Lesson video

Hello and welcome to today's lesson.

I'm so pleased that you're going to join me.

My name's Mrs. Rawbone, and I'm going to be your RE teacher today.

In today's lesson, you will be able to explain different Christian and non-religious views about crime and how beliefs influence responses to it.

Some keywords we'll be using are crime, injustice, and justice.

Crime is an action which breaks the law.

It can be against the person, against property or against the state.

Injustice is when people are treated unfairly, they're denied equal rights or not given the same opportunities or protections as others.

And justice is fairness; where everyone has equal provisions and opportunity.

Today's lesson will take two parts.

We will be looking at crime and at responses to crime.

So let's get started looking at crime.

A crime is an action which breaks the law.

There are three main types of crime according to how the law categorises who or what is harmed.

We have crimes against the person, property and the state.

Crimes against the person are offences that cause physical, emotional, or psychological harm or threats of harm.

Crimes against property are crimes that involve interference with another person's possessions or financial interests.

Crimes against the state are crimes that threaten national security, government authority, or public peace and order.

Examples of crimes against the person would be murder, manslaughter, assault, attempted bodily harm, grievous bodily harm, harassment, stalking, domestic abuse.

Crimes against property include theft, burglary, robbery, fraud, vandalism and arson, and against the state include things like terrorism, treason, perjury, riot, violent disorder, or incitement to violence.

This chart shows the percentages of key types of crime committed in the year 2023 to '24 and published by the Office for National Statistics.

So you can see there that we have crimes ranging from fraud right through to homicide.

So I'd like you to have a good look at that chart and to work out which type of crime is most common.

So pause if you need to, take a moment and then come back when you're ready to check your answer.

So you should have spotted that it is actually fraud that is the most common type of crime.

Let's check your understanding.

What is a crime? Pause the video, write down your answer, and then come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

You could have said: A crime is an action which breaks the law.

It can be against the person, against property or against the state.

So well done if you manage to include those key points that it breaks the law and that there are different types of crime depending on who or what it is against.

Andeep is asking Neil, who is a defence barrister, about theft Andeep says, "Does it count as theft if you took something, but were going to give it back?" Neil replies, "Theft is defined in the Theft Act 1968 as dishonestly taking property that belongs to someone else with the intention of permanently depriving them of it.

That means if you take something but plan to return it, it is usually not theft because you did not intend to keep it.

Punishments for theft can include fines, community orders, or imprisonment.

Laura is asking Neil about hate crime.

She says, "Does the law treat people differently if they commit a crime because of someone's identity? Neil replies, "Yes, it does.

A hate crime is committed because of prejudice against a person or group.

It often results in a harsher sentence.

Recorded hate crimes have risen by 95,991 cases since 2013 and '14.

In 2023 to 24, there was a 5% overall decrease from the previous year, but religious hate crimes increased by 25%.

Jun is asking Neil about murder.

"What makes killing another person murder rather than manslaughter?" Neil says, "Killing is considered murder if it is unlawful.

So it can't be in self-defense or during war.

And if the offender had the intent either to kill or to cause serious injury.

If intent is absent, it may be manslaughter rather than murder.

Murder carries a mandatory life sentence, but manslaughter sentences can vary widely depending on the circumstances." Let's check your understanding again.

Which two of the following are true? A: Theft requires the intention to permanently keep someone else's property.

B: Murder is legally defined as any killing, whether lawful or unlawful.

C: Hate crimes are treated the same as other crimes with no extra penalties.

Or D: A crime motivated by prejudice against religion is a hate crime.

Sp pause if you need to, have a reread of those possibilities and then jot down which two you think are true before you come back and see if you were right.

So well done if you put A and if you put D.

Crime has many causes: poverty, upbringing, mental illness, addiction, greed and hate.

In 2016, Barack Obama noted that young men growing up in poverty are more likely to end up in prison or become victims of crime.

For example, Kenneth Lay was caught stealing food and essentials from supermarkets in 2012 to feed his family after losing his job and facing homelessness.

Baroness Louise Casey stated in 2012 that poor parenting, family breakdown and lack of discipline are key causes of youth crime.

An example of this was Reggie and Ronnie Kray, who grew up in a poor East London area where crime and lack of role models led them into organised crime in the 1950s and '60s.

Professor Tony Madden, a forensic psychiatrist, says untreated mental illness can lead to re-offending and calls for care and prevention rather than blame.

An example of this was John Hinckley Jr.

who tried to assassinate President Reagan in 1981.

He was diagnosed with schizophrenia and found not guilty by insanity.

Professor Carl Hart has shown that addiction is not just about bad choices, it is a medical and psychological condition which alters the brain.

Keith Hunter Jesperson struggled with substance abuse in the 1990s, which contributed to him committing multiple murders.

The utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer has argued when success is defined by money, it promotes selfish behaviour and can lead to crime.

Bernie Madoff operated from the 1990s until 2008, running the largest Ponzi scheme in history and defrauding investors of billions.

Psychologist Gordon Allport explains that prejudice can escalate to discrimination and violence, with hate crime as a possible outcome.

Stephen Lawrence was murdered in 1993 in a racially-motivated attack in southeast London.

His case exposed racial hatred and police failings.

Some people might view a person as more or less responsible for their actions depending on their reason for committing a crime.

So they might think people are less to blame or fully to blame.

Laura says, "If someone is living in poverty and can't afford to eat, it is natural that they would steal food." Where would you place Laura's view on this scale? How does it compare with your own? Pause the video and if you're able to turn and talk to someone nearby, please do, then come back when you are ready to move on.

Laura continues: "No matter how someone was brought up, everyone understands the difference between right and wrong." So have a think again about where would place Laura's view on the scale and how it compares with your own.

If you can, turn and talk to someone nearby, please do, or you can pause and talk to me, and then come back when you are ready to move on.

Laura continues: "People with serious mental illnesses are not always in control of their actions." So have a think again.

Where would you place her view on the scale and how does it compare with your own? Pause the video, turn and talk to someone nearby, or you can talk to me, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

Laura continues: "Someone with an addiction who commits a crime made a choice to become addicted." So have a careful think about what she said and about your own view.

Think about where you would place them on the scale.

Pause the video, come back when you're ready to move on.

Laura then says, "Greed leads people to choose to put their own interests ahead of others." Again, think about her view.

Where would you place it on the scale? How does that compare with yours? Pause the video, come back when you're ready to move on.

And finally, Laura says, "Hatred is learned from others, but we can all resist and challenge prejudice." So how far does Laura think people are to blame for hate crimes? Think about where you place her on the scale in relation to your own view.

Pause again, turn and talk to someone nearby, or you can talk to me, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

There are different arguments about whether people who break the law to oppose injustice should be held responsible for their actions.

You might say they're responsible because they deliberately chose to break the law and they could have expressed their views in other ways.

On the other hand, you might say they're not responsible.

Their conscience compelled them to act.

History shows that positive change can come from civil disobedience.

So which way do you think the balance tips? Pause if you need to turn and talk to someone nearby and then come back when you're ready to move on.

Let's check your understanding.

Which of the following is an example of personal conviction overriding the need to follow the law? Is it A: choosing to buy ethically sourced products, B: paying a parking fine on time, C: refusing to be conscripted into the army due to religious beliefs, or D: wearing a seatbelt while driving? So pause again if you need to and then come back when you're ready to check.

So, well done if you chose C, refusing to be conscripted into the army due to religious beliefs is an example of a personal conviction overriding that need to follow the law.

For Task A, I'd like you to explain how the offender's intention and motivation affect the seriousness of the crime in each scenario.

Number one: Stealing a mobile phone from someone's bag on a crowded bus with the intention of keeping it.

Two: Verbally abusing someone on the street, using racist language.

And three: Deliberately stabbing someone during an argument with the intent to kill or cause serious harm.

So pause the video, take your time to think carefully about each scenario.

Write down your answers and then come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

You could have said: For one, the intent to permanently keep the stolen phone makes it theft, a serious offence.

Without that intent, it might not be theft.

Motivation does not add extra seriousness here.

For number two, the motivation of racial hatred increases the seriousness of the verbal abuse, which is treated as a hate crime and can lead to a harsher punishment than ordinary abuse.

And for number three, the clear intent to kill or cause serious harm makes this murder, which carries a mandatory life sentence.

Without that intent, it could be manslaughter with a lighter sentence.

So well done if you manage to explain the difference between intent and how far that matters, and also motivation in each of these cases.

Let's move on to the second part of our lesson, which is responses to crime.

Someone's view on crime could be influenced by a number of factors: religious beliefs, a moral worldview, personal experience, human rights principles, ethical theories, and societal and cultural values.

And these are just a few of the many things that influence us when we have opinions on issues like crime.

Warren is an atheist.

He's explaining his view on issues surrounding crime.

Warren says, "From a utilitarian perspective, crime should be understood and tackled in ways that reduce overall harm.

Different causes of crime like poverty or protest against injustice need different responses.

Petty crime, violent crime and organised crime affect people differently.

So the response should depend on which approach most reduces suffering and prevents future harm." So you can see here how Warren's worldview is informing his perspective, and I'd like you to look carefully at what he said.

What ethical theory does Warren make use of to support his argument? So pause the video, take your time to have a look at what he said again and then come back when you are ready to check.

So well done if you spotted that it is utilitarianism.

Zoe is an atheist and she works as a psychologist.

She's explaining her view on issues surrounding crime.

Zoe says, "Having studied some criminal psychology, I believe we need to look at the root causes of crime, like poverty, mental health and childhood experience.

Crime doesn't happen in a vacuum.

It often reflects deeper issues in society.

If we want to reduce crime, we need to understand why it happens, not just focus on punishing it.

So have a think about Zoe's worldview and her approach.

What has influenced it? Pause the video, you can reread what Zoe has said.

You could turn and talk to someone nearby and then come back when you are ready to check your answer.

So well done if you noticed that she studied some criminal psychology.

Neil is a humanist and a defence barrister, and he is explaining how the Universal Declaration of Human Rights supports his view on crime.

Article 3 states, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." Neil says, "This principle reminds us that dealing with crime is important because it threatens our rights.

Preventing it is about protecting human dignity." Article 10 states, "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal." Neil says, "This principle is at the heart of any fair justice system.

While crime must be taken seriously, our response must still be fair." So let's check your understanding again.

Name one factor that might influence someone's view on people who have committed crimes.

Pause the video, come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

You could have said any one of the following: human rights, psychology, ethical theories such as utilitarianism, personal experience, or religious beliefs.

So well done if you put any of those in your answer.

Christians try to answer questions about crime by consulting sources of authorities, such as the Bible and Church teachings.

They might also use their conscience and reason which they see as God-given gifts, and consider non-religious arguments to work out what to do.

They may interpret the sources differently or emphasise one more than another.

The Bible is a source of wisdom and authority for Christians when thinking about crime, Exodus 20:15 says, "You shall not steal." And verse 13 says, "You shall not murder." So the Bible clearly condemned specific crimes including theft and murder.

"Love your neighbour as yourself." Mark 12:31.

"And you have heard that it was said, you shall not murder.

But I tell you that anyone who is angry will be subject to judgement ," and that can be found in Matthew 5:21-22.

Well, both of these verses are Jesus' teaching and he seems to emphasise the seriousness of hatred.

So emphasising the seriousness of crime caused by hate.

He teaches people to show love and equates hatred and anger with the seriousness of murder.

Bible teaching suggests that Christians must balance their personal convictions with following the law.

So the law is supported in the Bible.

Romans 13:1 says, "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established." But personal conviction is also supported in the Bible.

Acts 5:29 says, "We must obey God rather than human beings." Let's look at an example of a Christian trying to balance these two things, following the law and their personal conviction.

So an example of a law, city ordinances in Birmingham, Alabama banned protests and marches without a permit.

The personal conviction.

Along with hundreds of others, Martin Luther King was arrested for marching in protest against segregation in public places.

So he deliberately, along with lots of other people, broke the law because he thought the law was unjust.

So in his case, personal conviction beat following the law.

So for Christians, there are times when personal conviction may override that need to follow a law if the law is unjust.

So all denominations in Christianity agree that crime is wrong.

The Catholic Church sees crime as an offence against human dignity and the common good, and the Catechism teaches that "every offence committed against justice and truth entails the duty of reparation." That's in paragraph 2,487 and it stresses the need to repair harm and address injustice in society.

The Orthodox Church sees crime as a result of sin and broken relationships.

And the Orthodox social ethos teaches that justice should be guided by mercy and aim to bring reconciliation and healing, reflecting the church's belief in the dignity and transformation of every person.

The Methodist Church sees crime as a result of broken relationships and social injustice.

Its statement on Justice, Victims and Restorative Justice emphasises addressing root causes like poverty and exclusion and promoting reconciliation, fairness, and healing in the community.

Gemma is a member of the Salvation Army.

She's explaining how she responds to crime.

Gemma says, "If someone grows up in a home where there is no stability, no guidance, and barely enough money for food or clothes, they are much more likely to struggle later in life.

At the Salvation Army, we try to break that cycle.

We offer food banks, emergency housing and support for families, so that children can grow up with the care and structure they need." So what does the Salvation Army do to help people break the cycle of crime? Pause the video, have a look at what Gemma said again, and then come back when you are ready to move on.

So you might have noticed that they offer food banks, emergency housing and support for families.

Danielle is a Roman Catholic Christian and she's explaining her view on hate crime.

Danielle says, "Hate builds when people feel threatened, divided or unheard.

I support Christian Action Research and Education, or CARE because it works on social policy issues including hate crime and online abuse.

They campaign for stronger legal protections, support freedom of belief, and help churches respond with compassion and clarity." So what does CARE campaign for? Pause the video, have a look at what Danielle has said and come back when you are ready to move on.

You might have noticed that it campaigns for stronger legal protections.

So let's check your understanding.

I'd like you to give me one reason why Christians are opposed to hate crime.

Pause if you need to, jot down your answer, and then come back when you're ready to check it.

So you could have said any one of the following: The Methodist Church teaches that hate crimes are sinful.

The Orthodox Church rejects hatred and discrimination.

Pope Francis condemned all forms of racism as sinful and offensive to God.

Jesus taught "Love your neighbour as yourself" And Jesus taught "Anyone who is angry will be subject to judgement ." So well done if you managed to put one reason why Christians are opposed to hate crime.

Fiona is an Anglican Christian and she's responding to the statement "Hate crimes are the worst type of crime." Fiona says, "I believe hate crimes are very serious since they go against Jesus' command to "Love your neighbour as yourself." Mark 12:31.

At the same time, crimes like murder are equally serious because they destroy life which is sacred.

Justice must carefully consider the harm caused by the crime.

Hate crimes deeply wound communities and murder destroys life itself." So have a think about Fiona's view and where it would fall on the scale from disagree to agree, based on the statement, "Hate crimes are the worst types of crime." Turn and talk to someone nearby if you can, or you can talk to me and then come back when you're ready to move on.

Diane is a humanist and she's responding to the statement "Hate crimes are the worst type of crime." Diane says, "I believe all crimes that harm people or society are serious.

Hate crimes are particularly wrong because they violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, especially Article 2, which says everyone deserves equal rights regardless of race, religion, or background.

Hate crimes target people based on these differences which damages social harmony." So take a moment again, have a think about that scale.

Where would you put Diane's view on it? So remember, zero is disagree that hate crimes are the worst type of crime, and 10 is agree.

Pause, turn and talk to someone nearby if you can or you can talk to me and then come back when you're ready to move on.

For part one of our task, I'd like you to decide whether each point can be used to argue for or against the statement "Hate crimes are the worst type of crime," and I'd like you to explain how.

So we have for the first argument: Hate crimes violate fundamental human rights.

For the second: Crimes should be judged by the harm they cause.

For the third: Jesus taught "Love your neighbour as yourself." For the fourth: All crimes causing harm are serious.

And for the fifth: Hate crimes harm entire communities.

So pause the video, take your time to think about whether it's an argument for or against the statement, and also to make a note of the reason why.

Pause and come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

So you could have said for the first one, hate crimes violate fundamental human rights.

It's an argument for, and that's because hate crimes target people based on identity, which violates their equality and dignity.

For the second, crime should be judged by the harm they cause.

This is an argument against because it suggests the effect of the crime matters more than the motive.

For the third, Jesus taught "Love your neighbour as yourself." This would support the statement, it would be for, because hate crimes go against "love your neighbour" by showing hatred.

For the fourth, all crimes causing harm are serious.

This would be an argument against.

It suggests all harmful crimes are equally serious regardless of motivation.

And finally, hate crimes harm entire communities.

That would be an argument to support the statement because it's arguing that hate crimes cause wider social fear and division beyond those individual victims. So well done if you worked out whether those were arguments for or against, and if you managed to explain why.

For the second part of our task, I'd like you to choose the strongest point to agree or disagree that hate crimes are the worst type of crime, and explain why it is a strong argument.

So this is a really useful skill at GCSE in any kind of evaluation question for RS, because you actually have to show evaluation and it's really good to try and show it throughout as you are talking about the different points for and against.

So suggested sentence starters would be: A strong argument which agrees or disagrees is.

And then you could choose from: This is a strong argument as.

or This argument is compelling because.

This argument is powerful as it.

Or This argument is convincing because.

And then finish with, This is supported by.

So take your time, look back at that table of arguments.

Choose the one that you think is a strong argument to agree or disagree.

So that might depend on your personal view on the statement.

And then express your reasoning as to why it's strong or convincing and explain how it is, so what supports it.

Pause the video and come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

So you could have said: A strong argument which agrees with the statement is hate crimes harm entire communities.

This argument is convincing because it shows that hate crimes go beyond the individual victim and spread fear and division across wider society.

This is supported by the fact that hate crimes target people for who they are, which makes others in the same group feel unsafe.

It also links to the teaching "Love your neighbour as yourself," which shows that hate crimes directly oppose core moral and religious values.

So well done if you managed to not only choose your statement, but also explain why it's convincing and how that is supported.

In today's lesson, we have learned that crime is breaking the law and its seriousness depends on intent, motivation, and the harm caused.

The causes of include poverty, addiction, mental illness, greed, hate, and injustice.

The Christian views focus on justice, dignity, and restoring relationships, guided by the Bible, Church and conscience.

That non-religious views vary with some focusing on reducing harm, others on fairness or understanding root causes.

And that Christians respond differently, such as the Salvation Army tackling poverty and CARE addressing hate crime.

We've learned a lot in today's lesson, so thank you for being with me and for all of your hard work.