow on a plate for you – see below.
***
INTRO – THE 2 ETERNAL VIEWPOINTS
1. Of the right – “heroes and villains” – crime is essentially a moral choice; tougher sentences and more jails required. TV Show - CSI
2. Of the left – “victims and survivors” – crime is created by social conditions; the perps are forced into a life of crime by having no other opportunities; better policies required. TV show : The Wire.
Political decisions, says Tom Gash, are based more on myths about crime than reality.
I wanted to share what I was discovering in order to help others question their own preconceptions about crime – and through this to improve our collective understanding of human nature
Fairly bold! What he ends up doing is investigating a million studies and analyses, interrogating a hundred lurid newspaper headlines (“A third of unemployed are convicted criminals” etc etc) and ends up saying well, on the one hand this, on the other hand that, and what does the third hand have to say? Hmm, yes, another very valid point.
We end up in a wilderness.
Myth 1 : Crime is Rising
Well, crime is falling greatly throughout the West since around 2005. I knew that because the stats have been reported on the BBC. But other people don’t because they look at tv channels that feature violent crime front and centre every day, because even if crime is falling, there are always some terrifying examples around to wake up the audience.
Since 1995 burglary and violent crime in England has fallen by two thirds. Similar falls in North America and Europe. Murders spectacularly down in the USA from the gruesome 1970-90 period. But only one in five of the population of these countries believe that.
Books appeared to explain the fall, like Freakanomics, which suggested that the availability of abortion to inner city girls in the 1970s led to a significant number of criminals not being born. But in the USA there was a whole new tougher sentencing thing going on in this period. Or maybe it was the increased ability in the US for citizens to carry arms.
Gash does do a pretty good job of shredding these one-note analyses, explaining that they are terribly selective due to their myriad assumptions.
Take the factors that people think might influence crime. These vastly vary between different models. Levitt’s include abortion laws; most don’t. John Lott’s include gun laws; most don’t. Levitt, Lott and Marvell do not regularly look at factors such as drug consumption, social values, or marriage – which other studies do examine.
Myth 2 : taking up a life of crime
The idea of the career criminal is slightly mythical. Most crimes are done by males between the ages of 12 and 27. They drop out of crime. A tiny few continue.
Gash says that the boys of 12 who appear in court for their first offence have not just started on their new career. They were born bad. They are the ones with ADHD who have been scratching and biting their fellows since the age of 2.
Maybe criminal tendencies are genetic.
Myth 3 : Criminals will stop at nothing
Is this something widely believed? Mostly I think they will stop if the window has a lock on it which is locked.
AN EXPERIMENT WITH MARSHMALLOWS
At Stanford University Dr Walter Mischel became interested in children’s behavior regarding resisting temptation. He got 4 to 6 year olds and one by one sat them in a room by themselves at a table where there was a plate with a marshmallow on it (this would not have worked for me, I hate marshmallows). Also there was a bell. The deal was, the kid could eat the marshmallow at any time after the good Doctor left, but they had to ring the bell first. OR…. They could wait for 15 minutes and get not one but TWO marshmallows.
He refined this experiment over the years with cohorts of kids who were then followed up in their lives.
The main things we found were that seconds of delay time [before eating the marshmallow] were predicting things like cocaine use in adolescence, things like body mass index; years of education.
In this chapter we can say Tom Gash has found something he’s sure about : most crime is committed impulsively, because the opportunity is there, and involves no forward planning and no consideration of any possible bad outcomes. Criminals are a little bit brain dead.
TOM GASH DOES NOT LIKE TO STICK HIS NECK OUT
There are bland comments in riotous profusion throughout this book:
Crime, substance abuse and risky sex have a lot in common. They all offer short term pleasure but in the longer term are usually poor choices… these are life’s snares – traps some people avoid and other people fall into according to their ability to make considered decisions.
Let’s try one from Myth 5 : Biology Determines Criminality
People with “abnormal” brains are often perfectly normal, just as people with apparently “normal” brains can be both psychologically disturbed and highly criminal.
Wowzer. And how about :
A range of studies confirm that living near criminals has a real impact on property prices.
and
There are no simple, automatic connections between poverty and crime. Rather the relationship…is highly complex and works both ways
In a chapter called Myth 7 : Immigration increases crime rates he says well, heck, sometimes it does, and you know what, sometimes it doesn’t.
