crime + deviance: explaining difference in offending Flashcards
what 3 reasons do Left Realists give to explain higher level of EMG offending?
1) marginalisation
2) relative deprivation
3)subcultural response
how does marginalisation lead to offending?
racism has led to marginalisation + economic exclusion of EM’s who face higher levels of unemployment + homelessness
how does relative deprivation lead to offending?
when you buy into material goals but feel as though you cannot achieve it
according to LR’s, what’s the delinquent subcultural response?
one response is formation of delinquent subculture especially by young, unemployed black males producing higher levels of utilitarian crime e.g. theft or robbery
as these groups are marginalised, their frustration can lead to non-utilitarian crime
how do Lea + Young argue that discriminatory policing doesn’t account for all the differences in offending?
-whilst police may act in racist ways, they argue that this is unlikely to account for ethnic differences in statistics (90% of crimes reported by members of public)
- police racism cannot explain the much higher conviction rates of blacks than of asians, they would have to be selectively racist against blacks not Asians to cause these differences
why are Lea + Young criticised?
as arrest rates for Asian may be lower than for lacks, not because they are less likely to offend but because police stereotype the 2 groups differently
- seeing blacks as dangerous and asians as passive
these stereotypes may have changed since 9/11, Asians now seen as dangerous- explaining rising criminalisation rates for this group
what does Gilroy argue about black criminality? (Neo-marxist)
it is a myth created by racist stereotypes when in reality African carribeans + Asians are no more criminal than any other
why does Gilroy argue that EMG crime is a form of political resistance?
most blacks + asians in the UK originated in former British colonies where their anti-colonial struggles taught them how to resist oppression e.g through riots
-when they found themselves facing racism in Britain, they adopted the same forms of struggle to defend themselves
what are Lea + Young’s criticisms of Gilroy?
-1st gen immigrants in 1950s+60s were very law abiding so its unlikely they passed down a tradition of anti-colonial struggle to their children
-most crime is intra-ethnic so its not a struggle against racism
-asian crime rates are similar/lower than for whites so are police only racist to black people?
what does Hall et al argue happens in 1970s? (Neo-marxist)
moral panic about black ‘muggers’
why did the media promote an image of crime being committed by black youths?
1970s - British capitalism faced crisis
myth of young black mugger served as a scapegoat to distract from true cause of society problems
what did moral panic cause?
served to divide w/c on racial grounds and weaken opposition to capitalism
why is Hall et al criticised?
-inconsistent = claim black street crime wasn’t rising but also that it was rising because of unemployment
-don’t show how capitalist crisis led to moral panic or that the public were actually blaming crime on blacks
-left realists say response of fear about muggings wasn’t panicky but realistic
what is Fitzgerald et al’s ‘Neighbourhood’ approach?
-found levels of street crime were highest in deprived neighbourhoods where young people came into contact with affluent people
-cause of crime = poor area not ethnicity
why does Fitzgerald say blacks are over represented?
because of discrimination in housing + job markers meant black people were more likely to live in poor areas than whites
what is Sharp and Budd’s ‘Getting Caught’ approach?
-some groups run a greater risk of being caught, black offenders were more likely than white offenders to have been arrested
-reasons include that they are more likely to commit crimes such as robbery where victims can identify them + to be excluded from school to associate with known criminals
-these are all factors that raised their ‘visibility’ to the authorities.
