This paper argues for the relevance of classical criminology for addressing contemporary problems of the criminal justice system. Despite many fundamental differences in political and cultural contexts, the central themes of classical crimino­logy continue to be relevant for our time. One such theme is the criticism of criminal law for imposing very harsh penalties. Penalties become cruel if they produce fear rather than moral responsibility. Criminal laws based on fear rather than conscience and reason are the expressions of political tyranny. The importance of developing moral responsibility has been reflected in a number of contemporary criminological theories. They, however, differ from classical criminology in one important aspect. Contemporary criminology, even though accepting the importance of morality in preventing crimes, does not affirm the existence of a moral truth. Classical criminology, as developed by Beccaria and Bentham, is based on a belief in moral truth as the criterion for evaluating contemporary institutions of criminal law. One instance of moral truth is that crimes are acts of free will. In contrast, many contemporary criminological theories do not recognize the concept of free will, which still remains the underlying principle of responsibility in criminal law. Rational choice theory is an exception. The paper highlights some shortcomings of the classical and rational choice theories from the viewpoint of a criminal law theorist. However, these shortcomings do not reduce the overriding importance of the unity of law, morals, and criminology. In order to reach a greater unity between the disciplines of criminology and criminal law, there is a need for the return to, and the acceptance of the main ethical tenets of classical criminology.