But it is clear that reducing levels of immigration is no panacea for our crime problems.
What? Read that back… surely some mistake…. No, gosh darn it, by page 183 Tom Gash has actually found something he is clear about! Let the angels of sociology turn summersets in the sky. Let a massive bell peal. Let me wake up from this turgidity.
I should not rubbish this book completely, but it did become quite painful to hack through quite quickly. He does turn up a lot of interesting stuff, like the Kansas City experiment which withdrew police patrols for one sector of the city completely, and sent them over to another sector. The study found that crime did not rise in the sector which now had no patrols.
That the three cornerstones of modern policing – vehicle patrols, foot patrols and rapid response – might have little effect on crime rates is deeply disconcerting. Hundreds of billions of pounds have been spent on police patrols and improving response times over the past century. And it appears that most of this money has been wasted.
In the end, I was worn down by all this conflicting information. And now I want to set up my own experiment. Let all the animals be released from the zoo. Then let’s study which ones end up getting normal jobs like bus drivers (I’m betting the polar bears) or accountants (the penguins for sure) and which end up selling themselves for a bag of crank at the wrong end of town (surely not… the wildebeest??)
"Hey sugar, looking for a good time?"
“So is that a yes or a no?”
“Hmmm. What do you think?”
**
One line summary of the whole book for the impatient :
These questions are at once vitally important and far harder to answer than we might think.
Actually, if you are an impatient person, we have a marshmallow on a plate for you – see below.
***
INTRO – THE 2 ETERNAL VIEWPOINTS
1. Of the right – “heroes and villains” – crime is essentially a moral choice; tougher sentences and more jails required. TV Show - CSI
2. Of the left – “victims and survivors” – crime is created by social conditions; the perps are forced into a life of crime by having no other opportunities; better policies required. TV show : The Wire.
Political decisions, says Tom Gash, are based more on myths about crime than reality.
I wanted to share what I was discovering in order to help others question their own preconceptions about crime – and through this to improve our collective understanding of human nature
Fairly bold! What he ends up doing is investigating a million studies and analyses, interrogating a hundred lurid newspaper headlines (“A third of unemployed are convicted criminals” etc etc) and ends up saying well, on the one hand this, on the other hand that, and what does the third hand have to say? Hmm, yes, another very valid point.
We end up in a wilderness.
Myth 1 : Crime is Rising
Well, crime is falling greatly throughout the West since around 2005. I knew that because the stats have been reported on the BBC. But other people don’t because they look at tv channels that feature violent crime front and centre every day, because even if crime is falling, there are always some terrifying examples around to wake up the audience.
Since 1995 burglary and violent crime in England has fallen by two thirds. Similar falls in North America and Europe. Murders spectacularly down in the USA from the gruesome 1970-90 period. But only one in five of the population of these countries believe that.
Books appeared to explain the fall, like Freakanomics, which suggested that the availability of abortion to inner city girls in the 1970s led to a significant number of criminals not being born. But in the USA there was a whole new tougher sentencing thing going on in this period. Or maybe it was the increased ability in the US for citizens to carry arms.
Gash does do a pretty good job of shredding these one-note analyses, explaining that they are terribly selective due to their myriad assumptions.
Take the factors that people think might influence crime. These vastly vary between different models. Levitt’s include abortion laws; most don’t. John Lott’s include gun laws; most don’t. Levitt, Lott and Marvell do not regularly look at factors such as drug consumption, social values, or marriage – which other studies do examine.
Myth 2 : taking up a life of crime
The idea of the career criminal is slightly mythical. Most crimes are done by males between the ages of 12 and 27. They drop out of crime. A tiny few continue.
Gash says that the boys of 12 who appear in court for their first offence have not just started on their new career. They were born bad. They are the ones with ADHD who have been scratching and biting their fellows since the age of 2.
Maybe criminal tendencies are genetic.
Myth 3 : Criminals will stop at nothing
Is this something widely believed? Mostly I think they will stop if the window has a lock on it which is locked.
AN EXPERIMENT WITH MARSHMALLOWS
At Stanford University Dr Walter Mischel became interested in children’s behavior regarding resisting temptation. He got 4 to 6 year olds and one by one sat them in a room by themselves at a table where there was a plate with a marshmallow on it (this would not have worked for me, I hate marshmallows). Also there was a bell. The deal was, the kid could eat the marshmallow at any time after the good Doctor left, but they had to ring the bell first. OR…. They could wait for 15 minutes and get not one but TWO marshmallows.
