I haven't posted lately, although there is a whole course worth of material to go up. I have been considering whether to go back and clean up the papers I have written. The stated purpose of this site was to maintain a reference site for myself as far as writings and sources. But I also have started thinking about using the site as a showcase for the papers. Right now I wouldn't want to do that as there are plenty of spelling areas, some papers lack any sort of coherent conclusions, and some papers lost all formatting when I copied them into Blogger. So I think that I am going to (over a long period of time). This means that I will not be leaving the exact papers up that I submitted for my coursework.
As far as having the site up for my own reference, that has worked very well for me. Instead of having to drill down through a series of folders and open several files with technical course names to look for an idea or source I have used before, I can search through the site and scan several papers (including notes) for the material I am looking for. I do need to rename some posts, I believe, and add some additional labels to be able to sort things more efficiently.
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
Sunday, June 1, 2014
Week 6 Paper - Criminological Theory
The Future of
Criminological Theory
A primary issue
with the state of our current criminal justice system is the high
number of resources used in curtailing drug offenses, also known as
the “War on Drugs”. I won't go into great detail on this
subject, as the discussion would require a plethora of paragraphs to
examine fully. There three issues that should be addressed in the
context of a discussion of out future; the high amount of drug
offenders, the underlying harm this war does to our society, and how
this could be remedied.
At the “Drug War Facts” website, the number of prisoners in our jails show that drug offenders account for half of the Federal prison population. The website states that “On Dec. 31, 2012, there were 196,574 sentenced prisoners under federal jurisdiction. Of these, 99,426 were serving time for drug offenses,” and further that “On Dec. 31, 2011, there were 1,341,797 sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction. Of these, 222,738 were serving time for drug offenses, of whom 55,013 were merely convicted for possession.(Drug War Facts, 2014, para 1-2)
Despite the waste of law enforcement resources on a mala prohibita issue, there is a greater cost to society; “most Americans have yet to appreciate that the War on Drugs is necessarily a war on the rights of all of us. It could not be otherwise, for it is directed not against inanimate drugs but against people—those who are suspected of using, dealing in, or otherwise being involved with illegal drugs. Because the drug industry arises from the voluntary transactions of tens of millions of people—all of whom try to keep their actions secret—the aggressive law enforcement schemes that constitute the war must aim at penetrating the private lives of those millions. And because nearly anyone may be a drug user or seller of drugs or an aider and abettor of the drug industry, virtually everyone has become a suspect. All must be observed, checked, screened, tested, and admonished—the guilty and innocent alike.” (Wisotsky, 1992, para. 11)
Although the underlying criminality of drug use remains a public issue, and subject to the whims of a busybody and buttinsky population, there is an easy fix that the criminal justice system can assume of it's own volition, a non enforcement policy. After all, hasn't city council after city council across America set a precedent by simply ignoring both the wishes of the voters and the law of the land to declare themselves sanctuary cities for illegal aliens? Why shouldn't law enforcement agencies simply take the same track in a policy that would benefit Americans for a change?
Theorists have already updated older perspectives, and we have modern variants of strain, social control, and developmental theories. In this context, is it possible that we already have enough Criminological theories for the future? Do we need to simply determine the contexts in which these theories will work best? Theory is just as mutable as the human animal it attempts to explain. More theories will be developed, because no single theory will be able to completely explain criminal behavior. Criminal behavior is going to result from a combination of factors which will vary from individual to individual Abrahamsen explains this; “Any classification, be it of plants, animals, or human beings, is to some extent artificial because there will always be individual characteristics or a set of characteristics which can properly be placed in more than one group. In our own attempt at classification, dealing as we often do with emotionally and mentally abnormal offenders, it is frequently difficult to distinguish between a criminal who is neurotic and one who suffers from a character disorder. Yet in spite of the shortcomings inherent in classification, we must attempt to categorize offenders if we are going to be successful in dealing with them. If we can classify them in a rational way, we can diagnose their characteristics, treat them, and predict their future behavior. However, such classification means that we will have to examine carefully each criminal to be able to find the characteristic and predominant traits that will tell us in which particular category he belongs. (Abrahamsen, n.d.,para 2)
A review of the criminological theory course leads me to the following thoughts: I had a natural affinity for classical thought, as I place a high value on the concept of free will, and that society must set and enforce controls to avoid anarchy. From Positivist thought, I think that strain theory makes a lot of sense and is useful for describing criminal decision making.. Other then Marxist based theories, I could see the usefulness of most theory under certain circumstance. I also like the assumption under social control theory that crime is a natural result of human existence
Will positivist or classical school influence criminal justice policies more in the future? Each theory will ebb and flow as a basis for policy as political influence and media propaganda is put into play. Historically, Americans have used both theories to explain and counter explain criminal behavior and to set policies used to combat criminal behavior
Do present day criminological theories satisfactorily explain female and juvenile crime? Several theories based on social learning can help explain juvenile crime, such as cultural transmission theory and differential association theory . There can be biological reasons or sociological reasons for less female crime, or as discussed above, more likely a combination, but we can see that feminist theory, like Marxist theory, based in attaining political goals, fails the test of time and reality. Although feminist theory predicted that as feminist policies were advanced, women would commit crime at the same rates as men, this is not the case. Adler contended that the “process will result in women committing more traditional male crimes, such as violent crimes and white-collar crimes. The rate of female crime will also increase” (Williams & McShane, 2014, p.149) Williams and McShane point out that “research has yet to find much support for her position”(2014, p.149)
At the “Drug War Facts” website, the number of prisoners in our jails show that drug offenders account for half of the Federal prison population. The website states that “On Dec. 31, 2012, there were 196,574 sentenced prisoners under federal jurisdiction. Of these, 99,426 were serving time for drug offenses,” and further that “On Dec. 31, 2011, there were 1,341,797 sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction. Of these, 222,738 were serving time for drug offenses, of whom 55,013 were merely convicted for possession.(Drug War Facts, 2014, para 1-2)
Despite the waste of law enforcement resources on a mala prohibita issue, there is a greater cost to society; “most Americans have yet to appreciate that the War on Drugs is necessarily a war on the rights of all of us. It could not be otherwise, for it is directed not against inanimate drugs but against people—those who are suspected of using, dealing in, or otherwise being involved with illegal drugs. Because the drug industry arises from the voluntary transactions of tens of millions of people—all of whom try to keep their actions secret—the aggressive law enforcement schemes that constitute the war must aim at penetrating the private lives of those millions. And because nearly anyone may be a drug user or seller of drugs or an aider and abettor of the drug industry, virtually everyone has become a suspect. All must be observed, checked, screened, tested, and admonished—the guilty and innocent alike.” (Wisotsky, 1992, para. 11)
Although the underlying criminality of drug use remains a public issue, and subject to the whims of a busybody and buttinsky population, there is an easy fix that the criminal justice system can assume of it's own volition, a non enforcement policy. After all, hasn't city council after city council across America set a precedent by simply ignoring both the wishes of the voters and the law of the land to declare themselves sanctuary cities for illegal aliens? Why shouldn't law enforcement agencies simply take the same track in a policy that would benefit Americans for a change?
Theorists have already updated older perspectives, and we have modern variants of strain, social control, and developmental theories. In this context, is it possible that we already have enough Criminological theories for the future? Do we need to simply determine the contexts in which these theories will work best? Theory is just as mutable as the human animal it attempts to explain. More theories will be developed, because no single theory will be able to completely explain criminal behavior. Criminal behavior is going to result from a combination of factors which will vary from individual to individual Abrahamsen explains this; “Any classification, be it of plants, animals, or human beings, is to some extent artificial because there will always be individual characteristics or a set of characteristics which can properly be placed in more than one group. In our own attempt at classification, dealing as we often do with emotionally and mentally abnormal offenders, it is frequently difficult to distinguish between a criminal who is neurotic and one who suffers from a character disorder. Yet in spite of the shortcomings inherent in classification, we must attempt to categorize offenders if we are going to be successful in dealing with them. If we can classify them in a rational way, we can diagnose their characteristics, treat them, and predict their future behavior. However, such classification means that we will have to examine carefully each criminal to be able to find the characteristic and predominant traits that will tell us in which particular category he belongs. (Abrahamsen, n.d.,para 2)
A review of the criminological theory course leads me to the following thoughts: I had a natural affinity for classical thought, as I place a high value on the concept of free will, and that society must set and enforce controls to avoid anarchy. From Positivist thought, I think that strain theory makes a lot of sense and is useful for describing criminal decision making.. Other then Marxist based theories, I could see the usefulness of most theory under certain circumstance. I also like the assumption under social control theory that crime is a natural result of human existence
Will positivist or classical school influence criminal justice policies more in the future? Each theory will ebb and flow as a basis for policy as political influence and media propaganda is put into play. Historically, Americans have used both theories to explain and counter explain criminal behavior and to set policies used to combat criminal behavior
Do present day criminological theories satisfactorily explain female and juvenile crime? Several theories based on social learning can help explain juvenile crime, such as cultural transmission theory and differential association theory . There can be biological reasons or sociological reasons for less female crime, or as discussed above, more likely a combination, but we can see that feminist theory, like Marxist theory, based in attaining political goals, fails the test of time and reality. Although feminist theory predicted that as feminist policies were advanced, women would commit crime at the same rates as men, this is not the case. Adler contended that the “process will result in women committing more traditional male crimes, such as violent crimes and white-collar crimes. The rate of female crime will also increase” (Williams & McShane, 2014, p.149) Williams and McShane point out that “research has yet to find much support for her position”(2014, p.149)
References
Abrahamsen , D.
(n.d.). The classification of criminals. Retrieved May 13, 2014 from
http://www.self-defender.net/extras/crime_class.htm
Drug War Facts. (2014).Drug offenders in the correctional system. Retrieved May 13, 2014 from http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Prisons_and_Drugs
Williams, F. &
McShane, M. (2014) Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson
Wisotsky, S. (1992,
October 2). A Society of Suspects: The War on Drugs and Civil
Liberties. Cato Institute. Retrieved February 1, 2014 from
http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/society-suspects-war-drugs-civil-liberties
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Week 6 Discussion - Criminological Theory.
Society controls the definition of crime. For instance, some
things that were considered crimes 100 years ago are not crimes today
and vice versa. In the context of the impact of changes in the nature
of crime, what are some likely trends?
Sociological explanations can describe criminal phenomena that has
not been encountered yet due to future culture conflict, the human
tendency to labeling of mala prohibita behavior as criminal, and the
growth of the burrocracy. These factors can be demonstrated as
changing what is legally criminal behavior today. The malleable
nature of culture conflict can be seen in the transition of the gay
rights movement from demanding tolerance to now demanding compliance;
a baker now “must serve gay couples despite his religious beliefs
or face fines,”(Moreno, 2013, para. 1). Whether you define it as
the growth complex, the bureaucratic politics model, or as
Pournelle's Iron law of bureaucracy, the tendency of large
organizations to forgo their forming mission and seek additional
power can be seen even now in the culture conflict between the
burrocracy & welfare state versus the taxpayers Silvergate
gives several examples of citizens arrested for felonies for behavior
that they did not know was illegal, and did not seem criminal in the
first place. One example is of “American businesswoman Diane Huang
was convicted under this far-reaching provision, despite her
unawareness of the supposed Honduran law banning the shipment of
lobsters in clear plastic bags. Lack of criminal intent,
the Washington Legal Foundation argued on behalf of Huang
and her co-defendants, should make the government’s criminal
charges inappropriate. To make matters worse, the Honduran law
governing such shipments was not valid at the time of Huang’s
arrest—a fact that the Honduran government pointed out to the 11th
Circuit Court of Appeals. Nonetheless, the federal court found Huang
guilty in March 2003 and imposed a two-year prison sentence”.
(Silvergate, 2009, para.2) You can see politicians pushing new
“bullying” laws, which they will use to silence their opposition
or any criticism. “An incumbent legislator has threatened cable
companies with litigation if they run advertisements citing his
voting record in the Texas House. Meanwhile, the same lawmaker’s
chief of staff demanded that a website publishing his votes be shut
down, citing a law designed to protect teenagers from cyber-bullying
on social media websites. “ (Gutowski,2014, para 1)
In the previous paragraph, the discussion touched on one of the trends we will see in the future of criminology, the criminalization of more and more behavior. Another major changes comes from technology. The Foresight Crime Prevention Panel of the UK “predicts that crime will transcend national borders and that electronic services will become direct targets for crime. “ (BBC News, 2000, para. 7) In the future as in the past there will be a technological arms race between the criminal justice system and criminals. One of the areas I was interested in beginning this program was in cyber crime. I have spent many hours on the Bad Ideas forum at Zoklet.net, and on the deep web black market Silk Road forums, and I believe that a disciplined criminal can conduct a variety of fraud and remain anonymous. On the other hand, to prevent this behavior would necessitate the destruction of a lot of our privacy, even as we see the burrocracy doing so now. The harm the destruction of our privacy far outweighs the harm an “uncatchable” thief does.
(For those of you interested in the discussions of petty criminals see:
http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/forumdisplay.php?f=37
For discussion of anonymity and moving money secretly, get the TOR browser and search for the Silk Road forums, which tend to disappear and reappear occasionally)
Even with the advance of technology, it will be possible to integrate some criminalogical theories to meet the challenges of the future; human nature is imutable even if the technology is not. For example, we can look at the behavior of sex predators; the technology has allowed predators access to more victims, but it has not changed their underlying behavior.”This proportion of arrests may have grown since 2000 as Internet use has become more widespread, and more law enforcement agencies have been trained to respond to Internet-related crimes.”(Wolak, Finkelhor, Mitchell, & Ybarra, 2008, p10)
The major factor that limits our ability to study crime today is the inability to gauge the criminals' true intent; beyond the issues of self-reporting, on which criminal may overestimate in bragging, or under report in concealing punishable activity, some crimes committed are from lack of control. They are emotional in nature and not always understood by criminal himself. Underreporting of crime by victims will also remain an obstacle to understanding crime.
Criminalogical theory will always be, in part, able to explain any sort of crime. These theories have been developed by the observation and study of human behavior throughout history, whether from a classical or positivist viewpoint. Even though no one theory can successfully explain all crime, each theory (that is, those based on observation and not political wish casting such as Marxist-based theory) can explain some aspect of crime and can continue to do so. The role criminology can play in counter-terrorism is through the use of the same tools to combat criminals; profiling, relationship mapping. One such tool is statistical analysis. “University of Pennsylvania criminologist Richard Berk, a trained statistician, never met a data set he didn't like. Now, using fresh data from the Philadelphia probation department, Berk and three colleagues have built an innovative model for predicting which troublemakers already in the system are most likely to kill or attempt a killing” (ecollege.com, n.d., p.1)
Although the technology of crime can change, and the definition of crime can vary, human nature itself does not. We experience the same rages, greed, envy, and lust that the Ancients did. The theories of criminology will always be useful in describing the results of these, and sometimes in explaining them, and hopefully, sometimes in preventing them.
Crime-fighting's hi-tech future. (2000, March 25). BBC News. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/690182.stm
ecollege.com. (n.d.) W6_News_Reports. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://vizedhtmlcontent.next.ecollege.com/pub/content/6a2e9492-75c8-4a56-8ba2-c65dcbde19af/W6_News_Reports.pdf?eclg_res=176601&eclg_resver=242033
Moreno, I. (2013, December 6) Judge orders Colo. cake-maker to
serve gay couples. The Denver Post.
Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_24672077/judge-orders-colo-cake-maker-serve-gay-couples
Raine, A. (2013). The anatomy of violence: The biological roots of crime. Kindle Ed. Random House LLC
Silvergate, H. (2009) You, too? Three felonies a day: How the Feds target the Innocent. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx
Genetic and biometric information may
be able to predict criminal tendency in the future. DNA evolutionary
adaption, frontal lobe activity differences, and low heart rate have
been found as distinctive in criminals. In “The anatomy of
violence: The biological roots of crime”, Raine discusses such
biological markers. As technology advances, the ability to “dissect”
these factors can only grow. It would be a mistake, however, to only
rely on these factors to explain criminal behavior either now or in
the future.
In the previous paragraph, the discussion touched on one of the trends we will see in the future of criminology, the criminalization of more and more behavior. Another major changes comes from technology. The Foresight Crime Prevention Panel of the UK “predicts that crime will transcend national borders and that electronic services will become direct targets for crime. “ (BBC News, 2000, para. 7) In the future as in the past there will be a technological arms race between the criminal justice system and criminals. One of the areas I was interested in beginning this program was in cyber crime. I have spent many hours on the Bad Ideas forum at Zoklet.net, and on the deep web black market Silk Road forums, and I believe that a disciplined criminal can conduct a variety of fraud and remain anonymous. On the other hand, to prevent this behavior would necessitate the destruction of a lot of our privacy, even as we see the burrocracy doing so now. The harm the destruction of our privacy far outweighs the harm an “uncatchable” thief does.
