ABSTRACT
Nevertheless, the dispositional bias remains and renders criminological theory unproductive in terms of the preventive measures which it generates. People are led to propose methods of preventive intervention precisely where it is most difficult to achieve any effects, i.e. in relation to the psychological events or the social and economic conditions that are supposed to generate criminal dispositions. As James ÇK Wilson ( 1 9 7 5 ) has argued, there seem to be no acceptable ways of modifying temperament and other biological variables, and it is difficult to know what can be done to make parents more inclined to love their children or exercise consistent discipline. Eradicating poverty may be no real solution either, in that crime rates have continued to rise since the war despite great improvements in economic conditions. And even if it were possible to provide people with the kinds of jobs and leisure facilities they might want, there is still no guarantee that crime would drop ; few crimes require much time or effort, and work and leisure in themP selves provide a whole range of criminal opportunities. As for violent crime, there would have to be a much clearer link between this and media portP rayals of violence before those who cater to popular taste would be perP suaded to change their material. Finally, given public attitudes to offending which, judging by some opinion surveys, can be quite punitive, there may not be a great deal of additional scope for policies of diversion and décriminaliP sation which are favoured by those who fear the consequences o f“ labelling” .