He refined this experiment over the years with cohorts of kids who were then followed up in their lives.
The main things we found were that seconds of delay time [before eating the marshmallow] were predicting things like cocaine use in adolescence, things like body mass index; years of education.
In this chapter we can say Tom Gash has found something he’s sure about : most crime is committed impulsively, because the opportunity is there, and involves no forward planning and no consideration of any possible bad outcomes. Criminals are a little bit brain dead.
TOM GASH DOES NOT LIKE TO STICK HIS NECK OUT
There are bland comments in riotous profusion throughout this book:
Crime, substance abuse and risky sex have a lot in common. They all offer short term pleasure but in the longer term are usually poor choices… these are life’s snares – traps some people avoid and other people fall into according to their ability to make considered decisions.
Let’s try one from Myth 5 : Biology Determines Criminality
People with “abnormal” brains are often perfectly normal, just as people with apparently “normal” brains can be both psychologically disturbed and highly criminal.
Wowzer. And how about :
A range of studies confirm that living near criminals has a real impact on property prices.
and
There are no simple, automatic connections between poverty and crime. Rather the relationship…is highly complex and works both ways
In a chapter called Myth 7 : Immigration increases crime rates he says well, heck, sometimes it does, and you know what, sometimes it doesn’t.
But it is clear that reducing levels of immigration is no panacea for our crime problems.
What? Read that back… surely some mistake…. No, gosh darn it, by page 183 Tom Gash has actually found something he is clear about! Let the angels of sociology turn summersets in the sky. Let a massive bell peal. Let me wake up from this turgidity.
I should not rubbish this book completely, but it did become quite painful to hack through quite quickly. He does turn up a lot of interesting stuff, like the Kansas City experiment which withdrew police patrols for one sector of the city completely, and sent them over to another sector. The study found that crime did not rise in the sector which now had no patrols.
That the three cornerstones of modern policing – vehicle patrols, foot patrols and rapid response – might have little effect on crime rates is deeply disconcerting. Hundreds of billions of pounds have been spent on police patrols and improving response times over the past century. And it appears that most of this money has been wasted.
In the end, I was worn down by all this conflicting information. And now I want to set up my own experiment. Let all the animals be released from the zoo. Then let’s study which ones end up getting normal jobs like bus drivers (I’m betting the polar bears) or accountants (the penguins for sure) and which end up selling themselves for a bag of crank at the wrong end of town (surely not… the wildebeest??)
"Hey sugar, looking for a good time?"
November 13, 2016
If I was to sum this book’s premise in a question, it would be ‘Life is complicated, why would you think crime would be any different?’
Attempting to both dismiss the common myths about crime (such as poverty causes crime) and criminals (such as they’ll stop at nothing), the book is also written to explain how crime can be reduced based on collected evidence.
The points raised are certainly interesting and really challenge some common perspectives with some recent and historical studies. The author’s primary point is that crime is caused by many factors both personal, environmental and opportunistic.
I feel the book could have been greatly improved by summarising all the points made on causal factors for ease of reading. My main concern with the book however is that while it delivers on the first half of its aim (dispelling myths) it doesn’t deliver well on how crime can be reduced. There are only a small number of specific examples provided which gives the impression of there being many explanations of what doesn’t cause crime but not a lot of information on what prevents it.
The author would likely argue that there isn’t any one solution to a particular type of crime -and for this I agree. However, a principle based analysis and approach to trialling solutions could have been better detailed in the book (as it stands, you can build such an approach having read the book but again, I feel you have to work for it a bit more than you should).
I think any policy practitioner working in the justice portfolio should read this book.
3.5 stars.
Topics and keywords: Crime, Current Affairs, Iconoclast, Policy
Attempting to both dismiss the common myths about crime (such as poverty causes crime) and criminals (such as they’ll stop at nothing), the book is also written to explain how crime can be reduced based on collected evidence.
The points raised are certainly interesting and really challenge some common perspectives with some recent and historical studies. The author’s primary point is that crime is caused by many factors both personal, environmental and opportunistic.
I feel the book could have been greatly improved by summarising all the points made on causal factors for ease of reading. My main concern with the book however is that while it delivers on the first half of its aim (dispelling myths) it doesn’t deliver well on how crime can be reduced. There are only a small number of specific examples provided which gives the impression of there being many explanations of what doesn’t cause crime but not a lot of information on what prevents it.
