theories on crime Flashcards
functionalist - durkheim
crime = inevitable, universal & functional:
boundary maintenance - reminds society of norms & values as criminals are punished
warning system - a.cohen - warns there’s a problem within society and that its malfunctioning
safety valve - davis - deviance can provide relatively harmless expression of dissatisfaction
durkheim criticism
fails to explain what causes crime and never states what is right amount of crime
functionalist - a.cohen (subcultural theory)
s/cs respond to difficulties of achieving mainstream goals by providing members illegitimate opportunities to achieve mainstream goals they can’t achieve legitimately.
w/c boys experience status frustration - anger and resentment felt as aspirations are blocked as they underachieve in edu - promotes m/c values that they don’t have.
however, they share society’s mainstream goals - achieving american dream so join s/cs which provide alternative status hierarchy and give them illegitimate opportunity structure to gain in the s/c what they lack in mainstream by inverting mainstream goals.
a.cohen criticism
assumes everyone shares same values so it is possible that the boys never wanted status
functionalist - cloward and ohlin (subcultural theory)
not all s/c respond in same way, response depends on unequal access to illegitimate opportunity structures
criminal s/c - develops in stable w/c areas with developed criminal culture which acts as role models for younger members
conflict s/c - develops in areas no established criminal network. Illegitimate opportunities available in gangs through non utilitarian crimes - helps them gain status not AD
retreatist s/c - develop in unstable neighbourhoods and fail to provide members with illegitimate opportunities to achieve makes them double failures - failed to achieve mainstream goals legitimately and illegitimately.
cloward and ohlin criticism
south - ignore overlap between different s/cs, e.g criminal s/cs are also often conflict s/c
functionalist - merton (block opps)
crime exists because everyone wants to achieve AD - not all members of society have legitimate means to achieve it
strain to anomie - pressure to deviate due to strain between people’s goals and ability to achieve them legitimately so turn to illegitimate means
conformists - achieve AD legitimately
innovators - utilitarian crimes to achieve AD
ritualists - deviant - have means to achieve AD but dont try
retreatists - deviant - reject and give up on AD
rebels - reject society’s norms and values and replace it with another set of values
merton criticism
focuses on individuals not groups - crime is often a group activity
right realist - biological differences
crime caused by mix of social and biological factors
biological differences make some people innately predisposed to commit crime than others
herrnstein & murray - main cause of crime is low intelligence which is biologically determined
biological predisposition to commit crime can be reduced by effective socialisation
biological differences criticism
there is no ‘criminal gene’
right realist - underclass and inadequate socialisation
murray - crime increasing due to growing underclass - result of welfare dependency
dependency culture - leads to increase in LPFs living on benefits - men dont have to take responsibility for children so have no reason to work. underclass single mothers cant socialise children properly - boys lack positive male role model which is damaging to them - results in delinquent behaviour as they turn to negative role models who gain status through crime not hard work
right realist - rational choice theory
clarke - individuals have free will - decision to commit crime is choice based on rational calculations of consequences - if reward outweighs consequences individuals more likely to commit crime
felson - for crime to be committed there must be motivated offender, suitable target and absence of capable guardian - criminals commit crime as chances of getting caught are low
rational choice theory criticism
ignores wider causes of crime
traditional marxism
structural causes crime - capitalism is criminogenic - causes crime by its very nature
explains w/c, WCC and CC - everyone commits crime
explains non-utilitarian and utilitarian crime - w/c commit both - utilitarian - exploited so turn to crime to survive, but also media promote consumerism and materialism so w/c turn to crime to obtain material goods. non-utilitarian - alienation causes frustration and non-utilitarian crimes are way to release frustration.
r/c - utilitarian - WCC and CC - capitalism encourages dog-eat-dog competition so r/c commit WCC and CC
explains purpose of law in serving interests of r/c - the law is ideological - makes it seem like it benefits w/c - e.g. H&S in workplace, but actually benefits r/c and doesn’t legislate against their own behaviour
law enforced selectively against the w/c - it makes crime appear as a w/c phenomenon so Marxist theory is useful as it shows OCS are incorrect.
traditional marxism criticism
not all capitalist societies have high crime rates and some communist societies have high rates
new criminology - taylor, walton and young
crime is positive - pro-revolutionary - criminals are modern-day Robin Hoods - steal from the rich to give to poor - redistributing wealth
acknowledges free will in leading to crime - theory is voluntaristic - argue individuals choose to commit crime deliberately to improve society.
new criminology criticism
romanticise w/c criminals - represent them as modern day Robin Hoods when most crime is intra-class - w/c commit crimes against other w/c
left realism - lea and young
explain structural causes of crime committed by w/c and show why OCS are correct - rel dep, marginality and s/c
explain increase in crime in recent years, especially among m/c - advertising & increased individualism leads to crime - people concerned about themselves at expense of others. individualism - causes disintegration of communities and breakdown of informal social control - leads to anti social behaviour and crime
s/c - blocked opportunities leads to people joining s/c - provide solution to feeling of relative deprivation - may not always be crime, can also be to gain spiritual comfort for relative deprivation through membership of religious s/cs
marginalisation - dont have goals or organisations to represent interests so dont contribute to society or benefit from it, e.g unemployed youth - no organisations to represent their views, powerless to use political means to improve their situation, feel frustrated and resentful towards society and turn to non-utilitarian crimes to express their frustration.
practical solutions for crime and influence gov polices on crime - gov action to reduce poverty, e.g. New Labour - ‘tough on crime, tough of the causes of crime’ - ASBOs created to be strict on criminals, increased benefit and created minimum
wages to get rid of the causes of crime (e.g. poverty).
labelling theory - becker
useful as he explains crime is social construct created by moral entrepreneurs - act only becomes criminal when someone says it’s criminal and moral entrepreneurs have power to label actions of others as criminal - go on moral crusade to put pressure on gov to change law in belief that it will benefit those to whom it is applied. criminal group now becomes marginalised as group is targeted by police to deal with perceived problem meaning they are now relabelled all over again
becker criticism
fails to explain why moral entrepreneurs have power to label others
labelling theory - cicourel
useful as it explains why some social groups more likely to be labelled and justice is negotiable which shows that OCS are inaccurate - police make arrests based on typifications - stereotypes of ‘typical criminal’
cicourel criticism
doesn’t say why police hold typifications - marxists - law is selectively enforced to make it appear like crime is a w/c phenomenon which maintains capitalism
labelling theory - s.cohen
useful for explaining how labelling causes moral panics and deviancy amplification
studied societal reaction to mods and rockers - found that press hugely exaggerated events when actually fighting and general criminality were minor.
due to sensationalist media reporting of the disturbances, youth became seen as folk devils - threat to social order. SFP happened and M&Rs engaged in more fighting - caused moral panic - over exaggerated social concern about the threat
police arrested anyone who fit stereotype of M&Rs
deviance amplification - the attempt to control deviance lead to increase in deviance
