It does not consider other factors such as criminal associations, individual traits, and inner strains, which plays significant role in determining punishment for the individuals in committing crimes. It is observed that this theory endeavours to know that whether the activities of crime as well as the victim’s choice, criminals commit the activities on start from rational decisions. The theory also determines that criminals consider different elements before committing crime. They engage in the exchange of ideas before reaching on any final decision. These elements consist of consequences of their crimes, which include revealing their families to problems or death, chances of being arrested, and others elements, which comprises of placement of surveillance systems (Walsh & Hemmens, 2010; Lichbach,
For decades researchers have speculated about the relationship between levels of violence, and societal conditions such as poverty, urbanism, population composition, and family disruption. National and international level research has concluded that each of these factors are related to crime rates and their trends overtime (Avison & Loring, 1986; Lafree, 1999, Lauristen & Carbone-Lopez, 2011). To examine these factors more closely we should recognize that they are the foundation of many criminological theories, both motivational and control, applied to the macro and individual level. Specifically, these include social disorganization theory (Shaw & MCkay, 1942), anomie-strain theory (Merton, 1968), violent subcultural theories (Anderson, 1999), social bond theory (Hirschi, 1969), self-control theory (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990), and biosocial perspectives (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1983).
Crime is the action of committing an illegal act, whether it be delinquency, kidnapping, murdering, or any minor wrongdoing. Sociologists use three theoretical explanations to define why crime occurs. The individual-level explanation, the social structure explanation, and the interactive explanation (Becken 2013). There are two aspects of the individual-level explanation, the biological and the psychological/psychoanalytical. The biological level uses contemporary neuroscience to explain crime, while the psychoanalytical uses Freud and personality theories to explain serial killers, and abusers. The social structure explanation is defined by two theories, one which states that society needs crime to define normal “us” vs. “them” to build social cohesion, and the other states that courts and laws protect the rich and punish the poor to help maintain economic growth (Durheim et al via Becken 2013). Interactive explanations state that people commit crime because of their community and opportunity for crime (...
We learn values from family, friends, coworkers, etc.; those values either support or oppose criminal behavior. Sutherland also noted that individuals with an excess of criminal definitions will be more open to new criminal definitions and that individual will be less receptive to anti-criminal definitions. The theory does not emphasize who one's associates are but rather upon the definitions provided by those associations. Once techniques are learned, values (or definitions) supporting that criminal behavior may be learned from just about anyone.
Specific use of racial surnames is labeling to a specific ethnic group and must be abolished. Largely
Many of the traditional criminological theories focused more on biological, psychological and sociological explanations of crime rather than on the cost and benefits of crime. More conservative approaches, including routine actives, lifestyle exposure and opportunity theories have clearly incorporated crime rate patterns as a fundamental part of analyzing the economics of crime. Crime statistics are important for the simple reason that they help put theories into a logical perspective. For example, a prospective home owner may want to look at crime rates in areas of potential occupancy. On a more complex level, it helps law enforcement and legislators create effective crime reduction programs. Furthermore, it also helps these agencies determine if crime prevention programs, that have been in effect, have been successful. There are many factors that influence the rates of crime including socio economic status, geographical location, culture and other lifestyle factors. More specifically, Messner and Blau (1987) used routine activities theory to test the relationship between the indicators of leisure activities and the rate of serious crimes. They discussed two types of leisure actives, the first being a household pastime, which primarily focused on television watching. The second type was a non-household leisure event which was consisted of attendance to sporting events, cinemas, and entertainment districts. The focus of this paper will be to study the effects that substantial amounts of leisure activities have on the offender and the victim. Leisure activities not only make a crime more opportunistic for offenders, it may also provide offenders with motivation to engage in criminal activity. On the other hand, it may also be argue...
However, those who critique the labeling theory point out that this theory focuses heavily upon secondary deviance rather than primary deviance, or the individual’s deviant acts prior to being labeled as a deviant. This theory fails to address other preexisting variables in an individual’s life that led them to deviance to begin with (Akers and Sellers, 158). There could be other factors that cause an individual to deviate post-incarceration that go beyond internalizing a negative label.
Criminology is the scientific study of crimes and criminal behaviour. Criminological theories and research aim at giving us an understanding of the reasons and factors that influence why people commit crimes. There are two main types of crime: Blue collar crime and white collar crime. Blue-collar crimes is the term used to describe crimes that are committed primarily by people who are from a lower socioeconomic class while white-collar crime is usually committed by people in a higher socioeconomic class. The main difference between the two is “white-collar” crime is usually considered to be a victimless crime in which there is no one directly made to be in a worse situation than what they were in before . An example of the more common street
To sum up, we can not accurately put a label on someone and call them an
The term reoffending refers to an individual who has committed more than one criminal act. As previously mentioned, current statistics indicate that 60 percent of adult criminals who have been imprisoned have reoffended at some stage. It has also been discovered that 80 percent of juvenile (or underage) criminals reoffend. Prison is defined as a legally sanctioned facility which holds individuals who have committed a serious crime. Prisons are typically defined within three categories; low, medium and high security, or can have areas of each security. Generally, lower security prisons include prisoners who are of less threats to society, and these prisoners have more freedom. In higher security ...
The Power to Name written by Hope A. Olson has similarities with this work in that classification systems are examined. Both authors argue that classification is part of life and can be considered a necessity. Basically, classification is ubiquitous and relevant to all facets of life. The Power to Name proves the difficulties posed by challenging a preexisting classification system (Dewey Decimal Classification) an idea that was brought up in Sorting Things Out. The idea of universality in classification is examined in Sorting Things Out by considering the lenses of anthropology, sociology, and history. Classification was used as a tool for understanding cultures for anthropologists, while sociologists have associated this with social
their acts as criminal and extending this judgement to them as people. Having been labelled, there is an expectation that this criminality must be expressed. With this attached stereotype, the general population will perceive them to be criminal and treat them accordingly. This produces unanticipated effects: the label of criminal is intended to prevent individuals from participating in criminal activities but it actually creates the very thing it intended to stop. It produces a self-fulfilling prophecy which is defined as a false definition of a situation, evoking a new behaviour that makes the original false assumption come true (Burke, 2005).
Anthony Lewis tells the story very well, including providing a background of Gideon’s case as