The author would likely argue that there isn’t any one solution to a particular type of crime -and for this I agree. However, a principle based analysis and approach to trialling solutions could have been better detailed in the book (as it stands, you can build such an approach having read the book but again, I feel you have to work for it a bit more than you should).
I think any policy practitioner working in the justice portfolio should read this book.
3.5 stars.
Topics and keywords: Crime, Current Affairs, Iconoclast, Policy
November 7, 2016
Tom Gash is no Emile Durkheim, and this book is no Suicide. Instead of a systematic study of crime statistics leading to a deeper understanding of how to address crime as a social problem, we are presented with a collection of "everybody knows" myths, which are then debunked using carefully-selected statistics.
The problem is, there is nothing surprising here. Anyone paying attention, or who has spoken with a criminal for longer than the time it takes to get mugged, will already know most of what Tom Gash is trying to convince us of. Most crime arises from opportunity. Most criminals are young males. The best way to prevent recidivism is to integrate released convicts into a stable social structure.
If this is news to you, then yes, you should read the book. It is engaging and well-written, and the 'myths' approach makes it suitable pop-social-science reading. Maybe read it anyways, as a survey of some of the more innovative studies regarding crime. Then pass it on to that angry uncle always railing about how the death penalty should be applied to shop lifting.
The problem is, there is nothing surprising here. Anyone paying attention, or who has spoken with a criminal for longer than the time it takes to get mugged, will already know most of what Tom Gash is trying to convince us of. Most crime arises from opportunity. Most criminals are young males. The best way to prevent recidivism is to integrate released convicts into a stable social structure.
If this is news to you, then yes, you should read the book. It is engaging and well-written, and the 'myths' approach makes it suitable pop-social-science reading. Maybe read it anyways, as a survey of some of the more innovative studies regarding crime. Then pass it on to that angry uncle always railing about how the death penalty should be applied to shop lifting.
October 22, 2017
Mr Gash is quite selective in his crime interests (mostly 'working class' crime). I'd have liked to know more about tax evasion and fiddling MPs' expenses (is that nature or nurture?); entering into contracts that mean a person takes no responsibility for catastrophes they've helped cause (bankers, anyone?); and the causes of domestic violence, gaslighting and general street abuse. Curiously, however, Mr Gash doesn't address that. He's also clearly looking to maintain his position or get a new one in various government depts. at least he's gracious about academics not deliberately misleading journalists (!).
May 7, 2017
An interesting and accessible overview of the research into crime, it's causes and the motivation and circumstances of criminals. The comparison to the two dominant theories of crime was interesting, and referred to a bit throughout, but it didn't create as coherent an overview as I was expecting. Perhaps I wanted too easy an answer. It did feel that the references in each section to other related 'myths' would have been more helpful if I didn't have to remind myself which was myth 3, etc each time (so referring by name, not number), which interrupted the flow of the arguments.
I'm sure this book will impact on my own thinking about crime and punishment over time and it's an important work. Not quite 4 stars for me, due to flow and structural issues, and the strength of some arguments not being up to scratch. Very worthy information over all, and an important area.
I'm sure this book will impact on my own thinking about crime and punishment over time and it's an important work. Not quite 4 stars for me, due to flow and structural issues, and the strength of some arguments not being up to scratch. Very worthy information over all, and an important area.
December 4, 2023
Superb research on crime policing that challenges the myths of how most people view crime in society. Highly recommend!
January 17, 2021
I was sorely disappointed by this book. I hope that this book would do what its title claimed, tell us the truth about why people do bad things. Instead of giving any substantial reasoning, Tom Gash just gave us more questions. While he was able to disprove certain myths concerning crime, he didn't offer a solution. He just said myth A is a myth but doesn't tell us what Truth A should be.
He also focused on developed nations throughout the book. I wish he would have talked about developing countries (where crime is generally more abundant) and compare how crime differs (or is similar) in developed and developing countries.
He also focused on developed nations throughout the book. I wish he would have talked about developing countries (where crime is generally more abundant) and compare how crime differs (or is similar) in developed and developing countries.
August 13, 2020
這本書用淺顯好懂的方式去述說作者觀察到的社會事實，和常見的犯罪理論比較，總結出幾個常見、但其實無法得到數據支持的迷思，比如，嚴刑並不能減低犯罪率；比如，改變社會結構和減少犯罪並沒有直接的關係，等等。相當有意思。
我覺得這本書提出最重要的概念會落在「犯罪是流動的一連串交互作用」，其實無法從單一原因（甚至「邪惡」）去解讀。
從這個角度去檢視行為本身也很值得深思。
我覺得這本書提出最重要的概念會落在「犯罪是流動的一連串交互作用」，其實無法從單一原因（甚至「邪惡」）去解讀。
從這個角度去檢視行為本身也很值得深思。
April 30, 2021
It's very accessible, and a bit obvious, but I still enjoyed it - just for the sheer range of facts with which Gash maintains his pretty much foregone conclusion. I'd agree with other readers that he's far too narrowed onto petty and violent crime throughout the whole book, but he does point out corporate and even national crime on occasion. Considering the caveat of unavailability, or inconclusive results, that he points out even for the most banal statistical evidence, I doubt he'd be able to contain much more analsysis into those crimes (let alone how lobbyists might handle it) within the scope of this generalist book.
There are points where his tone of objectivity seems quite laboured and often silly: such as when he dismisses the impact of trauma on crime (the lanaguage clearly not objective as 'poor life experiences) and understates the impact of poverty on crime, pointing towards small choices and choicelessnesses themselves as crime's origin - despite the fact these are themselves more likely from poverty.
He does point out racism, in some cases quite vehemently - but then, skulks back to objectivity, cautioning against overstating racism at quite peculiar and particular moments (for example, he says that despite racial profiling and harsher sentences, black people are generally more likely to committ crimes, then in a later chapter supposes that the three strikes rule could lead to prisoners pursuing larger and more risky crimes because they'd rather that than risk their lives on petty ones.)
This obsession with objectivity and letting the statistics speak for themselves is niave and hypocritical: after an introduction that criticises the very idea of economic/statistical objectivity and the fact that he goes as far as to add his own conclusions before retracting them as unsubstantiated.
However, I have to admire his clear stance against biological essentialism, especially with my own interests in neurodiversity and mental illness - which are both overrepresented in prison, and contain traits identified as possible drivers of criminality, as well as possessed by millions of innocent people around the world.
Crime science may seem like common sense to readers - but like a lot of common sense, it's not been deemed particularly fashionable by politicians. This part of the book, at least, has a clear argument for its existence.
Overall, though, the book's got a muddled heart that strangles anything new it might have come up with. But, as a starting point or general reference book, it's easy to read and presents a wide range of fascinating case studies and interviews with people on all sides of the criminal divide.
There are points where his tone of objectivity seems quite laboured and often silly: such as when he dismisses the impact of trauma on crime (the lanaguage clearly not objective as 'poor life experiences) and understates the impact of poverty on crime, pointing towards small choices and choicelessnesses themselves as crime's origin - despite the fact these are themselves more likely from poverty.
He does point out racism, in some cases quite vehemently - but then, skulks back to objectivity, cautioning against overstating racism at quite peculiar and particular moments (for example, he says that despite racial profiling and harsher sentences, black people are generally more likely to committ crimes, then in a later chapter supposes that the three strikes rule could lead to prisoners pursuing larger and more risky crimes because they'd rather that than risk their lives on petty ones.)
This obsession with objectivity and letting the statistics speak for themselves is niave and hypocritical: after an introduction that criticises the very idea of economic/statistical objectivity and the fact that he goes as far as to add his own conclusions before retracting them as unsubstantiated.
However, I have to admire his clear stance against biological essentialism, especially with my own interests in neurodiversity and mental illness - which are both overrepresented in prison, and contain traits identified as possible drivers of criminality, as well as possessed by millions of innocent people around the world.
Crime science may seem like common sense to readers - but like a lot of common sense, it's not been deemed particularly fashionable by politicians. This part of the book, at least, has a clear argument for its existence.
Overall, though, the book's got a muddled heart that strangles anything new it might have come up with. But, as a starting point or general reference book, it's easy to read and presents a wide range of fascinating case studies and interviews with people on all sides of the criminal divide.
