According to the Uniform Crime Reports gathered by the FBI and the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the rate of criminal behavior and deviance can be directly linked to the environment in which people are raised. Between 2008 and 2012, the rate of nonfatal violent victimization in poor regions was double that of upper class regions. In order to understand how the environment relates to deviance and crime, an examination of its effects on people’s socialization must be conducted. As stated before, the environment plays an enormous role in the development of delinquency and crime. The reason for this lies in the socialization, interactions, and economic status of people.
I am going to argue that social disorganization is the best way to explain crime from a sociological standpoint. Shay and McKay developed the theory, which stated that social disorganization could be traced to conditions specific to rural areas that the lower class could afford to live in. They studied the lifestyles, discovering that there was a high rate of turnovers in homes and that there was a mix of ethnic backgrounds. One article written about their study states, “...key facts about the community correlates [crime] and delinquency...” A short statement, however it was one that would be built upon and challenged for years to come. It was proven that an unstable environment, such as where a person would be living next month or if they could afford food, could lead to an unstable home life which could then encroach into other aspects of a person’s life. The article also states that there are several variables to this theory to make it an accurate one that should be respected. “Residential instability, ethnic diversity, family disruption, economic status, population size, and proximity to urban areas influence a community’s capacity to develop and maintain strong systems of social rela...
Crime is bound to happen whether it is in Worcester or Boston or Chicago or wherever it maybe but no crime happen without the cause of people. A neighborhood is just a location but people are the determination of what the neighborhood becomes. We can’t control crime but we can give resources for prevention. Worcester used to have this program called D.A.R.E for kids in school, it talks and give awareness for drugs and other criminals acts which was useful in my case because without the knowledge I received, I wouldn’t had known that the guy in the corner of my street while walking to school was a drug dealer. But aside from people there are features that cause people to become criminals, like stress or the necessity of surviving. Life becomes the struggle, life becomes the factor which causes individuals to do things whether it was a crime or not. Strain becomes the major factor and neighborhoods become a component. Differential reinforcement causes individuals to commit crime in the sense of rewards, collective efficacy is based on the neighborhood and the people within the community and strain theory focuses on the endeavor, all of these falls in the focus of Worcester in the functions of people. But at the end of the day there are still good people within that 182,544
The presence of crime in the inner cities of America is the result of many different factors. Although it is impossible to explain the issue with one single theory, it is possible to recognize the characteristics within society that have traditionally been associated with crime. These include poor neighborhoods, weak family structures and high rates of unemployment. However, they cannot be used to explain overarching mechanisms of extremely high rates of American urban crime today. Social structures as well as cultural conditions play strong explanatory roles in describing the causes of crime in American cities. Some prominent social structural theories include social disorganization theory, strain theory, and cultural deviance theory.
Anomie and social disorganization theory are reasoning as why individual turn to crimes. The focus is on the macro level (anomie) and micro level (social disorganization theory) of external environmental factors contributing to criminal behaviors. I think social disorganization theory is more beneficial in deterring crimes. It is more manageable to transform a neighborhood or concentrated area than a societal norm. The movement will require equivocal amount of resources with noticeable. By influencing changes at the micro level, as individual transition out of the area, they can impinge a positive attitude in a new environment. As numerous changes occurs on the micro level, it will eventually metamorphose into the macro level.
Public Spaces in high social capital area are cleaner, people are friendlier and the streets are safer. Traditional neighborhood “risk factors” such as high poverty and residential mobility are not as significant. Places have higher crime rates in large part because people don’t participate in community organizations, don’t supervise younger people, and aren’t linked through networks of friends (Putnam, 2000).
Criminologists have been conducting research since the 1920s about neighborhoods and crime. There are clear differences in crime rates across different parts of different states, there are cities where an ample amount of people try to avoid and some where people are scared to live because of the reputation that city has. Conservational factors play a vast role in committing crimes. Communities and neighborhoods in the United States have been studied for decades. Neighborhoods that have the highest percentages of minorities are also often the poorest and most isolated. Most researchers suggest that
Nice job on your report, but I was thinking that the Chicago school theory is correct to a point, but I also disagree as well with this theory, because I believe that my neighborhood does not define me or others, and just because there is crime or poverty within my neighborhood that people will result to committing criminal acts or behavior. There have been many individuals that have lives through neighborhoods like these, and have survive without getting involve with criminal acts, etc. I also believe that other things can force a neighborhood to experience a higher volume of crime, such as new businesses moving into a level two zone, that attract other business like mom and pops stores, “which now causes an invasion that can
The Natural Sociological theorizing focuses on the nature of the power of relationships that exist between social groups and on the influence that various social phenomena bring o the bear on the type of behaviors that tend to characterize groups of people. Sociological Perspectives on crime causation assume that Social groups, social institution arrangements of society and social roles all provide information for criminological research. It also, Society’s structure and degree of organization is also assumed as major factors of criminal behavior. The The perspective also thinks that group dynamics, group organization, and subgroup relationships form the causal integration of factors that from which crime develops.
When looking at the social disorganisation theory it is demonstrated how certain behaviours are influenced by the make-up of communities, cultural backgrounds and having a lack of social structure. This theory suggests that those who have been raised in disadvantaged neighbourhoods and those who are part of a subculture that influences delinquency tends to enable these individuals in engaging in criminality. Gaines and Miller (2011, p. 115) state, “Crime is largely a product of unfavourable conditions in certain communities”. Consistent with this is the general concept of social disorganisation theory suggesting the high rates of crime are linked with the ecological factors of those individuals. The community in which the offender is from has a significantly a ...