Concepts and Theories of Crime
Concepts and Theories of Crime
What is crime and deviance?
Crime: a legal wrong that can be followed by criminal proceedings, may result in punishment; an action/omission which constituted an offence is punishable by law.
Deviance: behaviour which is disapproved of by most people in a society or a group, which doesn’t conform to shared norms or values.
Social Control: methods used to force individuals to conform to dominant social norms and values in society (formal and informal) (cf. Althusser - ISAs and RSAs)
Social Construction of Crime:
Newburn (2007):
Crime is basically a label that is attached to behaviours prohibited by the state.
The fact that criminal law changes across cultures and time, reinforces the idea that there is nothing that is in itself criminal.
Those in power dictate - criminal justice, agencies, the police and the law simply interpret, or make a judgement.
Plummer (1979) - Societal Deviance and Situational Deviance:
Societal Deviance:
Forms of deviance that most members of society regard as deviant because they share similar ideas about approved or unapproved behaviours.
eg. murder, rape, child abuse, drink driving.
Situational Deviance:
The way in which an act being seen as deviant or not depends on the context or location in which it takes place.
Crime and deviance is relative.
Relativity of Crime and Deviance:
Ways that deviance can vary according to circumstance:
Non-deviant crimes (eg. soft drugs)
The time (eg. smoking indoors)
Society or culture (eg. drinking for muslims)
Social groups (eg. smoking cannabis with friends)
The place (eg. sex in public)
Non-sociological Theories of Crime and Deviance:
Psychology
Biology
Psychological and biological theories suggest that deviant/criminal behaviour is determined by conditions arising from nature (biology and physiology) or nurture (psychology) which prevent some individuals conforming to conventional norms and legal rules. Crime is put down to something ‘being wrong’ with the person, rather than with society.
Biological Theories:
Cesare Lombrosso:
Suggested that criminals had abnormal physical features (atavistic features) that distinguished them from the rest of society. For example:
Large jaw or cheekbones
Congenital defects (deformities)
Long limbs
Left handedness
Usually derived from the idea of features of an earlier stage of evolution.
Phrenology claimed that people’s personalities can be explained by the shape of people’s skulls, and a criminal could be identified in this way.
Psychological Theories:
Link criminality with genetically based personality characteristics, such as the presence of an extra Y chromosome creating neurotic extroverts, who are less rational, less cautious and more risk-taking, aggressive, impulsive and excitement seeking.
PET scans have shown that psychopaths are more likely to have brain abnormalities.
Modern studies suggest childhood experiences can have long term psychological effects which may lead to maladjusted personalities and potential criminality in later life.
Sociological Criticism:
Fail to recognise social and cultural factors.
Many criminals are never detected.
Most studies are based on an unrepresentative sample of criminals who have already been caught and publicly labelled a criminal.
Crime does not follow genetic patterns, but rather follows social patterns eg. age, class, gender and ethnicity.
Essay Practice:
Outline three ways crime and deviance is a social construct.
Crime and deviance are relative. Deviance can vary according to the circumstance, for example, different societies and cultures have different views on what is deviant or not.
Crime is a label attached to behaviours by the state. Criminal law changes over time, reinforcing the idea that nothing is in itself criminal by nature.
Crime and deviance can be extremely interchangeable when it comes to deciding whether something is truly criminal. For example, some things may be considered a crime/deviant under one context, but in a different situation will be considered a social norm.
Functionalism and Crime
Durkheim - Anomie and Functions of Crime
Value consensus (the majority sharing the same norms and values) is important for society to function and maintain social order).
Anything that doesn’t fit is deviance.
This state would be called ‘anomie’.
This is very damaging for society.
This is why socialisation is so important for functionalists.
Everyone needs to learn the same norms and values to avoid anomie.
A small amount of crime and deviance can prevent anomie, as long as it is punished.
Egoism vs Anomie
Egoism:
Occurs when the collective conscience becomes too weak to restrain the selfish desires of individuals.
Mainly occurs in industrial societies.
By not being socialised properly and accepting values, individuals can put their own interests before those of society and commit crime.
Anomie:
Occurs in periods of great social change or stress.
New norms challenge the old without being established.
Uncertainty over certain behaviour causes individuals to feel less subject to social controls imposed by the collective conscience.
Positive Functions of Crime:
Strengthening collective values
Enabling social change
Acting as a safety valve
Acting as a warning device
1 Strengthening Collective Values:
Values can ‘atrophy’ (waste away) unless we are reminded of the boundaries between right and wrong behaviour.
Eg. sensationalist reporting in the media of incidents of child abuse has the effect of reinforcing social control against child abusers and improving the protection of vulnerable children.
The media dramatises crime to spark public outrage against the act or groups involved.
United in disapproval, society condemns deviant behaviour and strengthens collective values.
Collective Conscience in Current Affairs:
Fear across Europe following terrorist attacks by ISIS
Public outrage over American laws on abortion changing
Public grief in response to the shooting of Harambe the gorilla
The death of Queen Elizabeth II
2 Enabling Social Change
Some deviance is necessary to allow new ideas to develop, and enable society to change or progress.
Members of any society must learn the boundaries of what is acceptable behaviour within that group.
Crime and deviance facilitate this by showing members of society where the boundaries of right and wrong are through publicly condemning and punishing those who stray beyond the boundaries.
Agents of Social Control
Formal - police, courts and prisons (RSA)
Informal - education, family, media (ISA)
Erikson (1966):
Argues that members of any community will participate in confrontations with a deviant person who goes beyond the community’s boundaries.
Medieval times = public degradation ceremonies eg. flogging, hanging, executions.
Today = media, coverage to demonise.
These help society to stick together or change.
3. Acting as a Safety Valve
Deviance can release stress in society or ‘let off steam’.
Examples include mass violent protests, walkouts, festivals, and underground activities (racing, illegal betting, etc.)
Gives us an outlet to prevent from deviating anymore.
Davis (1961) - Prostitution as a Safety Valve
Argues prostitution provides a safe outlet for sexual tensions in the home.
This act is less threatening to the family than promiscuity or even rape.
Should be a morally accepted expression of sexuality.
4. Acting as a Warning Device
Crime can warn us that society is not working properly.
Examples:
High rates of suicide
Truancy from school
Drug addiction
Divorce
These all point to underlying social problems that need solving before serious threats to social order develop.
Evaluating Durkheim (AO3):
Some crimes may be so harmful that they are more dysfunctional to society rather than functional (eg. genocide, rape, murder), therefore crime and deviance can’t always have a positive impact on society.
Durkheim assumes that society has universal laws and values that mostly get followed, however different societies have different values and norms that don’t always get followed.
Marxists would argue that some crimes get left unnoticed or punished due to those in power. Crime can not be considered functional if there is prejudice against the justice system, as well as the justice system being made for the elite/ruling class
Merton: Strain Theory (1968)
Builds on functionalist theory.
Suggests social order is based on a consensus around social goals and approved ways of achieving them.
Argues not all people have the same opportunities to achieve their goals.
Individuals can face strain and anomie if the dominant rules outweigh their needs.
Basically, if the goals are emphasised more than the means, strain happens.
Uses the idea of the ‘American Dream’ as an example
Example
Sports (doping):
If the culture of winning becomes more important than fair play and rules, then winning by any means becomes acceptable.
Modes of Adaptation:
Conformity
Innovation
Ritualism
Retreatism
Rebellion
1 Conformity
Most common response to society’s goals in a stable society.
Eg. most people in America will work hard at school and in their job, to make as much money as they can in legitimate ways.
2 Innovation
This occurs when an individual has internalised a goal but has not fully internalised the acceptable means of achieving this.
Eg. Middle-class individuals who are prepared to ‘bend’ the rules to make money.
3 Ritualism
Some individuals find it unrealistic to continually strive for great wealth and so they abandon or scale down their goals. This helps to achieve equilibrium.
Eg. Some people view ritualists as lacking ambition or ‘stuck in a rut’, and so are seen as deviant in a society of achievers.
4 Retreatism
Those who struggle to achieve success may drop out of the society that judges them.
Eg. They often reject family and friends and pursue self-destructive deviant behaviour.
5 Rebellion
Those who reject society’s goals and replace them with alternatives.
Eg. Joining an organised movement which seeks a different type of society entirely, or one that campaigns for a different cause.
Evaluation of Merton (AO3):
Assumes all/most accept goals (consensus). Some people don’t accept goals or have other goals.
Ignores social patterns of crime and deviance (social class, gender, and ethnicity)
Doesn’t explain why some of those who face strain, don’t commit crime/deviance.
Ignores outwardly respectable, apparently conforming successful people who are ‘innovators’ engaged in illegal activities such as white-collar crime and corporate crime.
Outline three functions that crime and deviance may perform (6 marks)
Acts as a warning device - tells us if society is no longer functioning.
Strengthening collective values - through the publication of crime, conformist citizens are more likely to strengthen their anti-crime and agenda, therefore being more reluctant to commit a crime.
Act as a safety valve - allows some members to deviate moderately without committing a severe crime (release/alleviate strain)
Subcultural Explanations of Crime
Subculturists:
Mostly built from Merton’s theoretical framework (strain theory).
Instead, focus on the groups rather than individuals.
Largely concerned with working-class juvenile delinquency as this is proportionally the largest group of criminals and deviants of society.
Subculture groups use norms and values to influence the members to commit crime.
Subcultures formed by working-class youths may normalise criminal and deviant behaviour as a response to strains created by their social class.
Subculturists:
Status frustration
Gangs
Focal concerns
Cohen: Status Frustration
Argues that working-class youth share the same success goals of mainstream culture.
Their experiences of failure in education, material deprivation and poorer employment access means they have little opportunities to succeed in approved ways.
They feel they are denied status in mainstream society, and so experience status frustration.
They react to this by developing their own set of values - a delinquent subculture
In a delinquent subculture, working-class boys can achieve status through changing their goals and values.
This gives the working-class opportunities to achieve some status in society in their peer groups which they are denied in wider society.
There are also elements of revenge - getting back at society who failed them and denied them of mainstream status.
Explains why many juvenile offences are not motivated by desire, but rather a peer group desire for status.
Vandalism, joy-riding, fighting and anti-social behaviour are examples.
Evaluating Cohen (AO3):
Cloward and Ohlin (1960): Gangs and Subcultures
Influenced by Merton’s strain theory.
Argues that Cohen doesn’t consider the diversity of responses found amongst working-class youth.
Deviance is a reaction to problems in achieving the values of mainstream culture.
If you are unable to achieve the valued goals (eg. success and money) through legitimate means, you may innovate and use illegitimate means.
These are sometimes referred to as illegitimate opportunity structures.
Criminal Subcultures:
Characterised by useful crimes (eg. theft).
Develop in more stable working-class areas.
Providing learning opportunities for a criminal career.
Adult criminals have social control over the young.
Get youths to carry out non-useful crimes (eg. vandalism) to get police attention.
Conflict Subcultures:
Emerge in socially disorganised areas with high population and little social control.
Characterised by violence, gang warfare and street crime.
Both approved and illegal means of achieving goals are limited.
Youths express frustration through violent means.
Explains crime in rundown inner-city areas.
Retreatist Subcultures:
Lower-class youths who are ‘double-failures’ (failed to succeed in mainstream society and gang culture).
Retreat into drug addiction and alcoholism, paid for by petty theft, drug-dealing, shoplifting and prostitution.
Evaluating Cloward and Ohlin:
Miller: Focal Concerns
Similarly to Cohen, considered the development of deviant values in subcultures.
Argued that working-class boys have their own ‘focal concerns’ (values) which can lead them to deviant behaviour.
These are different to the focal concerns of middle-class boys.
This can explain why levels of deviance are higher amongst the working-class.
Focal concerns of working-class boys:
Valuing autonomy, freedom and excitement
Being in trouble (accepting that life involves violence and fights)
Toughness and masculinity
Being smart and ‘streetwise’
Evaluating Miller:
Marxism and Crime
Marxism and Crime:
Criminogenic society
Laws reflect ruling-class ideology
Selective law enforcement
Conflict Theory:
Marxist theories of crime are conflict theories.
Functionalist based theories like Merton, and subcultural theories have consensus approaches (people broadly abide by the consensus of society).
Marxists - like functionalists - see people’s behaviour moulded by the social structure, but Marxists regard this structure as based on conflict between social classes with social inequality as the driving force behind crime.
A Criminogenic Society:
‘Criminogenic’ means that crime is an in-built and natural part of a capitalist society which emphasises economic self-interest, greed, and personal gain.
Looking after others is not seen as a priority in a capitalist society.
Relative poverty means some struggle to survive or are excluded from the consumer society and this encourages crimes like theft, vandalism and violence because the perpetrators have been socially excluded.
Gordon (1971) says society should not be surprised at the rate of working-class crime, we should be more surprised that there is not more of it.
Laws Reflect Ruling-Class Interests and Ideology:
Laws are not expressions of value consensus, as functionalists contend, but as writers such as Chambliss (1975) argue, they are instruments of the ruling class and they reflect the values and beliefs found in ruling-class ideology.
Chambliss - the Saints and the Roughnecks
Observed two high school gangs for 2 years (saints - upper class, and roughnecks - lower class).
Identified differences in public and police perception of the two gangs.
Identified how social class impacts on labelling and self-concept (radical criminology)
Box (1983) - Crime and Social Control
The proletariat are socialised to see murder as a stereotypical act, with stereotypical criminals, weapons, situations, and motives.
Consequently, most people convicted of ‘legally defined’ murder are usually poor and less powerful.
Meanwhile, other types of murder (committed by the powerful) are seen as less serious.
Box argues that what is defined as serious crime is ideologically constructed.
Serious crime is identified as property crime and violence committed by members of the working-class, rather than as the major harm caused be corporations - such as environmental damage caused by oil spills or by governments such as human rights violations and war and genocides.
Snider (1991)
Argues that capitalist states will pass health and safety laws, or laws against pollution and other laws that regulate private business, only when forced to do so by public crises or union agitation.
They will strengthen them reluctantly, and weaken them whenever they can.
If they can avoid enforcing them, then they will.
The impression in official statistics is that crime is mainly a working class phenomena
According to Chambliss, this is because the law is selectively enforced
There is one law for the rich and one law for the poor.
The poor are more likely to be prosecuted for their crimes, while those of higher social classes are less likely to be prosecuted for crime and if they are they are treated more leniently
Selective Law Enforcement:
Pearce - Crimes of the Powerful
Biggest crimes are those committed by the ruling class.
Includes white-collar and corporate crime (e.g. fraud, tax evasion, corporate manslaughter and health and safety breaches).
These crimes are rarely prosecuted, as we are told to believe that working-class people commit more crime.
Diverts the working class’ attention away from the exploitation they experience and the crimes of the ruling class.
This redirects the attention back to the working class.
It is individuals, not the system, who are blamed for crime.
Interactionism and Crime
Becker calls agencies that have the power and resources to create or enforce rules, such as the media and the police, moral entrepreneurs.
Interactionism:
Seems to explain how some behaviours by some individuals are labelled criminal, where others committing similar acts are not.
The interaction between deviants and those who define themselves as so.
Interested in the process where rules are selectively enforced.
The consequences of being labelled ‘deviant’.
The circumstance in which a person becomes set apart and defined as deviant.
Becker: Labelling Theory
Deviance is socially constructed by those with the power to do so.
Those who have been labelled as deviant cannot be studied to explain their behaviour because some have been wrongly labelled or not labelled at all.
He is less concerned with the characteristics of deviants than the process by which they become ‘outsiders’.
Deviance is the product of people’s responses to behaviour.
Behaviour only becomes deviant when it has been defined and labelled as such.
Master Status and Self-fulfilling Prophecy:
A deviant label is an evolution of a person.
It can become a ‘master status’ which affects that person’s other status and roles.
Others will respond to the person’s master status and also interpret any behaviours in relation to the label.
The deviant identity becomes the controlling identity.
The Role of a Self-fulfilling Prophecy:
A ‘deviant career’ may be pursued when they join a deviant group/subculture.
The group may rationalist, justify and support deviant identities and activities.
Even more likely to internalise your deviant label.
At this stage, the deviant identity becomes the controlling one and affects choices/lifestyle/self-concept.
Supporting Studies:
Cohen (1972): Deviancy Amplification and Moral Panics
Labelling used by the media generated more of the deviance it apparently condemned.
Young (1971): Moral Panics
Participant observation of marijuana users in Notting Hill
Selective Law Enforcement:
Agencies of social control use considerable discretion and judgement in deciding how to deal with illegal or deviant behaviour.
Eg. The police cannot prosecute all crimes with it being too heavy on the community and a drain on resources.
The ‘criminal’ label is not attached to every breach of the law.
Becker argues that the police operate with pre-existing conceptions and stereotypical categories of what constitutes as ‘trouble’, what areas are criminal and so on.
The action taken does not depend on the crimes, but the person who committed it based on stereotypes of that group.
Cicourel (1976): Police Negotiations
Agreed with Becker, argues law-enforcers have subjective perceptions on criminal labels.
Studied juvenile delinquency in 2 US cities.
Argues that the process of dealing with potential deviants involves the police making judgements based on preconceived ideas about what is suspicious/unusual.
Decisions whether the arrest/charge are partially based on appearance, manner and responses.
Juvenile crime rates are higher in working-class areas.
City 1:
Middle-class youth have ‘good backgrounds’ and family support.
Behaviour seen as ‘temporary’ with no charges
City 2:
Held opposite perceptions of working-class youth.
More formal police action taken.
This research suggests we need to look at police choices, suspicion and stop and search charges.
Police Stop and Searching:
Asian - Bangladeshi people are more likely to be stopped and searched.
Black - Black people are most likely of any ethnic group to be stopped and searched. Those of Black other descent are the highest convicted group.
Mixed - Those of Mixed other ethnicity are more likely to be stopped and searched.
White - White people are least likely to be stopped and searched. White other are the highest out of all white people.
Statistics from .GOV:
Between Apr 2018 to Mar 2019 - 4 stop and searches for every 1000 White people; 38 for every 1000 Black people.
Almost half of stop and searches took place in MET police force area in London
Lermet (1972): Primary and Secondary Deviance
Like Becker, he argues that societal reaction to behaviour is more significant than the behaviour itself.
Primary Deviance - Deviant acts which are not publicly labelled.
Many people commit these and they have little effect on self-concept. They are rationalised and accepted.
Secondary Deviance - Deviant behaviour that is consciously engaged in as an expression of a deviant self-concept.
If you repeat a deviance and it attracts societal attention it begins to affect your self-concept.
Evaluation of Interactionist Perspective (AO3):
Deterministic - Not everyone accepts their labels.
Offenders are just passive – it doesn’t recognise the role of personal choice in committing crime.
Structural sociologists argue that there are deeper, structural explanations of crime, it isn’t all just a product of labelling and interactions.
Feminism and Crime
Do women commit less crime?
Yes - From a sociological standpoint, women are most likely treated as innocent. Expected to be polite and emotionally expressive. Social norms grow women up to be harmless, whereas men are brought up to be violent.
Yes - Biological standpoint - Some may view that men’s increased level of testosterone allows them to be more aggressive compared to women, which may link to an increase of crime and deviance.
No - Some sociologists may argue that the social expectations don’t hinder women in committing crime but rather allow them to not be found out and prosecuted.
Radical Feminism - No - Laws are made to criminalise women, eg. prostitution demonising women, double deviant, media - patriarchy.
Liberal Feminism - No - Laws and legislation and court/justice system inequality.
Marxist Feminism - Yes - Stopped at home, women not given opportunity to commit crimes.
Mainstream Sociology:
Heidonsohn and Silvester (2012):
Two themes of malestream criminology:
Amnesia (women being forgotten).
Neglect and Distortion (people don’t care).
Gender issues and female offending were forgotten and ignored until recently.
Studies of crime never considered working-class girls.
Female victimisation is ignored, particular those by men in forms of domestic abuse and sexual violence.
Heidensohn (1996) suggests various reasons for this inevitability of females:
Most academics and researchers are men in sociology.
Middle-class sociologists romanticise male working-class deviance, improving their street cred.
Low levels of female criminality, and ‘invisible’ female crime like prostitution.
The Growth of Feminist Crimonology:
Feminists bring the issue of gender and male power into criminology.
A major theme has been the importance of gender identity in understanding crime and deviance.
This is as opposed to looking at structural features as previously explored.
Smart (1976):
Women offenders are seen as ‘double deviants’.
They not only break the law, but they break traditional gender roles too.
This results in higher stigmatisation than crimes by men, even if they are less serious.
Messerschmidt (1993):
Explores conceptions of femininity and female gender roles.
Also looks into why men are more deviant than women.
Argues that men commit crime to assert an ‘accomplished masculinity’ that they have failed at doing in other areas of their lives.
Eg. success at school, steady job, family provider.
They can show themselves as ‘real men’
Violence is used as an alternative ‘masculine validating resource’.
1. What percent of women commit violence crime?
8%
2. Give an example of the types of crimes women typically commit.
Shoplifting, drug offences, fraud, TV licence
3. What percentage is the total female population in prison?
Less than 5%
4. Why is there more to lose for women going to prison?
Childcare, their social life, and respect. Ripple effect on children committing crime.
5. What is an alternative to sending women to prison?
Women’s detention centre.
6. How many years has it taken for the Government to put a strategy in place regarding women’s sentence length?
10 years
More relevant theories and studies available in gender and crime
Left Realism and Crime
Realist Theories:
Focuses on the reality of crime - what’s actually happening and the impact of it.
Two versions: right-realism and left-realism.
Left realists recognise street crime, but also white-collar and global crime, and tend to blame social injustices and inequalities in society.
Right realists focus on ‘street crime’, tend to blame the individual offender and solutions focus on controlling people.
Through victim surveys (like the Islington survey), left realists found there was a serious problem with crime in inner-city areas.
Types of crime people are worried about are mugging, violence, car theft, and burglary (mostly carried out by young working-class males).
The poor are more likely to be victims of these crimes, increasingly so for minority ethnic groups.
Most people don’t care about white-collar and corporate crime as it doesn’t impact their lives.
Lea and Young (1984):
Developed left realism as a response to traditional neo-marxism, accusing it of:
Not taking working-class crime seriously and romanticising working-class criminals as ‘Robin Hood’ characters fighting against social inequality.
Reducing working-class crime to a moral panic by the capitalist state.
Regarding working-class crime as a social construct due to selective law enforcement and labelling.
Failing to take victimisation seriously.
Have no practical policies to reduce crime.
People Turn to Crime for Three Key Reasons:
Relative deprivation (relative = depending on situation; in relation or in proportion)
Marginalisation
Subcultures
Relative Deprivation - it is not deprivation that causes crime, but whether they see themselves as deprived relative to others they compare themselves with. This generates discontent and resentment as their expressions are not met.
Marginalisation - find themselves politically and economically ‘on the edge’ of society and face social exclusion such as poor educational achievement and unemployment. This combined with the above can lead to anti-social behaviour and rioting to express their frustrations.
Subcultures - working-class deviant subcultures emerge as solutions to the above. They legitimate crime to get what they need in gangs.
Young (1999): Bulimic Society in Late Modernity
Argues that late modern societies are media saturated, and everyone, even the poorest, is forced into consumer culture through constant exposure to advertising of consumer goods and media-generated lifestyles.
This raises everyone’s expectations of what the good life is like.
Those at the bottom of the class structure who are socially and economically excluded cannot afford this lifestyle, creating a ‘bulimic society’.
People gorge themselves on media imagery then forced by economic circumstances to ‘vomit’ out their raised expectations.
Intensified sense of relative deprivation made worse by:
Growing Individualism - growing emphasis on self-seeking and freedom creates self-centredness and less concern on others’ welfare.
Weakening of Informal Controls - families and communities are broken, no longer providing support and informal controls on behaviour.
Growing Economic Inequality and Change - globalisation has made the gap between rich and poor bigger. Amazing rewards for media stars such as the likes of footballers and musicians, while there is a decline in traditional unskilled work affecting the young working-class the most.
Lea and Young:
The Square of Crime:
It is necessary to examine the inter-relationships between four elements and how they influence or interact with one another in influencing crime in the community.
This explanation recognised that crime is socially constructed and that individual interpretations can influence this.
Right Realism
Right Realism:
Associated with New Right.
Concepts:
Values consensus
People are selfish
Community control
Rational choice
Crime will always exist
Value Consensus and Shared Morality:
Reflected in the law.
Criminals are immortal because they breach the consensus.
Social order is crucial and people should not live in fear of crime.
Wilson (1975): Importance of Social Order
Believes that long-term trends in crime can be accounted for by 3 factors:
1. How many young males are around in society.
2. The availability of jobs and state of the economy.
3. How people are socialised in society.
Argues that these 3 factors are largely uncontrollable.
This means that no government can actually prevent crime at the source.
Does not believe that poverty is not the root cause of crime (many poor people don’t commit crime).
Therefore, attempting to redistribute wealth is costly, unfair and will not reduce crime.
The environment plays a key role in creating a ‘culture’ of order and acceptable behaviour.
Social order is maintained → Individuals will not be tempted to participate in deviant behaviour
Police visibility clamping down on crime → Culture is created where other residents also report crime more and are involved in informal social control
Alternatively,
Impression that nobody cares and disorder is prevalent → Previously law-abiding people may see it as acceptable to join in with deviant behaviour
Wilson: Broken Windows Theory
The idea that where there is one broken window left unreplaced, there will be many.
A broken window is a physical symbol that the residents of a particular neighbourhood do not especially care about their environment and that low-level deviance is tolerated.
Theory influenced policy makers on both sides of the Atlantic and, most famously, in New York in the 1990s.
Their response was zero tolerance policing where the criminal justice system took low-level crime and anti-social behaviour much more seriously than they had in the past.
Included ‘3 strikes and you’re out’ policies - custody for multiple offences/warnings (eg. prostitution, drunk).
Low level crime should not be tolerated, severe penalties needed in order to deter more serious crime and ensure that collective conscience and social solidarity is maintained by clear boundary maintenance.
Evaluation (AO3):
Impact of policy in NYC appeared to be dramatic, with a 40% drop in overall crime and over 50% in homicide.
Just because there was a correlation, does not mean there was causality.
Some accused broken windows of achieving control without justice.
Community Control:
It is poor socialisation and lack of community control that lie behind crime rates
Strengthening bonds in the community is the most effective way to control crime.
Strict socialisation is needed in the family, in education and the community to re-establish social cohesion and individual responsibility.
Murray (1989):
Links crime to the unemployed work-shy underclass.
Those who live in broken communities have high rates of social disorder and crime.
Welfare dependency, dysfunctional families, lack of respect for authority, lone parenthood all to blame for lack of proper socialisation.
This links to a lack of control of children and a rise in deviance.
The community fails and needs more control.
Hirschi: Control Theory
Instead of looking at why people commit crime, Hirschi asks why people don’t commit crime.
All humans suffer from weakening control that turns them to crime.
Social bonds exist to exercise self-control.
Rational Choice and Opportunity:
Rationality is weighing up the costs and benefits before choosing what action to take.
Cornish and Clarke (1986):
Suggest people choose to commit crime because they decide the benefits to be gained are greater than the costs.
Opportunity is often available so the risks are worth it.
Solution is to increase the costs - such as heavier policing - to increase the risks of being caught, reducing these opportunities.
Crime Will Always Exist:
Greed and selfishness will always slip through control agencies.
It’s a waste of time to find out the social causes (like left realists and marxists).
Most deprived people don’t commit crime.
Most that can be achieved is to reduce the impact of crime on victims, particularly violence and burglary.
These are major concerns to the public.
White collar and corporate crime do not impact the public so there is no need to focus on it.
Comments
Post a Comment