October 29, 2018
Is crime a selfish choice which can only be deterred through the full force of the law and (carceral) punishment or is crime the product of socioeconomic deprivations which should be tackled by modifying the social structures which force people into crime? Well, both and neither, according to Tom Gash. In this book, he tackles some of the main preconceptions which dominate both views on crime (which he respectively labels the ‘Heroes and Villain’ and ‘Victims and Survivors’ approaches) by unpacking 11 common myths. These include, among others, the idea that more police on the beat and tougher sentences are the most effective ways to reduce crime, that most crime is highly professional, or that poverty is a direct cause of crime. In each chapter he carefully unpacks these claims; drawing on extensive data and a wealth of secondary research, he shows how the reality of crime is often far more complex than the prevailing conceptions that we have of it.
Overall, he presents a nuanced explanation of crime and avoids overly lambasting either the ‘Heroes and Villain’ or ‘Victims and Survivors’ viewpoints, which would have been easy to do. Instead, he engages with them to deftly show that they all too often rely on assumptions that are often not backed up by solid research. The author himself appears to align with the situational approach to crime, which places the emphasis for crime prevention on addressing the circumstances which facilitate crime (i.e. reducing the temptation of crime) and on recognising that there exist ‘many guardians of social order’ alongside the police which can be mobilised in support of anti-crime measures. Wherever you stand on the Villains-Heroes spectrum, this is a highly readable and insightful book which is sure to challenge your beliefs about criminality.
Overall, he presents a nuanced explanation of crime and avoids overly lambasting either the ‘Heroes and Villain’ or ‘Victims and Survivors’ viewpoints, which would have been easy to do. Instead, he engages with them to deftly show that they all too often rely on assumptions that are often not backed up by solid research. The author himself appears to align with the situational approach to crime, which places the emphasis for crime prevention on addressing the circumstances which facilitate crime (i.e. reducing the temptation of crime) and on recognising that there exist ‘many guardians of social order’ alongside the police which can be mobilised in support of anti-crime measures. Wherever you stand on the Villains-Heroes spectrum, this is a highly readable and insightful book which is sure to challenge your beliefs about criminality.
October 22, 2020
Sets out to dispel the myths about crime and it’s causes and to illustrate the complexity of the issues that contribute to it. I found it reasonably interesting but felt it could have been more concise and to the point in places. It certainly didn’t hold my attention throughout. For me the most interesting material was the section towards the end that described the often small, practical changes that could be clearly shown to have reduced certain types of crime in particular areas. However, this was relatively brief and I would have welcomed more discussion around these initiatives as well as further examples.
January 22, 2017
Very interesting, I found this a lot more open to be unsure of the explanation about opportunity being the driving force of crime, compared to the Nick Ross book on crime.
I would say this is great reading for those interested in crime and people who want to be challenged critically about what you think about crime and how you think about crime.
Really slays or casts serious intellectual doubt on commonly-held assumptions about crime.
Top work Mr Gash!
I would say this is great reading for those interested in crime and people who want to be challenged critically about what you think about crime and how you think about crime.
Really slays or casts serious intellectual doubt on commonly-held assumptions about crime.
Top work Mr Gash!
August 29, 2020
An interesting and important read but at times a bit arduous and repetitive feeling. It's a good exploration of lots of elements of crime so acts as an introduction/jumping off point for understanding the issues. This was particularly helpful as a law student reading out of interest in sociological/criminological methods and theory.
January 17, 2020
In other words. Crime is multi-faceted and complex.
But we could be doing more to understand it. It’s not as easy as eradicating poverty, putting more police on the beat or making sentences harsher.
But we could be doing more to understand it. It’s not as easy as eradicating poverty, putting more police on the beat or making sentences harsher.
December 4, 2024
Really enjoyed it, was a good jump into what people think help crime and how the gut feel is not truly what the data tells you. Humans are unpredictable. For a non fiction book this wasnt dry and was a reasonably easy read and had me going and looking things up.
July 13, 2025
Tom Gash tackles the two warring theories about the causes of criminal conduct, and considers 11 myths about criminal behaviour.
There are some interesting studies and the results may surprise you. Or not.
There are some interesting studies and the results may surprise you. Or not.
August 17, 2018
An eye opener. Thoroughly researched and written in clear language. A must read if you want to understand the criminal mind in a scientific correct way.
April 10, 2019
Finally, someone is smart slash courageous enough to step up and tell the truth how it is. Although, a brief examination of history will show that Humanity has never been short of prophets.
