Studies show criminality is highly heritable

[cyborg]

Studies have shown that up to 62 percent of antisocial and criminal behavior is "heritable," a rough measure of a genetic contribution. And in a few cases, courts have allowed arguments seemingly akin to "My genes made me do it."

The Supreme Court of South Carolina reversed a murder conviction for a man who shot a shopkeeper in the head, concurring with the killer's attorney that his actions were an outgrowth of severe, genetically rooted depression -- essentially saying that what he did was the result of an inherited disease rather than an act of free will.

[ All deliberate criminal acts are a product of the kind of person the criminal is. They should not be considered less culpable because of that! What this shows is that eugenics is necessary - especially preventing worthless and harmful people from multiplying. ]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/19/AR2008041902225_3.html?sid=ST2008042100610

http://www.nazi.org/nazi/news/archives/00001715.html

[Winston]

The idea that a person is largely at the mercy of their genes, and that one person cannot necessarily be held to the standards of another, is one that I generally agree with; although I'm not sure that the legal system is really equipped to factor these things in when it comes to sentencing.

[cyborg]

No it isn't. Society itself is not, because we regularly let people carrying these genes come into the world and only respond to their behaviour after the damage is done. Unfortunately, there isn't any freedom to be free of the damage caused by one's fellow equals until after the fact.

[Kamandi]

Heritability and 'genetically pre-determined' are NOT synonyms. :rolleyes:

[Felix the Cat]

How is this any different to the Medieval defense that "the devil made me do it?"

[cyborg]

Maybe when people were making such claims during those past centuries, they were honestly communicating what they felt compelled their actions (not in control). It would be ignorant/backwards to ignore and dismiss input like that from a perpetrator.

[Winston]

How is this any different to the Medieval defense that "the devil made me do it?"

Genetics exist; the devil doesn't.

[La Cosa Blanca]

Like attracts like, and like produces like or better. Refuse or stray from this basic mandate, and unpleasant results will most likely occur. Simple as that.

[President Barbicane]

If someone is genetically predisposed to criminal activity, that means he should be locked up longer because he has a greater chance of recidivism.

[Starr]

This should only be taken into consideration when thinking of ways to reduce crime in society. Not that we will be going down that road anytime soon. After a person like this commits a criminal act they should not be treated less harshly and that is exactly where some people might want to go with this(though that, of course, has implications those same kind of people don't like and don't want to talk too much about) A person might be genetically more prone to display certain criminal behaviors, but how many can it actually be said have no choice in the matter, whatsoever? If they can distinguish between right and wrong and are aware of the laws, they can choose not to commit a crime.

[Kamandi]

If someone is genetically predisposed to criminal activity, that means he should be locked up longer because he has a greater chance of recidivism.
Criminality is not distributed in Mendelian patterns of inheritance, so it's unlikely any specific gene is responsible for its expression. Heritability refers to the ratio of hereditary vs environmental factors producing statistical variation in the selected trait in whole populations, not any single individual.

Since we know that the lower the socioeconomic status of any population, the more likely environmental causes are responsible for any variation in a heritable trait, that would imply that variation in criminality is more likely to be due to inherited factors in white than black populations.

[Dan Dare]

Heritability and 'genetically pre-determined' are NOT synonyms. :rolleyes:

Is there some other means of acquiring a genetically-determined trait besides inheriting it?

[Kamandi]

The concept of "genetically determined" isn't well-defined. For example, the number of fingers you're born with appears to be 'genetically determined' but the heritability of the trait is close to zero.

(Most variation is due to environmental causes: people chopping them off in accidents, for example.)

[1-800]

Wouldn't heritability be 100% (or '1')? If you didn't inherit it then you could have any number of fingers.

No, that's at an individual level.

On topic, there are studies that indicate criminality has a genetic component, see here:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v16/n5/abs/5201999a.html

[Vasily Zaitsev]

Is there some other means of acquiring a genetically-determined trait besides inheriting it?

Yes.

Mutation.

[Kamandi]

Mendelian patterns of inheritance only work with one or two genes. If there are more than two genes the Mendelian method of identifying genetic inheritance fails to identify them.
Very true, but if the trait is truly polygenic then ANOVA will not be effective in determining the heritability, because we don't currently understand the interaction of multiple genes with the environment in determining trait expression, particularly behavioral traits.


An assumption can be made that they are at the bottom of the socioeconomic pile due to genetic factors. Genetically bright people brought up by dim parents end up find their way to the top regardless of how poor they are.
Maybe, but as most wealth is inherited, many dull people end up at the top of the SES scale as well simply because they have bright parents (or grandparents or great-grandparents, etc.)

Consequently, the issue will likely remain unresolved.

No. He's being pedantic. I am assuming he means that just because you inherit a gene doesn't mean that you actually have to be influenced by it. The environment and the mental aspect of humanity can override genes (in theory).
It would be more accurate to say that we do not generally understand the interaction between genes and environment or the role of perceived human free will.

Wouldn't heritability be 100% (or '1')? If you didn't inherit it then you could have any number of fingers.
No, heritability is the ratio of genetic to environmental factors in variation observed in any trait.

Variation in the trait of "number of fingers" is almost entirely environmental due to the extremely low number of humans born with anything other than ten fingers. Most people with less than ten fingers have had accidents.

As some humans are born with a non-standard number of fingers, the ratio will be equal to slightly more than zero

[Kamandi]

No, that's at an individual level.

On topic, there are studies that indicate criminality has a genetic component, see here:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v16/n5/abs/5201999a.html
That study actually indicates that some criminals have a genetic similarity, not that criminality in general has a genetic component.

[Kamandi]

Yes.

Mutation.
There is no documented case of any human being acquiring a "genetically determined" trait through mutation, at least mutation subsequent to birth.