(For those of you interested in the discussions of petty criminals see:
http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/forumdisplay.php?f=37
For discussion of anonymity and moving money secretly, get the TOR browser and search for the Silk Road forums, which tend to disappear and reappear occasionally)
Even with the advance of technology, it will be possible to integrate some criminalogical theories to meet the challenges of the future; human nature is imutable even if the technology is not. For example, we can look at the behavior of sex predators; the technology has allowed predators access to more victims, but it has not changed their underlying behavior.”This proportion of arrests may have grown since 2000 as Internet use has become more widespread, and more law enforcement agencies have been trained to respond to Internet-related crimes.”(Wolak, Finkelhor, Mitchell, & Ybarra, 2008, p10)
The major factor that limits our ability to study crime today is the inability to gauge the criminals' true intent; beyond the issues of self-reporting, on which criminal may overestimate in bragging, or under report in concealing punishable activity, some crimes committed are from lack of control. They are emotional in nature and not always understood by criminal himself. Underreporting of crime by victims will also remain an obstacle to understanding crime.
Criminalogical theory will always be, in part, able to explain any sort of crime. These theories have been developed by the observation and study of human behavior throughout history, whether from a classical or positivist viewpoint. Even though no one theory can successfully explain all crime, each theory (that is, those based on observation and not political wish casting such as Marxist-based theory) can explain some aspect of crime and can continue to do so. The role criminology can play in counter-terrorism is through the use of the same tools to combat criminals; profiling, relationship mapping. One such tool is statistical analysis. “University of Pennsylvania criminologist Richard Berk, a trained statistician, never met a data set he didn't like. Now, using fresh data from the Philadelphia probation department, Berk and three colleagues have built an innovative model for predicting which troublemakers already in the system are most likely to kill or attempt a killing” (ecollege.com, n.d., p.1)
Although the technology of crime can change, and the definition of crime can vary, human nature itself does not. We experience the same rages, greed, envy, and lust that the Ancients did. The theories of criminology will always be useful in describing the results of these, and sometimes in explaining them, and hopefully, sometimes in preventing them.
Crime-fighting's hi-tech future. (2000, March 25). BBC News. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/690182.stm
ecollege.com. (n.d.) W6_News_Reports. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://vizedhtmlcontent.next.ecollege.com/pub/content/6a2e9492-75c8-4a56-8ba2-c65dcbde19af/W6_News_Reports.pdf?eclg_res=176601&eclg_resver=242033
Gutowski, S. (204, Feburary 9).Texas
State Rep tries to use anti-bullying law to silence critics
[Breitbart]. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from
http://capitolcityproject.com/headline/texas-state-rep-tries-use-anti-bullying-law-silence-critics-breitbart/
Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_24672077/judge-orders-colo-cake-maker-serve-gay-couples
Raine, A. (2013). The anatomy of violence: The biological roots of crime. Kindle Ed. Random House LLC
Silvergate, H. (2009) You, too? Three felonies a day: How the Feds target the Innocent. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx
Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K.,
& Ybarra, M. (2008) Online “Predators” and their Victims:
Myths, Realities and Implications for
Prevention and Treatment. American
Psychologist, 63, 111-128. Retrieved May 11, 2014 from
http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/Am%20Psy%202-08.pdf
Friday, May 30, 2014
Crimogenic Differences in Siblings
Crimogenic Differences in
Siblings
A brief survey of criminological
theories can explain possible reasons for one or both of a pair of
siblings to assume a criminally deviant lifestyle. In discussing
these theories, the possibility arises that their shared environment
can play a part in that deviant path, even in the event that one
sibling does not assume deviancy. Social control theory may hold an
explanation for different life paths. In addition, differential
association theory may also explain these differences. If there is a
gender difference between the siblings, this could also account for
such differences. This discussion of sibling crimogenic differences
may illuminate why most people in don't become criminals even when
they originate in environments that should, according to theory,
spawn mostly criminals.
The survey of theory will begin with strain theory. Under this theory, stress in an individual is caused by the conflict between cultural goals and institutional guidelines when a person perceives that the guidelines are outside that person's abilities. This strain is dealt with by the method of adaption known as innovation in which a person achieves cultural goals while subverting or ignoring institutional guidelines. In other words, “a premium is implicitly set upon the use, of illegitimate but technically efficient means.(Williams & McShane, 1998, p .124) This strain would apply to siblings brought up in the same environment which implies both similar cultural goals and similar institutional guidelines. Moving on to differential association theory, the similarity of environment returns in that “differential association theory is entirely a product of the social environment surrounding individuals and the values gained from important others in that social environment”(Williams & McShane, 2014, p. 69) Of course, siblings would share the set of “important others” in most cases. To look at another theory, social control theory assumes that crime is a normal function of society, and occurs when control breaks down. “The most important way we exercise control is through the process of socialization. We teach the 'right' way to do things (rules, norms), both informally, as in the family, and formally, as in school. In fact, much of our early upbringing is designed to socialize us so we can function in society.”(Williams & McShane, 2014, p. 161). The learning of controls is based on reward and punishment;“Humans learn deviant behavior just as we learn any other behavior, Reinforcement increases the frequency of a behavior, while punishment decreases this frequency.” (South University Online, 2010, sidebar)Again, we assume that siblings commonly share the same family and school controls. In examing social learning theory, we return to the assumtion that siblings share “past events”; as this theory assumes that “behavior is a product of present and past events in the life of the individual. The contingencies of reinforcement and punishment (aversive stimuli) determine whether the frequency of any particular behavior is increased or diminished” (Williams & McShane, 2014, p.179). These “past events” would certainly imply that the siblings ahre the same punative and reawed stimuli. Finally, we return to the Classical mode of criminology, and assume that as individuals, the siblings may not share the same values that would be assigned in balancing risk/reward judgements made from free will.
While these theories may partially explain a deviant mindset, they require some fine tuning to explain why one sibling might turn to crime while the other sibling turns out to be an upstanding citizen. This difference is particularly highlighted in which the environment may be considered highly crimogenic. Turner discusses the idea of “resiliency”; a term used to describe “high-risk youths who refrain from serious involvement in delinquency-that is who are 'resilient' despite the multiple adversities that they face.” (2001, p.2) Turner discusses the factors that may affect a person's resiliency. He categorizes them as ”four different domains: (1) intrapersonal; (2) family; (3) peer; and (4) neighborhood.”(2001, p.28) We can use these factors in further examination of social control theory and differential association theory. Filtering family and neighborhood factors through a social control theory prism, we could name possible contributors to a sibling difference: parental favoritism resulting in different punishments/rewards, family illness, a family move to a new neighborhood at different times in the sibling's development periods, a detioration of the neighborhood, and family changes such as divorce and new marriages. Any of these issues could definetely contribute to changes in the social environment that social controls are assigned. We could look at the peer factor as categorized by Turner and applied to differential association theory. This would especially apply during the adolescent period. Turner states that “The correlation between associating with delinquent peers and delinquent behavior is one of the strongest and most consistent findings in criminological research (2001, p38). This meshes with differential association theory in that the theory stresses the learning of criminal behavior from trusted intimates. Siblings can easily have seperate peer groups, especially as the age difference increases.
A major factor that should be examined as a cause of deviant behavior in siblings is gender. Females commit crime at a far lesser rate than men do. Without wasting time on the nonsense of feminist theory, we can look to biological determinants for possible reasons this is so. One example of a biological determinant would be the presence of testostorone in males leading to more aggressive behavior in general. Another possible biological determinant would be evolutionary psychology: “Women have to be very careful in their use of aggression...because personal survival is more critical to women then men. That's because the bear the brunt of child care and their survival is critical to the survival of their offspring (Raine,2013, p.34)
In conclusion, we can apply the fact the observation that sibling pairs may not share a path towards either deviancy or normalcy, even in a theoretically highly crimogenic environment, to the populace at large in such environments to potentially explain why the majority of that populace does not assume a deviant mindset. The ability to resist the environment, called resiliency, may rely on a number of factors which themselves are variable within such an environment. Finally, the individual may have the free will decision to avoid criminal acts.
The survey of theory will begin with strain theory. Under this theory, stress in an individual is caused by the conflict between cultural goals and institutional guidelines when a person perceives that the guidelines are outside that person's abilities. This strain is dealt with by the method of adaption known as innovation in which a person achieves cultural goals while subverting or ignoring institutional guidelines. In other words, “a premium is implicitly set upon the use, of illegitimate but technically efficient means.(Williams & McShane, 1998, p .124) This strain would apply to siblings brought up in the same environment which implies both similar cultural goals and similar institutional guidelines. Moving on to differential association theory, the similarity of environment returns in that “differential association theory is entirely a product of the social environment surrounding individuals and the values gained from important others in that social environment”(Williams & McShane, 2014, p. 69) Of course, siblings would share the set of “important others” in most cases. To look at another theory, social control theory assumes that crime is a normal function of society, and occurs when control breaks down. “The most important way we exercise control is through the process of socialization. We teach the 'right' way to do things (rules, norms), both informally, as in the family, and formally, as in school. In fact, much of our early upbringing is designed to socialize us so we can function in society.”(Williams & McShane, 2014, p. 161). The learning of controls is based on reward and punishment;“Humans learn deviant behavior just as we learn any other behavior, Reinforcement increases the frequency of a behavior, while punishment decreases this frequency.” (South University Online, 2010, sidebar)Again, we assume that siblings commonly share the same family and school controls. In examing social learning theory, we return to the assumtion that siblings share “past events”; as this theory assumes that “behavior is a product of present and past events in the life of the individual. The contingencies of reinforcement and punishment (aversive stimuli) determine whether the frequency of any particular behavior is increased or diminished” (Williams & McShane, 2014, p.179). These “past events” would certainly imply that the siblings ahre the same punative and reawed stimuli. Finally, we return to the Classical mode of criminology, and assume that as individuals, the siblings may not share the same values that would be assigned in balancing risk/reward judgements made from free will.
While these theories may partially explain a deviant mindset, they require some fine tuning to explain why one sibling might turn to crime while the other sibling turns out to be an upstanding citizen. This difference is particularly highlighted in which the environment may be considered highly crimogenic. Turner discusses the idea of “resiliency”; a term used to describe “high-risk youths who refrain from serious involvement in delinquency-that is who are 'resilient' despite the multiple adversities that they face.” (2001, p.2) Turner discusses the factors that may affect a person's resiliency. He categorizes them as ”four different domains: (1) intrapersonal; (2) family; (3) peer; and (4) neighborhood.”(2001, p.28) We can use these factors in further examination of social control theory and differential association theory. Filtering family and neighborhood factors through a social control theory prism, we could name possible contributors to a sibling difference: parental favoritism resulting in different punishments/rewards, family illness, a family move to a new neighborhood at different times in the sibling's development periods, a detioration of the neighborhood, and family changes such as divorce and new marriages. Any of these issues could definetely contribute to changes in the social environment that social controls are assigned. We could look at the peer factor as categorized by Turner and applied to differential association theory. This would especially apply during the adolescent period. Turner states that “The correlation between associating with delinquent peers and delinquent behavior is one of the strongest and most consistent findings in criminological research (2001, p38). This meshes with differential association theory in that the theory stresses the learning of criminal behavior from trusted intimates. Siblings can easily have seperate peer groups, especially as the age difference increases.
A major factor that should be examined as a cause of deviant behavior in siblings is gender. Females commit crime at a far lesser rate than men do. Without wasting time on the nonsense of feminist theory, we can look to biological determinants for possible reasons this is so. One example of a biological determinant would be the presence of testostorone in males leading to more aggressive behavior in general. Another possible biological determinant would be evolutionary psychology: “Women have to be very careful in their use of aggression...because personal survival is more critical to women then men. That's because the bear the brunt of child care and their survival is critical to the survival of their offspring (Raine,2013, p.34)
In conclusion, we can apply the fact the observation that sibling pairs may not share a path towards either deviancy or normalcy, even in a theoretically highly crimogenic environment, to the populace at large in such environments to potentially explain why the majority of that populace does not assume a deviant mindset. The ability to resist the environment, called resiliency, may rely on a number of factors which themselves are variable within such an environment. Finally, the individual may have the free will decision to avoid criminal acts.
References
Raine, A. (2013). The anatomy of
violence: The biological roots of crime. Kindle Ed. Random HouseLLC
South University Online. (2010). MCJ6003: Criminological Theory: Week 5: Rhode Island Truancy
Court
(2 of 2). Retrieved
May 5, 2014 from myeclassonline.com
Turner,
M. (2001) Good kids in bad circumstances: A longitudinal analysis of
resilient youth. National Criminal Justice
Reference Service (NCJRS). Retrieved May
5, 2014 from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/188263.pdf
Williams, F. & McShane, M.
(1998) Criminology theory: Selected classic readings (2nd edition).
Anderson Publishing Co.
Williams, F. & McShane, M.
(2014) Criminology theory (6th edition). Pearson
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Week 5 Discussion 2 - Criminological Theory.
- How might a social control theorist respond to the idea that
a person's environment should not be used as an excuse for poor
behavior? Why?
- What kind of information about Gardner's background would a
social control theorist require in order to be fully informed about
Gardner's environment and to explain how he improved his life? Why?
- Can the environment of individuals impact the likelihood that
they would be able to “pull themselves up by their bootstraps and
succeed in a conventional lifestyle?” How?
- If Gardner, frustrated with his life, had taken up a career
of crime, which criminological theories could have been utilized to
defend his actions?
- What social control mechanisms might Gardner have encountered
in his early life that could have aided his behavior later in life?
Does labeling count as a social control mechanism? We have the example of Oprah's grandma, who made sure that Oprah had a positive self-image from early childhood.
South University Online. (2010).
MCJ6003: Criminological Theory: Week 5: Mike Brescia (2 of 2).
Retrieved May 5, 2014 from myeclassonline.com
Turner, M. (2001) Good kids in bad
circumstances: A longitudinal analysis of resilient youth. National
Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Retrieved May 5, 2014
from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/188263.pdf
Williams, F. & McShane, M. (2014)
Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Week 5 Discussion 1 - Criminological Theory.
What possible factors could have allowed Oprah to turn her life
around and find success when many others in similar or better
situations end up becoming criminals? Include the impact of the
following factors in your discussion:
The question of how some people like Oprah can overcome a bad environment is subject to many factors. Michael Turner presented a report to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service in which he dicusses this question and it's relationship to these factors. Turner decribes the ability to avoid a deviant lifestyle as “resiliency”: “Work in this area is often called 'resiliency' research because the focus is on high-risk youths who refrain from serious involvement in delinquency-that is who are 'resilient' despite the multiple adversities that they face.” (2001, p.2) One factor that may have played a role in Oprah's resiliency is her gender. Women tend to commit less crime then men in general. Although feminist theory predicted that as feminist policies were advanced, women would commit crime at the same rates as men, this is not the case. Adler contended that the “process will result in women committing more traditional male crimes, such as violent crimes and white-collar crimes. The rate of female crime will also increase” (Williams & McShane, 2014, p.149) Williams and McShane point out that ““research has yet to find much support for her position”(2014, p.149) . Raine addresses the gender difference in crime rates from the point of evolutionary psychology: “Women have to be very careful in their use of aggression...because personal survival is more critical to women then men. That's because the bear the brunt of child care and their survival is critical to the survival of their offspring (2013, p.34)
A second factor that likely played a part in Oprah's resiliency was her participation in social activities aprt from her deviant activities. Oprah took part in the Upward Bound program, was on her high school speech team, and competed in beauty pageants. Turner states that “The correlation between associating with delinquent peers and delinquent behavior is one of the strongest and most consistent findings in criminological research (2001, p. 38) By particpating in such programs, Oprah not only disassociated to some point from deviant peers, but was instead associating with peers more likely to strengthen her social bonding with the main culture.
A factor we can certainly see that Oprah oversame is the relationship between family income and crime. Although crime and poverty have been linked by some criminologists, I would argue that many of the factors that play a part in poverty ( physical dilapidation, high mobility, high rates of disease, unemployment) share an underlying factor, low inpulse control). Although Oprah may be accused of low self-control in her delinquent actions, there is no proof that she was not making a rational decsion to steal and to enjoy a lot of sex. On the other hand, she has displayed much evidence to the point that she is driven to succeed in her media career, which indicates strong impulse control.
And perhaps that drive to succeed came from a reaction to the labelling she received as a child as “poor”. Her peers labeled her that way, but perhaps she did not take on that master label. Since she was not caught breaking the law, she never recived an offical label as as juvenile delinquennt. Finally, Oprah states that her grandmother "gave me a positive sense of myself"
We can use the example of Oprah's resiliency to demonstate several criminological theories. ““Another way to look at social control theory is to call it socialization theory. Since unsocialized humans—babies, for example—will simply act out their desires, it is the presence of other people that necessitates those behaviors be controlled. The most important way we exercise control is through the process of socialization. We teach the “right” way to do things.”(Williams & McShane, 2014, p.161) Oprah's grandmother certianly socialized Oprah when she would “hit her with a stick when she did not do chores or if she misbehaved in any way. “ We can see this also as an example of social learning theories. We can see the effect of labeling theory as it seems that Oprah's grandmother gave her a positive master label. We can see Classical school theory in that Oprah has made the decision to be a success. We can see the observation of many criminologists that some people “age out” of delinquency and apply that to Oprah.
Perhaps the best theory to apply to Oprah's resiliency would be social control theory: “According to social control theorists, human behavior is organized around 2 areas:
Raine, A. (2013). The anatomy of violence: The biological roots of crime. Kindle Ed. Random House LLC
- The impact of gender on crime
- The impact of attachment to school and social activities on crime.
- The relationship between income and crime
- The ability to avoid or overcome negative labels
The question of how some people like Oprah can overcome a bad environment is subject to many factors. Michael Turner presented a report to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service in which he dicusses this question and it's relationship to these factors. Turner decribes the ability to avoid a deviant lifestyle as “resiliency”: “Work in this area is often called 'resiliency' research because the focus is on high-risk youths who refrain from serious involvement in delinquency-that is who are 'resilient' despite the multiple adversities that they face.” (2001, p.2) One factor that may have played a role in Oprah's resiliency is her gender. Women tend to commit less crime then men in general. Although feminist theory predicted that as feminist policies were advanced, women would commit crime at the same rates as men, this is not the case. Adler contended that the “process will result in women committing more traditional male crimes, such as violent crimes and white-collar crimes. The rate of female crime will also increase” (Williams & McShane, 2014, p.149) Williams and McShane point out that ““research has yet to find much support for her position”(2014, p.149) . Raine addresses the gender difference in crime rates from the point of evolutionary psychology: “Women have to be very careful in their use of aggression...because personal survival is more critical to women then men. That's because the bear the brunt of child care and their survival is critical to the survival of their offspring (2013, p.34)
A second factor that likely played a part in Oprah's resiliency was her participation in social activities aprt from her deviant activities. Oprah took part in the Upward Bound program, was on her high school speech team, and competed in beauty pageants. Turner states that “The correlation between associating with delinquent peers and delinquent behavior is one of the strongest and most consistent findings in criminological research (2001, p. 38) By particpating in such programs, Oprah not only disassociated to some point from deviant peers, but was instead associating with peers more likely to strengthen her social bonding with the main culture.
A factor we can certainly see that Oprah oversame is the relationship between family income and crime. Although crime and poverty have been linked by some criminologists, I would argue that many of the factors that play a part in poverty ( physical dilapidation, high mobility, high rates of disease, unemployment) share an underlying factor, low inpulse control). Although Oprah may be accused of low self-control in her delinquent actions, there is no proof that she was not making a rational decsion to steal and to enjoy a lot of sex. On the other hand, she has displayed much evidence to the point that she is driven to succeed in her media career, which indicates strong impulse control.
And perhaps that drive to succeed came from a reaction to the labelling she received as a child as “poor”. Her peers labeled her that way, but perhaps she did not take on that master label. Since she was not caught breaking the law, she never recived an offical label as as juvenile delinquennt. Finally, Oprah states that her grandmother "gave me a positive sense of myself"
We can use the example of Oprah's resiliency to demonstate several criminological theories. ““Another way to look at social control theory is to call it socialization theory. Since unsocialized humans—babies, for example—will simply act out their desires, it is the presence of other people that necessitates those behaviors be controlled. The most important way we exercise control is through the process of socialization. We teach the “right” way to do things.”(Williams & McShane, 2014, p.161) Oprah's grandmother certianly socialized Oprah when she would “hit her with a stick when she did not do chores or if she misbehaved in any way. “ We can see this also as an example of social learning theories. We can see the effect of labeling theory as it seems that Oprah's grandmother gave her a positive master label. We can see Classical school theory in that Oprah has made the decision to be a success. We can see the observation of many criminologists that some people “age out” of delinquency and apply that to Oprah.
Perhaps the best theory to apply to Oprah's resiliency would be social control theory: “According to social control theorists, human behavior is organized around 2 areas:
-seeking pleasure
-avoiding pain
Humans learn deviant behavior just as
we learn any other behavior, Reinforcement increases the
frequency of a behavior, while punishment decreases this
frequency.”
(South University Online, 2010, sidebar). In Oprah's case, we can
see reinforcement in her career success, and punishment in her
grandmother's early discipline as well as her mother's placing her
with other family members. In addition, social control relies on
social bonding to the norm, which Oprah also maintained.Raine, A. (2013). The anatomy of violence: The biological roots of crime. Kindle Ed. Random House LLC
South
University Online. (2010). MCJ6003: Criminological Theory: Week 5:
Rhode Island Truancy Court (2 of 2). Retrieved
May 5, 2014 from myeclassonline.com
Turner, M. (2001) Good kids in bad
circumstances: A longitudinal analysis of resilient youth. National
Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Retrieved May 5, 2014
from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/188263.pdf
Williams, F. & McShane, M. (2014)
Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Out of Proportion Arrest Rates of African-Americans in San Francisco
Out
of Proportion Arrest Rates of African-Americans in San Francisco
One
report that reveals that African-Americans are involved in a
disproportionately high number of arrests in California, compared
with their population. According to this report the disparity is
greatest in San Francisco where African-Americans formed 7.8 percent
of the population in 2005, yet out of the total 17,495 arrests made
in 2005, 8,803 arrests or 50.3 percent involved African-Americans.
(Swaerd, 2006, p.9). This situation can be examined in terms of
labeling theory, conflict theory, and briefly touch on other
criminological that may apply. We also need to examine probable
reasons behind the situation in San Francisco in terms of ethnic
minority and low socioeconomic status and ask if they are more prone
to be arrested. This also raises the question of whether increased
focus on an individual or on an area by the criminal justice system
has a criminogenic effect.. Does our criminal justice policy and
our use of police resources focus more on individuals of specific
minority groups or low socioeconomic status, and of so, is this
justified?
We
will begin with a brief examination of labeling theory, and attempt
to apply it to the numbers we see in San Francisco. A summary of
labeling theory is provided by Williams and McShane, “labeling is
about the way in which people react to and label others.” (2014,
p.110). Williams and McShane provide more detail,
however; “Other classifications are more straightforward. Labeling
is clearly a variation of conflict
assumptions rather than
being consensus oriented. From its refusal to treat definitions of
crime as universal to its approach to explaining how reactions are
distributed in society, the theory embodies cultural pluralism and
value conflict. Finally, labeling is a microtheory. It focuses
on the effects of societal reaction to the individual’s behavior.
Even when there is discussion of the way in which authorities react
to deviance, the emphasis is on the process of labeling individuals
instead of on explaining how social structure creates labels.”
(2014, p. 119) Finally, Williams
and McShane delineate the 10 major points of labeling theory:
| 1 | Society is characterized by multiple values with differing degrees of overlap. |
| 2 | The quality of any individual behavior is determined only by the application of values. The identification of a behavior as deviant occurs through a reaction to that behavior. |
| 3 | Deviance is a quality of the reaction and is not intrinsic to the behavior itself. If there is no reaction, there is no deviance. |
| 4 | Once behavior is perceived by a social audience and labeled deviant, the individual who engaged in that behavior is also labeled deviant. |
| 5 | The process of reacting and labeling is more likely when those labeled are less socially powerful than their audience is. Thus, deviance is more commonly ascribed to the less powerful in society. |
| 6 | Reactors (individuals, social groups, law enforcement agencies) tend to observe more closely those whom they have identified as deviants and therefore find even more deviance in those persons. Subsequent acts are reacted to more quickly and the label more firmly affixed. |
| 7 | The audience views an individual, once labeled, as being what the label says he or she is. A person labeled as a criminal is perceived to be first and foremost a criminal; other attributes that are not covered by the label may be ignored. |
| 8 | In addition to “becoming” a deviant for the audience, an individual may begin to accept the label as a self-identity. Acceptance of the label depends on the strength of the individual’s original self-concept and the force of the labeling process. |
| 9 | A change in self-concept results in an internalization of the deviant character, with all its attributes. |
| 10 | Further deviant behavior (secondary deviance) is a product of living and acting within the role of the deviant label, often as a part of a deviant subculture. |
(Williams
& McShane, 2014, p.120)
In
essence, labeling theory suggests that the label of criminality on a
person can have an affect on the way that the criminal justice
system approaches a person or a neighborhood. Under these
assumptions, we can see this theory describing the situation in San
Francisco. “It works this way, Jacqua said: If a kid shoplifts in
the Sunset District, police are probably going to call Mom and Dad
and have them take their child home. "But if you shoplift
downtown and your address is in the Bayview, then they will take you
to jail." (Swaed, 2006, p.7) Police officers counter that
they are fighting crime where the crime is, but labeling theory can
be seen in this response, “Nichols, ex-San Francisco police
officer, on the high black arrest rate: "It comes from the fact
the majority of officers who want to take on criminals are in the
Bayview and the Fillmore, which are heavily black. I don't believe
it's racism. ... Officers have to pick and choose the severity of the
crime they want to spend their time on, and officers who make a lot
of arrests generally go after hard-core criminals." He also said
black drug dealers are particularly visible: "How often do you
see a group of whites standing on the street corner selling
narcotics? Generally whites don't sell on the corner."
(Swaed, 2006, p.8)
Although
labeling theory has been defined as a variation of conflict theory,
conflict theory in itself can give another perspective on this
subject. Indeed, the close association between labeling theory
and conflict theory can be seen in this example of labeling by the
police by area residents. “Police Commissioner Marshall, who is
African American, wrote a book, "Street Soldier," in which
he described the deep-seated antipathy black people hold for police.
"There's not a black person I know who doesn't see the police as
an occupying force in the community. (Swaed, 2006, p.5) Conflict
theory presents the view of
“social issues almost as though they were fields of combat with
opposing armies fighting to see who will prevail and rule the land.
“
(Williams & McShane,2014, p.129). Further, “Law itself
represents a resource. If a group’s values are embodied in law, it
can use that law, and its enforcement, to its benefit.
“(Williams & McShane,2014, p.129). Consider these terms of
“opposing
armies” and “occupying forces” though the perspective of one
community view expressed as , “poor blacks are in the way of what
this city wants to be, though the city won't admit it because 'we're
liberal and believe in diversity.' But the city really doesn't want
poor folks and especially poor black folks." (Swaed, 2006,
p.7) Under this consideration, conflict theory can be used as a
description of abnormal crime rates in San
Francisco
But
are these theories accurate in being the sole reason for the high
arrest rates? Cultural conflict theory might suggest that some
criminally defined behavior may not be seen as criminal acts within
these neighborhoods, or within subcultures within these areas, such
as drug use. Social disorganzation theory would explain the high
arrest rates as a result of a lack of social
cohesion on the neighborhoods, and fear builds up to the point
causing the “light of large numbers of middle-class black
residents from the city in recent decades” (Swaed, 2006, p.7)
Social learning theories may also partially apply; “In some
neighborhoods, it's instilled from when kids are little that the
police are the
enemy."
(Swaed, 2006, p.5) Unfortunately, none of these theories, including
labeling theory and conflict theory, provide a conclusive
explanation of issue on it's own merits.
And
unfortunately as well, the data shows that minorities of low
socioeconomic status are more prone to arrest. Does this have a
crimogenic effect? Do the actions of the criminal justice system
cause crime? “Public Defender Jeff
Adachi said
that he does not believe the department has a go-after-black-suspects
plan, but he added that by focusing on heavily black neighborhoods
plagued by crime and violence, police inevitably drive black arrest
numbers up and often use those high numbers as proof they are in the
right spots to catch the criminals. “ (Swaed, 2006, p4). From this
statement, it is impossible to state which effect comes first, or
even has a cause on the second at all. Labeling theory would suggest
that the actions of the criminal justice system do in en effect
create more criminals, but there is not enough evidence to suggest
that this application of theory is more valid then interpreting
the actions of police as a response to social disorganization.
Luckily,
there are actions the police can take to mitigate the perception of
being “at war” with the community. In fact, San Francisco police
have taken some steps to build better ties with the community at
large, such as “officers who do all kinds of good stuff for the
kids, participating in community events, giving toys at Christmas,
hundreds of turkeys at
Thanksgiving."
(Swaed, 2006, p.5). These types of efforts have had some positive
results in that “many black people believe they often can "talk
things over" with police in San Francisco when that wouldn't
work in Oakland, Santa Clara or Daly City. (Swaed, 2006, p.4)
References
Swaed,
S. (2006, December 17). High black arrest rate calls for inquiry.
SFGate.
Retrieved April 29, 2014 from
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/HIGH-BLACK-ARREST-RATE-RAISES-CALL-FOR-INQUIRY-2482118.php
Williams,
F. & McShane, M. (2014) Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson
Monday, May 26, 2014
Week 4 Discussion 2 - Criminological Theory.
- How is labeling theory different from anomie and ecological
theories? How does the concept of symbolic interactionism affect
labeling?
Labeling theory is “an offshoot of symbolic interactionism,” ((Williams & McShane, 2014, p.110) that describes the behavior of an individual to a symbol in the form of a label.
- How effective is labeling theory in explaining the situation
in San Francisco and other cities in California? Why?
- Do you believe individuals who are arrested once for a
blue-collar or white-collar crime earn a permanent label of
“criminal,” and are, therefore, more prone to commit crimes
again? Why?
- Could expanding the number of activities that are labeled as
crimes actually create more criminals rather than deterring crime?
Why?
- Shaming sentences have been criticized by some as placing a
stigma or label on offenders and potentially can do more harm than
good. Others believe that shaming can only work on offenders in
small communities where individuals know many of their fellow
citizens. In the context of shaming sentences, answer these
questions:
- How effective are policies of shaming and placing stigmas on
individuals in deterring crimes?
- Do shaming sentences have equal impact on individuals of
different racial and socioeconomic backgrounds or will it affect
some individuals more than others? Why?
- Can shaming sentences be used in specific environments of
San Francisco and other Californian cities that are more prone to
crimes? Why?
- How effective are policies of shaming and placing stigmas on
individuals in deterring crimes?
- With a disorganized “melting pot” found in many large
urban areas, does criminal labeling have a strong stigma and impact
on an individual's self-concept, or is it reserved more for smaller
homogenous communities?
Cole, K. (2006, November 28). Should "Shame" return to the criminal justice system? CrimProfLaw. Retrieved May 3, 2014 from http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2006/11/should_shame_re.html
Swaed, S. (2006, December 17). High black arrest rate calls for inquiry. SFGate. Retrieved April 29, 2014 from http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/HIGH-BLACK-ARREST-RATE-RAISES-CALL-FOR-INQUIRY-2482118.php
Williams, F. & McShane, M. (2014)
Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson
Sunday, May 25, 2014
Week 4 Discussion 1 - Criminological Theory.
- Are arrests a valid indicator of actual crime rates? If an area has more arrests, does that mean that it has more crime?
Arrests
cab be a partially valid indicator of crime; however, using arrest
rates to measure crime suffers the following flaws. It does not take
into account the underreporting of crime. It does not take into
account police decision making at the first level of the criminal
justice filter, such as police responding to a crime scene and taking
mediating action between brawlers but not arresting them. It does
not take into account areas in which police activity is higher ( a
precinct in which a unit commander prioritizes speeding tickets
versus a precinct where the commander stresses quality of life
arrests versus a department that assigns more resources to a
high-crime area). So it does not mean that an area with a higher
crime rate will necessarily have a higher arrest rate.
- San Francisco police arrest African-Americans for serious crimes at a much higher rate than officers in California's other biggest cities. Is this because San Francisco police focused their forces on large minority populations or because of a higher rate of criminal activity within the African-American community? Why?
Both
factors are true. SFPD does focus on the African-American community
living in high-crime neighborhoods. “Public Defender Jeff
Adachi
said that he does not believe the department has a
go-after-black-suspects plan, but he added that by focusing on
heavily black neighborhoods plagued by crime and violence, police
inevitably drive black arrest numbers up and often use those high
numbers as proof they are in the right spots to catch the criminals.
“ (Swaed, 2006, p4) Gang officers justify this to counter
violence,“African American youth are shooting each other at a rate
far greater than other groups, so we try to get those kids on some
charge if we can't get them on a homicide," Chaplin said”.
(Swaed, 2006, p4)
Neither
factor explains why San Francisco police arrest African-Americans for
serious crimes at a much higher rate than officers in California's
other biggest cities. Because the California Department of
Justice's Criminal Justice Statistics Center does not break down
arrest statistics by race or by city (there is a “City” link
which redirects to county information) it becomes necessary to use
the numbers provided by Swaed (2006, p.9). The percentage of arrests
of African-Americans compared to their proportion of the population
varies from city to city without a clear pattern; with an eyeball
estimate, the ratio ranges from 2 to 6 with San Francisco at the high
end and with neighboring Oakland at the low end, and yet Swaed quotes
resident Guy Hudson saying “that many black people believe they
often can "talk things over" with police in San Francisco
when that wouldn't work in Oakland” (2006, p.4). In addition,
“Police Academy recruits are given 52 hours of training -- more
than twice the state requirement -- on discrimination and cultural
diversity (Swaed,
2006, p4)
Are
there other possible factors? Amongst the many possibilities that
Swaed briefly touches on, the following may partially explain the
situation: rich white liberals purging the pity of poor blacks,
contribution to the crime rate by nonresidents, racism, institutional
racism, a declining black population rate, and finally, a possibility
that bears more examination, the possibility that the judicial
environment sabotages the deterrent and incapacitation capabilities
of the justice system; “many officers believe -- that criminals are
drawn to San Francisco because they feel that if caught, their
punishment in the courts will be lighter than it would be in
surrounding counties. "We know a guy with four cases pending,"
Robinson said. "Where does this stop?"(Swaed, 2006,
p3)
- Explain whether conservative or radical conflict theories can be used to justify the high rate of arrest of African-Americans in San Francisco than in other cities of California.
Both
pluralist and marxist conflict theory can be used to explain high
rates of arrest of African-Americans in San Francisco, especially
when using the assumption that rich white liberals are attempting to
purge the city of black people that Swaed touched upon.
“And
what of the city's liberal political establishment that has reigned
for many years?
"The
bottom line," said Jacqua, "is that poor blacks are in the
way of what this city wants to be, though the city won't admit it
because 'we're liberal and believe in diversity.' But the city really
doesn't want poor folks and especially poor black folks."
(Swaed, 2006, p.7)
For
purposes of brevity, I won't go into the probability that the rich
white liberals' policies exacerbated the poverty of the poor black
people in the first place. The major commonality between the two
variations of conflict theory is that “the conflict approach views
social issues almost as though they were fields of combat with
opposing armies fighting to see who will prevail and rule the land.
“
(Williams & McShane,2014, p.129). Further, “Law itself
represents a resource. If a group’s values are embodied in law, it
can use that law, and its enforcement, to its benefit. “(ibid)
Marxist theory differs from the pluralist approach in focusing on
the powerful in society as the significant factor in this conflict;
“ that the law
itself is a tool of the ruling class.”
(Williams & McShane,2014, p.133). Thus we can see how under this
assumption that either conflict theory would apply in creating a
hostile environment for African-Americans in order for rich white
liberals to “rule the land”.
- According to a number of researchers, minorities constitute the majority of arrests for drug possession, but do not make up the majority of drug users. Is this the case in San Francisco? Why?
“1
out of 3 arrests of black people involved narcotics.” (Swaed,
2006, p.2)
This is again out of proportion considering the African-American
proportion to the populace at large. Obviously, having the police
targeting an area looking for violent offenders but arresting for
lesser offenses could account for this, but there is more to this.
Swaed mentions in passing the drug dealing habits of the
African-Americans getting arrested; however, I watched a presentation
by a LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) officer that went
into detail comparing both the drug dealing and drug using tendencies
of poor blacks versus middle class whites. A summary of the LEAP
officer's case was that the public nature of these tendencies in
poor African-Americans was a much higher chance of arrest. His
conclusion was that the INTENT was not racist, but that the EFFECT
was racist ( and yet another good reason to abandon the mala probita
nature of drug criminalization).
There
is the question of how much racism there is in America (and also in
the rest of the world). In America, I think most of us realize
there is some racism. It would be hard to quantify die to the hidden
nature of a person's heart, and also due to the existence of other
factors such as poverty, culture conflict ( can one be bigoted
against ghetto culture without being bigoted against
African-Americans, for example), and misogyny in general. I will
make the assumption that there is MORE racism then whites believe in
general, and that there is LESS racism then blacks in general believe
there is. In fact, I can see an example of culture conflict in
attitudes regarding the San Francisco PF arrest rates of
African-Americans in the Swaed article; the police officers don't
see it as a result of racism, the community organizers do.
- How are conflict theories different from consensus theories?
“Conflict
theory and consensus theory are two major social theories. In general
terms, conflict theory states that society functions by the
exploitation of a subject, or worker class by the ruling class, which
owns and controls the means of production, maintaining a constant
state of conflict between the classes' interests. In contrast,
consensus theory maintains that society functions as a result of
peoples' shared and common interests and values, which are developed
through similar socialization experiences.” (reference.com, nd,
para 1)
Reference.com.
(nd). Conflict theory V consensus
theory. Retrieved April 29, 2014 from
http://www.reference.com/motif/society/conflict-theory-v-consensus-theory
Swaed,
S. (2006, December 17). High black arrest rate calls for inquiry.
SFGate.
Retrieved April 29, 2014 from
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/HIGH-BLACK-ARREST-RATE-RAISES-CALL-FOR-INQUIRY-2482118.php
Williams,
F. & McShane, M. (2014) Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson
Saturday, May 24, 2014
Subcultural Deviance: The Poverty Pitfall
Subcultural Deviance: The
Poverty Pitfall
The main causes of
white-collar crime and blue-collar crime are criminals. While this
sounds sarcastic, it should be noted that “data from Marvin
Wolfgang's famous Philadelphia cohort study suggested that around 5
percent of offenders account for 40 percent of crimes “ (Center for
Problem-Oriented Policing, 2014, para. 1). In addition, studies of
convicted criminals show that “Within three years of release, 67.5%
of the 1994 cohort were arrested for a new crime.” (Leipold, 2006,
p.546)
This implies that
most crime is committed by people that repeatedly commit crime. The
question is then, what impels these people to break the law, over and
over? A partial answer lies in anomie theory, which examines the
stress in an individual caused by the conflict between achieving
cultural goals and staying within institutional guidelines to achieve
them A person has cultural goals such as success, wealth and
station; a person that cannot achieve these goals within the
institutional guidelines (the rules and norms of his society) will
suffer from some internal strain which must be dealt with through
one of five methods of adoption. The second method of adaption is
innovation in which a person deals with this strain by achieving
cultural goals while subverting or ignoring institutional guidelines.
According to Merton, “when the aim of victory is
shorn of its institutional trappings and success in contests becomes
construed as 'winning the game' rather than 'winning through
circumscribed modes of activity,' a premium is implicitly set upon
the use, of illegitimate but technically efficient means.”
(Williams & McShane, 1998, p.124).However, anomie theory ignores
personal goals which are not always the same as cultural goals. Some
criminals seek to hurt victims when they have already achieved the
cultural goal of wealth. This may reflect an alpha need to dominate,
or a hateful person “punishing” victims of different races,
different social classes, or of the opposite sex. These could be
considered as personal goals, and not cultural goals. Finally, it
may be that criminals just can't control themselves to make legal
free will decisions. Engel states "criminality is a time
invariant personality trait, namely self-control" ( 2012, p.15)
There
is not necessarily a difference in the causes of white-collar crime
and blue-collar crime. There appears to be a bias in Positivist
thinking of the Chicago School that poverty is a cause of crime.
According to Williams & McShane, lower-class people are unable to
teach their children not to steal. “...they
[lower-class children]are also evaluated by adults who use a
'middle-class measuring rod,' a set of standards that are difficult
for the lower-class child to attain. These standards include sharing,
delaying gratification, setting long-range goals, and respecting
others’ property. All of these things intrinsically relate to being
brought up with property of one’s own and to having parents who
know firsthand the future can be better and hard work pays off. None
of these standards are necessarily self-evident to the parents of
lower-class children, and they cannot be expected to lie to their
children.” (2014, p.92) It may surprise Williams and McShane, but
not all poor people are either criminals or welfare clients.
There
is a commonality to the sociological theories that criminal behavior
is a learned behavior. Differential association theory stresses
that criminal tools and values are taught by intimate groups;
although focal concern, subculture theory, and differential
opportunity theory focus on juveline delinquents and gang culture,
the concept that criminal behavior is more likely to be learned in
subcultures that are oriented towards criminal activity, This can
also be related to differential association theory if we assume that
the intimate persoanl group is part of the subculture. It is
important to note that subcultures do not have to be gangs of poor
youth. The Enron situation provides us with an example of a
corporate executive subculture based on criminality. “A lot can be
said about the culture that the leaders at Enron created. 'They set
the wrong role models, rewarded risky rule breaking and created a
‘win-at-all-cost’ system.” (Khedekar, 2010, p.166). A second
counter example can be found in the treason of Boyce and Lee,
members of the middle-class that established their own subculture
based in spying. It can be argued then that some subcultures, which
can be defined in terms of neighborhoods or localities, companies,
and social groups, can indeed be more prone to criminal activity.
Let us use with the example of the Ivy League and it's graduates.
From Travelgate to the Gorelick Wall to the TARP “bailout”
scheme, from Gorelick to Geithner (and a book could be written solely
on Jamie Gorelick's blundering from scandal to scandal), Ivy League
graduates can be found at the center of every business and political
scandal or disaster America has dealt with for the last thirty years,
if not longer. How can this be accounted for in terms of learned
behavior? In 2013, cheating scandals erupted amongst the Ivy league
schools at Barnard, Columbia, and Harvard, an issue discussed by Liz
Crocker in the article “The Ivy League’s Cheating Problem”
(2013) Bur where would the students learn such behavior? From these
institutions themselves, possibly? “Pulitzer Prize-winning
former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Golden
published The Price of Admission, a devastating account
of the corrupt admissions practices at so many of our leading
universities “ (Unz, 2012, para.6) Thus it can be argued both that
criminality can be caused from learned behavior in a subculture, and
that the subculture does not necessarily have to be poor.
The last sentence
shows both the strength and the weakness of the sociological
theories. Coming from a Positivist influence to explain crime, these
theories can be excellent in describing the conditions that criminals
operate in, and the possible reasons they decide to commit those
crimes. The failure of these theories is the tendency to ascribe
poverty as an immutable cause of law-breaking. The biggest failure
of these theories is the policy prescriptions that are based upon
that premise. Richard Cloward comes to mind immediately with his
participation in the formulation of the “Cloward-Piven Strategy”,
with the goal of overloading the state and the economy to the point
of collapse. Supposedly this would end poverty, but with the
examples set from the execution of every other scheme based on
Marxist/oppression theory (North Korea and Cuba come immediately to
mind), it's not a risk/reward scenario worth pursuing for a
thoughtful society. The focus on poverty as a cause of crime also
overlooks the motives and decision-making in criminals that are not
poor, and further highlights this weakness. Thus we could call the
major weakness of this line of thinking “the poverty pitfall”
We should examine
two of the sociological theories separately, as they do both a better
job of describing criminal motivations and and of not focusing on the
“poverty pitfall”. Differential association theory also
stresses crime as a learned activity; this theory though is based on
a premise of culture conflict. Of course, following from this
theory, a society that focuses on mala in se crime and doesn't
“busybody” it's neighbors with a plethora of mala prohibita
regulations would have less crime. Anomie theory, as described in
the first paragraph, has a similarity to differential association
theory in that both are more flexible in describing criminal behavior
whether it be white-collar crime or blue-collar crime.
In summary, we will
state the following: that most crime is committed by the same
individuals over and over, that these individuals make the decision
to commit crime, that their motive in making the criminal decision
may be influenced by behavior that they have learned, that criminal
behavior can be learned from participation in a criminally oriented
subculture, and that these types of subcultures may be found at every
level of social class in society. We have looked at crime though
criminological theories based upon the Chicago School; theories that
stress crime as a learned behavior, and we have discarded fallacies
based on a premise that poor people are a priori criminals. So thus
we leap over the “poverty pitfall”.
References
Center for
Problem-Oriented Policing. (2014). Consider repeat offending.
Retrieved April 25, 2014 from
http://www.popcenter.org/learning/60steps/index.cfm?stepNum=30
Crocker, L. (2013,
May 12). The Ivy League’s cheating problem. The Daily Beast.
Retrieved April 25, 2014 from
http://www.thedailybeast.com/witw/articles/2013/05/12/barnard-and-columbia-rocked-by-cheating-scandals.html
Engel, C. (2012, February). Low
self-control as a source of crime: a meta-study. Preprints of the
Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods. Bonn.
Retrieved February 4, 2014 from
http://www.coll.mpg.de/pdf_dat/2012_04online.pdf
Khedekar, D.
(2010,October ). Corporate crime: A comparison of culture at Enron
and Satyam. Economics & Business Journal:Inquiries &
Perspectives :156: Volume 3 :Number 1. Retrieved April 25, 2014
from http://ecedweb.unomaha.edu/EBJIP2010Khedekar.pdf
Leipold, A. (2006).
Recidivism, incapacitation, and criminal sentencing policy.
University of St. Thomas Law Journal: Vol. 3:Iss. 3, Article 9.
Retrieved April 25, 2014 from
http://ir.stthomas.edu/ustlj/vol3/iss3/9
Unz, R. (2012,
November 28). The myth of American meritocracy:How corrupt are Ivy
League admissions? The American Conservative. Retrieved April
25, 2014 from
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
Williams, F. & McShane, M.
(1998) Criminology theory: Selected classic readings (2nd edition).
Anderson Publishing Co.
Williams, F. & McShane, M.
(2014) Criminology theory (6th edition). Pearson
Friday, May 23, 2014
Week 3 Discussion Follow-up - Criminological Theory.
I believe there are several issues that affect the criminal justice system's ability to fight white collar crime.
The most important one is lack of resources; I don't know if there would be enough even if agencies were devoted 100% to fighting actual crime (a Utopian dream, that), but I do know we waste resources on enforcing mala prohibita regulations. Certainly, officers harassing Open Carry marchers, shutting down little girls' lemonade stands, and shooting the dogs of crime victims cant be investigating crime at the same time.
The second one is that companies will often not cooperate with authorities in pressing charges or in investigating; many times, even though an embezzler is known, the company would rather have the offender return a portion of the money rather then prosecute.
A third problem is that white collar crime often goes unreported; victims do not want to be embarrassed and admit they got conned.
Compounding all these issues is the perception of white-collar crime as "victimless", even in cases of fraud...which when boiled down to simplicity is theft, and thus a mala in se crime. "It appears at times that our justice system does not place adequate emphasis on fraud and other white collar crimes especially when it is considered a non-violentvictimless crime. One disturbing fact is how the offense is perceived, not as a criminal offense at all, but as simple bad judgment on the part of victims, by both the general public and by the victims themselves. "(Crimes of Persuasion, 2014, para 3)
So how would I deal with white-collar crime, with current levels of resources?
1. Shift resources away from buttinsky policy and towards crime (however, I would shift more resources towards combatting violent crime)
2. Select officers for the white-collar crime that understand that theft is theft, no matter who commits it.
3. At the beginning, I would focus on a "one white-collar crime at a time" tactic. Hopefully, a consistent stream of convictions would begin to wear away the perception of white-collar theft as a victimless crime that police cant or won't solve.
Crimes
of Persuasion. (2014) Factors
Which Allow The Problem To Continue.Retrieved
January 30, 2014 from
http://www.crimes-of-persuasion.com/laws/problems.htm
It is possible to use differential association theory to describe the criminal behavior of Enron's executives. In Sutherland's final version of differential association theory, there are 4 major points. First, that crime is a learned behavior; second, that it is learned from interaction with participants who hold shared values; third, that participants are members of intimate personal groups ; and finally, that two things are learned, techniques of crime and values/rationales for criminal decsion-making (or as Sutherland terms them, definitions). Finally, the underlying premise of differential association theory is based on culture conflict.
There was a culture amongst the Enron executives that was deviant from the norm. “A lot can be said about the culture that the leaders at Enron created. 'They set the wrong role models, rewarded risky rule breaking and created a ‘win-at-all-cost’ system.” (Khedekar, 2010, p.166). Khedekar further decsries the coporate culture: ”crime was possible as a result of cooperation among senior management (2010, p.168) Criminal behavior could said to be have been learned under the auspices of this culture; as ”employees who followed the culture set by leaders and raked in profits were awarded bonuses while the ones who did not were fired” (Khedekar, 2010, p.166). So yes it is possible to say that crime was a learned behavior at Enron.
Khedekar,
D. (2010,October ). Corporate crime: A comparison of culture at
Enron and Satyam. Economics
& Business Journal:Inquiries & Perspectives :156: Volume 3
:Number 1.
Retrieved April 25, 2014 from
http://ecedweb.unomaha.edu/EBJIP2010Khedekar.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)