October 18, 2020
interesting read but we have very different views of human nature so i feel like we were never going to fully agree on what causes crime
July 11, 2021
THIS IS NOT A BOOK ABOUT WHY PEOPLE DO BAD THINGS. THIS IS A BOOK ABOUT HOW TO LOWER CRIME.
January 30, 2022
Changed my entire view on human nature and views on people, and why many do bad things. Opens up your mind, creates a new sense of empathy.
October 21, 2022
Stereotypes, we all have some about one thing or another, but this book is one big stereotype ender. Crime is probably one of the topics in which we hold the most ingrained beliefs. I personally believe this is due to the vast number of media we consume that discuss the rise in crime, high-profile cases and so on. This book really helps to set these straight, or at least attempts to through the use of thorough, well-researched work by Gash.
I think one of the most interesting topics in this book was the idea of prison as a punishment for criminal activity. I personally hold the belief that those that commit any serious or violent crime should be sentenced to a prison term. However, the book opened my eyes to the lack of effectiveness in deterring further criminal activity. Another important factor that needs to be considered when discussing prisons is their cost. It’s such an extortionate fee to house a prisoner per year, approximately £80,000. This is an extremely costly process, especially considering there is little evidence to suggest that long-term imprisonment leads to a reduction in the crime rate.
I was also shocked by the first myth that ‘’crime is rising’’. Tom Gash says crime is falling, which I found difficult to believe. Gash puts this view down to the sensationalization of the news, but I also think it’s down to the ability to be in communication all the time on social media. We can know about something going on in our neighbours, nearby cities, or across the world instantly. This obviously influences our opinion, which is probably why I believed crime is rising. Of course, there’s an increase and decrease over time of certain crimes, for example during the COVID pandemic there was a rise in fraud offences and a decrease in theft. This however doesn’t lead to a significant change in the overall crime levels.
I do feel that such a complicated topic as crime is so difficult to reduce to a few hundred pages in a book. You could do 100 studies, but it would still be difficult to create definitive results to debunk the many myths that make up this book. I did find it very intriguing no doubt and suggest reading this book if you are interested in crime or just looking for something a little bit different to get into.
I think one of the most interesting topics in this book was the idea of prison as a punishment for criminal activity. I personally hold the belief that those that commit any serious or violent crime should be sentenced to a prison term. However, the book opened my eyes to the lack of effectiveness in deterring further criminal activity. Another important factor that needs to be considered when discussing prisons is their cost. It’s such an extortionate fee to house a prisoner per year, approximately £80,000. This is an extremely costly process, especially considering there is little evidence to suggest that long-term imprisonment leads to a reduction in the crime rate.
I was also shocked by the first myth that ‘’crime is rising’’. Tom Gash says crime is falling, which I found difficult to believe. Gash puts this view down to the sensationalization of the news, but I also think it’s down to the ability to be in communication all the time on social media. We can know about something going on in our neighbours, nearby cities, or across the world instantly. This obviously influences our opinion, which is probably why I believed crime is rising. Of course, there’s an increase and decrease over time of certain crimes, for example during the COVID pandemic there was a rise in fraud offences and a decrease in theft. This however doesn’t lead to a significant change in the overall crime levels.
I do feel that such a complicated topic as crime is so difficult to reduce to a few hundred pages in a book. You could do 100 studies, but it would still be difficult to create definitive results to debunk the many myths that make up this book. I did find it very intriguing no doubt and suggest reading this book if you are interested in crime or just looking for something a little bit different to get into.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 19, 2016
An interesting and readable stroll through various criminological findings that belie popular and populist conceptions of criminality.
Read
September 14, 2016Great stuff. Questioning dominant social discourses.
December 26, 2016
EXCELLENT BOOK OFFERING REAL INSIGHTS INTO WHY CRIMINALS BEHAVE AS THEY DO
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 25, 2016
A most thought-provoking book that will make you question your beliefs about crime and criminals
May 3, 2017
Super interesting.
Interrogate both the right and left myth making behind the causes of crime, and analyse the data to identify conditions where criminal behaviour is more frequent - then make subtle interventions in the environment (not necessarily through policing or the criminal justice system) to lessen opportunity for crimes - voila less crimes. Innit.
Interrogate both the right and left myth making behind the causes of crime, and analyse the data to identify conditions where criminal behaviour is more frequent - then make subtle interventions in the environment (not necessarily through policing or the criminal justice system) to lessen opportunity for crimes - voila less crimes. Innit.
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews