Analyzing Criminology: Alcohol Violence, NSW Laws & Neo-liberalism

This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of alcohol-related violence and the 'one-punch' law in New South Wales (NSW) from a criminology perspective. It examines the evolution and operation of punch laws in Australia, questioning their effectiveness and potential impact on the criminal justice system. The essay also explores the connection between public debates and political actions regarding alcohol violence and manslaughter with neo-liberal ideologies, focusing on concepts like responsibilisation and risk management. The analysis delves into how these ideologies influence crime control strategies and public involvement in addressing criminal activities, referencing relevant scholarly articles and legal cases to support its arguments.

Running head: PERSPECTIVES IN CRIMINOLOGY
Perspectives in Criminology
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1PERSPECTIVES IN CRIMINOLOGY
Question 1:
From the very beginning, alcohol related violence and violence and violence related to
one punching has been the major topic of debate in the politics of NSW. However, various
measures were implemented over last few years for the purpose of combating this problem.
Before the legislative reforms and measures could be emphasized, it is important to have
knowledge regarding the actual matter. On July 2012, it was observed that Thomas Kelly, a
teenager, who was put to death by a violence alcohol-fuelled act on the part of Kieran Loveridge.
However, general public was of the opinion that, Kieran Loveridge should be imposed with a
vigorous sentencing. It was observed that he was sentenced to NPP (non-parole period) for a
period of four years. The media and the general public immediately reacted to the judgment.
However, the reaction of the New South Wales Government was immediate in addressing the
seriousness of the issue and therefore proposed the development of the newly implemented “one
punch” law.
In the perspective of modern researchers, an examination was conducted on the evolution
and operation of punch laws in Australia (Flynn et al. 2015). Modern authors were of the opinion
that after analyzing the history and operation of criminal, unlawful and dangerous activities in
Australia, the implementation of punch law is not the appropriate remedy (Quilter 2015). Firstly,
it has been impossible on the part of the jurists to identify the relevant punch law for the purpose
of fulfilling the existing gaps in the laws of New South Wales regarding alcohol related fatal
violence. Secondly, with the implementation of one punch law, it may create unfavorable impact
on the criminal justice system in response to the existing domestic crimes (Quilter 2014).
Thirdly, it has been proposed that punch law has the potentiality to reduce prison sentences in

2PERSPECTIVES IN CRIMINOLOGY
cases involving death as a result of single punch however; this can create opposite reaction on
the part of the government authorities.
In Australia, first punch law was first proposed in August 2007 through a Bill of a private
member of the Attorney General in the Queensland Parliament. The Bill was applied in the case
of R v Little and R v Moody which involved plea in relation to manslaughter. It was observed
that with the implementation of the Bill, it attracted huge media publicity for three consecutive
prosecutions for the crime involving one punch deaths. In this regard, it was observed that two of
them were discharged and the other was led to a plea for manslaughter. While introducing the
Bill, it was clearly explained by the Attorney-General that the Bill was implemented for the
purpose of responding towards the concern regarding community in relation to the existing
punch cases. It was observed that the Bill sought to introduce a new offence related to unlawful
assault causing death which would be applicable to a maximum sentencing of seven years.
However, after all the efforts, the Parliament failed to pass the Bill.
Question 2:
It is noteworthy to mention here that various public debates and political actions in
relation to the offences of alcohol violence and manslaughter can be related to neoliberal
ideologies. It is evident that from the very beginning, the existence pressures and contradictions
are common in neo-liberalism. However, it is important to emphasize on the moral aspects of
neo-liberalism which can be related to the subject-matter of neoliberal politics. It is worthwhile
to mention here that although the subject-matter of neo-liberalism forms an important feature of
various sociological and political debates, the major elements are often ignored (Loader and
Sparks 2016). In this regard, it is important to provide the definition of neo-liberalism. Neo-

3PERSPECTIVES IN CRIMINOLOGY
liberalism can be defined as the ideology which has emerged as a result of various social and
democratic compromises (Hermansson 2018). In this regard, it is worth mentioning that the
concept of neo-liberalism proposes the idea that the nature of political competition in the world
should be free and fair. However, as a result of active competition on the part of the individuals,
the weaker groups were under constant threat and were involved in protecting themselves from
the upcoming consequences. It is worth stating that as a result of efficient competition between
states, the concept of public intervention was legitimized for the purpose of restoring peace and
stability. As a result of it, there was a space for substantial political opposition regarding the
matter related to the offences of alcohol violence and manslaughter.
The concept of responsibilisation has been undermining the reforms of youth justice in
New South Wales since the beginning. As a result of it, various crime control strategies were
implemented and due to this the offenders were liable for their own responsibilities. It can be
observed that as a result of emerging risk and responsibilisation, it encouraged the general public
to involve themselves towards the elimination of criminal activities within states. According to
modern scholars, a series of risk are associated with the concept of responsibilisation and
therefore, the burden of managing the risk factors are included on the part of the general public
(Stonehouse, Threlkeld and Farmer 2015). In this regard, it is worthwhile to refer here that the
concept of neo-liberal responsibilisation has proved to be beneficial in covering two major
factors regarding the question of big government and the power of individual states in addressing
the prevailing issues. Therefore, the meaning of government has changed into a new shape and
due to this its operational functions towards the society changed considerably. However, much
preference has been emphasized on the concept of political authority while addressing the issues
related to self-organization and inter-organizational networks. It is worth mentioning that the

4PERSPECTIVES IN CRIMINOLOGY
present social and penal policies in responses towards risk policies have efficiently defined
implications related with the policies of responsibilisation. Therefore, it can be stated that for the
purpose of emphasizing towards public actions and political debates, responsibilisation
efficiently framed different risk policies for the purpose of increasing preventive measures
towards crime.

5PERSPECTIVES IN CRIMINOLOGY
References:
Flynn, A., Halsey, M. and Lee, M., 2015. Emblematic violence and aetiological cul-de-sacs: On
the discourse of ‘one-punch’(non) fatalities. British Journal of Criminology, 56(1), pp.179-195.
Hermansson, K., 2018. The role of symbolic politics in exceptional crime policy debate: a study
of the 2014 Swedish general election. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and
Crime Prevention, pp.1-19.
Loader, I. and Sparks, R., 2016. Ideologies and crime: political ideas and the dynamics of crime
control. Global crime, 17(3-4), pp.314-330.
Quilter, J., 2015. Populism and criminal justice policy: An Australian case study of non-punitive
responses to alcohol-related violence. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 48(1),
pp.24-52.
Quilter, J.A., 2014. One-punch laws, mandatory minimums and ‘alcohol-fuelled’as an
aggravating factor: Implications for NSW criminal law. International Journal for Crime, Justice
and Social Democracy, 3(1), pp.81-106.
Stonehouse, D., Threlkeld, G. and Farmer, J., 2015. ‘Housing risk’and the neoliberal discourse of
responsibilisation in Victoria. Critical Social Policy, 35(3), pp.393-413.