Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Sociology - Crime and Deviance > Key Theorists - Control, Punishment and Victims > Flashcards

Key Theorists - Control, Punishment and Victims Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Sociology 101 flashcards
1
Q

Key Theorist – Clarke (1992): Situational Crime Prevention

WHAT DOES TH THEORISTS ARGUE ABOUT SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION STRATEGIES?

A
  • This method limits the opportunity to commit crime by reducing efforts and reducing rewards.
  • By removing opportunities, less crime will take place.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Key Theorist – Clarke (1992): Situational Crime Prevention

HOW CAN THIS THEORY BE EVALUATED?
GIVE AT LEAST ONE EXAMPLE.

A

At least one from:

  • This theory assumes that crimes are committed on a rational basis (the view that criminals act rationally, weighing up the costs and benefits of a crime opportunity before deciding whether to commit it), but this is often not the case.
  • Chaiken et al argue that this type of crime prevention does not reduce crime, as criminals just relocate to where the crime is easier to commit.
  • Assumes crime is opportunistic and not due to underlying social structures (e.g. capitalism).
  • Ignores underlying issues e.g. poverty.
  • The theory focuses on state crime and doesn’t take into account other types of crime e.g. tax evasion and fraud.
  • Situational crime prevention works to some extent in reducing certain types of crime.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Key Theorists - Chaiken et al: Evaluating Situational Crime Prevention

WHAT DOES THIS THEORIST ARGUE?

A
  • Criminals will get round the issue of situational crime prevention by displacing the place in which they commit the crime.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Key Theorists - Chaiken et al: Evaluating Situational Crime Prevention

WHAT IS SPATIAL DISPLACEMENT?

A
  • Moving somewhere else to commit the crime.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Key Theorists - Chaiken et al: Evaluating Situational Crime Prevention

WHAT IS TEMPORAL DISPLACEMENT?

A
  • Committing the crime at a different time.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Key Theorists - Chaiken et al: Evaluating Situational Crime Prevention

WHAT IS TARGET DISPLACEMENT?

A
  • Choosing a different victim.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Key Theorists - Chaiken et al: Evaluating Situational Crime Prevention

WHAT IS TACTICAL DISPLACEMENT?

A
  • Using a different method to commit the crime.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Key Theorists - Chaiken et al: Evaluating Situational Crime Prevention

WHAT IS FUNCTIONAL DISPLACEMENT?

A
  • Committing a different type of crime.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Key Theorists – Wilson and Kelling: Environmental Crime Prevention Strategies

WHAT THEORY DID THEY COME UP WITH?

A
  • Broken window theory.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Key Theorists – Wilson and Kelling: Environmental Crime Prevention Strategies

WHAT DO THESE THEORISTS ARGUE?

A
  • If issues such as dog fouling, noise and beggars are left unfixed, this gives a message that no one cares and leads to a spiral of decline.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Key Theorists – Wilson and Kelling: Environmental Crime Prevention Strategies

WHAT TWO STRATEGIES DO THEY SUGGEST SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED TO PREVENT CRIME?

A
  1. Environmental improvement - tow abandoned cars, fix windows (change the appearance of the environment).
  2. Zero tolerance policing- not just as a reaction to crime but any disorder even if it is not illegal.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Key Theorists – Wilson and Kelling: Environmental Crime Prevention Strategies

HOW CAN THIS THEORY BE EVALUATED?
GIVE AT LEAST ONE EXAMPLE.

A

At least one from:

  • In New York zero tolerance policing showed positive results: from 1993 - 1996 homicide fell by 50%.
  • However, in New York at the time there were 7000 extra police officers and a general decline in crime in general in the USA at the time.
  • While homicides declined, attempted murders increased.
  • Zero tolerance policing is popular in the UK and USA.
  • Zero tolerance policing and environmental changes may help to some extent, but the root causes of why crimes are often committed e.g. poverty, is not being dealt with.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Key Theorists – Newburn and Rock (2006): Class and Victims

WHAT DO THEY SUGGEST?

A
  • Marginalised groups are more likely to be victims.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Key Theorists – Newburn and Rock (2006): Class and Victims

WHAT DID THEY FIND WHEN THEY CONDUCTED A STUDY ON 300 HOMELESS PEOPLE?

A
  • That they were twelve times more likely to have experienced violence than the general population. One in ten had been urinated on while sleeping rough.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Key Theorist - Miers (1989): Positivist Victimology

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE ARE THE THREE MAIN FEATURES OF POSITIVIST VICTIMOLOGY?

A
  • It aims to identify the factors that produce patterns in victimisation – especially those that make some individuals or groups more likely to be victims.
  • It focuses on interpersonal crimes of violence.
  • It aims to identify victims who have contributed to their own victimisation.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Key Theorist - Von Hentig (1948): Positivist Victimology

WHAT DID THIS THEORY FIND?

