Crime and Society Flashcards
Durkheim - Crime as Functional
Durkheim claimed crime is healthy for a society, therefore crime can be functional. If crime is regulated and managed by the relevant social institutions, it can be beneficial in maintaining the value consensus. Functionalists argue there are three functions of crime.
Durkheim - 1) Boundary Maintenance
Durkheim says when people commit crime, they are punished by the criminal justice system. This reminds other citizens of the value consensus which therefore strengthens its effectiveness. Crime creates social solidarity, a sense of togetherness, in society that serves to bind the wider community together.
Durkheim - 2) Warning Device
Durkheim argues this is when society needs to adapt and change as a result of crime. All change starts with deviance or in extreme cases, criminal activity. Individuals must be able to think differently if society wants to evolve further. Criminal activity can sometimes show that a current social policy has lost its function in society.
Davis et al. - 3) Boundary Maintenance
Functionalist Davis et al. suggests that a certain amount of deviant behaviour can be beneficial to the maintenance of social order. Davis et al. uses the continuation of prostitution as evidence to support his claim.
In Davis’ view, the use of prostitutes can act as a ‘safety valve’ for men to release their sexual tension and frustrations without threatening their marriage. This therefore maintains the nuclear family. It is more beneficial to maintain the nuclear family in society than to stamp out prostitution.
Merton - Strain Theory
Merton tried to focus on why people committed crime, rather than the functions it performed for society. In unequal societies, some find achieving the cultural goal of material success fairly easy. However, for those individuals who can never achieve the material success they will begin to feel strain. When outlining ‘strain’, Merton outlines 5 possible responses that could occur.
1) Conformists - those who fail to achieve success but still believe that hard work will help them achieve the goal of material success.
2) Rebels - those who react badly to not achieving material success and therefore create new goals.
3) Innovators - those who realise that they cannot achieve material success by conforming so create new ways to achieve wealth, possibly leading to criminal activity.
4) Ritualists - those who cope with failure by forgetting about the goal and compensate by obsessing over the means.
5) Retreatists - those who give up on the goals and reject the means.
Cohen - Status Frustration
Cohen researched working class boys and how they face strain in the mainstream middle class culture of the education system. They are unable to succeed in education which places them at the bottom of the official status hierarchy, not being able to achieve mainstream goals.
As a result of being unable to achieve through legitimate means the boys suffer status frustration. They turn to others in the same situation and form a delinquent subculture with alternative values, rejecting the goals of the school.
The boys form subcultures, based on their shared experiences and create new goals that are achievable to them, which tend to conflict with the middle class culture of the school. Cohen claimed this results in an ‘alternative status hierarchy’ as the boys are competing with each other to see who can be the best delinquent in the school.
Cloward and Ohlin - Subcultures Response to Failure
1) Criminal Subcultures
Exist mainly in inner-city estates in which a criminal culture is dominant. It is easy for frustrated youths to learn criminal skills and have the opportunity to practice their trade. They have criminal role models to look up to and learn from.
2) Conflict Subcultures
Also emerge in inner-city estates, particularly in areas that suffer from a high social turnover. It is difficult for a criminal culture to develop as different gangs battle with each other for overall control.
3) Retreatist Subcultures
Some youths who want to be criminals do not always succeed. These individuals become ‘double failures’ and are unlikely to succeed in professional or violent crime so turn to illegal drug use instead.
Box - Ideological Law Making
Marxists such as Box claim that the law is written by the bourgeoisie and therefore only reflects their interests. This is referred to as ideological law making.
Pearce - Caring Face of Capitalism
However, Pearce claims these laws are rarely enforced and usually benefit the bourgeoisie as a healthy and happy workforce is more productive and obedient, this is referred to as the caring face of capitalism.
Becker - Moral Entrepreneurs
A ‘moral entrepreneur’ is someone who attempts to influence our reaction in order to change the law. These are usually journalists, politicians or members of the criminal justice system. Moral entrepreneurs begin to influence other people’s opinions, which then in turn affects the labelling process.
Cicourel - Typifications and/or Stereotypes
Cicourel claimed that police officers and judges use typifications or stereotypes to influence their judgement of an offender. If the offender fits their expectations of a typical criminal, they are more likely to arrest them.
Lemert - Primary and Secondary Deviance
Primary Deviance
Although technically illegal the criminal label is not attached as people tend to see it as ‘primary deviance’. As the criminal label is not attached, it does not affect the ‘self-concept’ of the individual and as a result no labelling takes place.
Secondary Deviance
An act that generates a strong response and results in a label being attached to the offender. After being labelled, an offender may experience consequences such as punishment or humiliation. This label becomes the person’s master status and therefore their controlling identity. This leads to the self-fulfilling prophecy and as a result more crime.
Braithwaite - Reintegrative vs Disintegrative Shaming
Braithwaite suggests that labelling can be used to reintegrate offenders, rather than marginalise them. He refers to this process as reintegrative shaming.
He claims ‘reintegrative shaming’ is more effective and focuses more on the act, rather than the individual. Braithwaite says this is more useful than disintegrative shaming that labels the criminal and outcasts them from society.
Herrnstein and Murray - Biological Differences
Right realists believe that some people are more prone to commit crime based on their genetics. Herrnstein and Murray believe the main cause of crime is low intelligence which is biologically determined.
Murray - Cultural Deprivation
Right realists believe that through effective socialisation, the risk of criminal behaviour can be controlled. However, because of the breakdown of the nuclear family and a generous welfare state, Murray believes an ‘underclass’ of immoral and culturally deprived people have emerged who are the most common criminals.