A
  • Victims were more likely to be female, elderly or ‘mentally subnormal’.
17
Q

Key Theorist - Von Hentig (1948): Positivist Victimology

WHAT DID THIS THEORIST ARGUE?

A
  • The implication of this is that the victims in some sense ‘invite’ victimisation by being the kind of person they are. This can also include lifestyle factors such as victims who display their wealth.
18
Q

Key Theorist – Marvin Wolfgang (1958): Positivist Victimology

WHAT DID THEY STUDY?

A
  • 588 homicides in Philadelphia.
19
Q

Key Theorist – Marvin Wolfgang (1958): Positivist Victimology

WHAT DID THEY FIND?

A
  • 26% of them involved victim precipitation – the victim triggered the event leading to the homicide, for instance, by being the first to use violence. For example, this was often the case where the victim was male and the perpetrator was female.
20
Q

Key Theorist – Marvin Wolfgang (1958): Positivist Victimology

HOW CAN THIS THEORY BE EVALUATED?

A
  • Wolfgang shows the importance of the victim-offender relationship and the fact that in many homicides, it is a matter of chance as to who becomes the victim.
21
Q

Key Theorists – Mawby and Walklate (1994): Critical Victimology

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • Victimisation is a form of structural powerlessness.
22
Q

Key Theorists – Tombs and Whyte: Critical Victimology

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • ‘Safety crimes’ where employers’ violations of the law lead to death of injury of workers, are often explained as the fault of ‘accident prone’ workers.
  • As with many rape cases, this both denies the victim official ‘victim status’ and blames them for their fate.
  • By concealing the true extent of victimisation and its real causes, it hides the crimes of the powerful and denies the powerless victims any redress. In the hierarchy of victimisation, therefore, the powerless are most likely to be victimised, yet least likely to have this acknowledged by the state.
23
Q

Key Theorist – Pynoos et al (1987): The Impact of Victimisation

WHAT DID THEY FIND?

A
  • That child witnesses of a sniper attack continued to have grief related dreams and altered behaviour a year after the event.
24
Q

Key Theorist – Durkheim (1893): Punishment

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • That the function of punishment is to uphold social solidarity and reinforce shared values.
  • Punishment is primarily expressive – it expresses society’s emotions of moral outrage at the offence.
  • Through rituals of order, such as public trial and punishment, society’s shared values are reaffirmed and its members come to feel a sense of moral unity.
25
Q

Key Theorist – Durkheim (1893): Punishment

WHAT TWO TYPES OF JUSTICE DID THEY IDENTIFY?

A
  • Retributive justice – in traditional society, there is little specialisation, and solidarity between individuals is based on their similarity to one another. This produces a strong collective conscience, which, when offended responds with vengeful passion to repress the wrongdoing. Punishment is severe and cruel, and its motivation is purely expressive.
  • Restitutive justice – in modern society, there is extensive specialisation, and solidarity is based on the resulting interdependence between individuals. Crime damage is this interdependence, so it is necessary to repair the damage, for example through compensation. This is referred to as restitutive justice, because it aims to make restitution (to restore things to how they were before the offence). Its motivation is instrumental, to restore society’s equilibrium. Nevertheless, even in modern society, punishment still has an expressive element, because it still expresses collective emotions.
26
Q

Key Theorist – E.P Thompson (1977): Marxist View of Punishment

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • In the 18th century punishments such as hanging and transportation to the colonies for theft and poaching were part of a ‘rule of terror’ by the landed aristocracy over the poor.
27
Q

Key Theorists – Rusche and Kirchheimer (1939): Punishment

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • Each type of economy has its own corresponding penal system. For example, money fines are impossible without a money economy.
  • Under capitalism, imprisonment becomes the dominant form of punishment.
28
Q

Key Theorists – Melossi and Pavarini (1981): Punishment

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • Imprisonment reflects capitalist relations of production.
  • For example capitalism puts a price on workers time; so too prisoners ‘do time’ to ‘pay’ for their crime or ‘repay a debt to society’.
  • Another example would be that the prison and the capitalist factory both have a similar strict disciplinary style, involving subordination and loss of liberty.
29
Q

Key Theorist – Garland (2001): Prison

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • The USA, and to a lesser extent the UK, is moving into an era of mass incarceration.
  • For most of the last century, the American prison population was stable, at around 100-120 people per 10,000 people. In 1972, there were about 200,000 inmates in state and federal prisons.
  • The reason for mass incarceration is the growing palletisation of crime control. For most of the last century, there was a consensus which Garland calls ‘penal welfarism’ – the idea that punishment should re-integrate offenders into society.
30
Q

Key Theorist – Downes (2001): Prison

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • The US prison system soaks up about 30 to 40% of the unemployed, thereby making capitalism look more successful.
31
Q

Key Theorist – Simon (2001): Prison and Drugs

WHAT DO THEY ARGUE?

A
  • Because drug use is so widespread, this has produced an almost limitless supply of arrestable and imprisonable offenders.

Sociology - Crime and Deviance (24 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions