I
chose the City of New York to examine in terms of breaking crime
cycles. I chose New York City due to the “zero tolerance” method
used to reduce crime rates; a policy based upon the “broken
windows” theory. In addition, I chose this policy to examine due
to the fact that Deblasio has declared his intent to end the program,
so in effect we are looking at a program that is complete. Finally,
here has been a good deal written examining the policy from both pro
and con positions.
Before
I explain which of the Chicago School theories are macro-level or
micro-level, I will differentiate the concepts. “A
micro-level theory explains why some individuals engage in crime
and others do not. In contrast, a macro-level theory attempts
to explain differences in groups” (Vito & Maahs, 2011, p. 12).
The theories to define as macro-level or micro-level are: culture
conflict, social disorganization, cultural transmission theory,
social control theory, differential association theory,
and
symbolic interactionism theory.
Culture conflict is described by Williams and McShane “as a major
social process, set in motion by the differences in values and
cultures among groups of people “( 2014, p.53) They continue to
explain that “the legal definition of crime is but the conduct norm
for one particular social group” 2014, p.54) We can thus define
the culture conflict theory to be a macro-level theory. Culture
conflict is a prime example of why crimes should be defined on the
basis of mala in se offenses, and not mala prohibita offenses. A
specific example of culture conflict would be this past weekend's
incident at the Bundy Ranch; a rancher who doesn't understand why the
government would regulate the size of his herd to 1/15 of it's
original size under the auspices of protecting a turtle; a turtle
that the same government was euthanizing due to overpopulation.
Social
disorganization theory “is based on a conception of primary
relationships similar to those found in a village. If relationships
in the family and friendship groupings are good, neighborhoods are
stable and cohesive, and people have a sense of loyalty to the area,
then social organization is sound” (Williams & McShane, 2014,
p.50). Because the focus is on the individual response to the
presence of stable relationships, we can describe social
disorganization theory as a micro-level theory.
Cultural transmission theory can be described to be a sub-theory of
social disorganization theory. “the process by which social
disorganization affects juveniles and leads to delinquency, commonly
referred to as “cultural transmission theory.” According to this
theory, juveniles who live in socially disorganized areas have
greater opportunities for exposure to those who espouse delinquent
and criminal values”(Williams & McShane, 2014, p.50). Again,
as the focus is on the individual that commits a crime this theory is
also a a micro-level theory.
Social
control theory is based on the premise that “people are somehow
socialized into the major values and lifeways of society. Deviance
occurs when socialization somehow breaks down.” (Williams &
McShane, 1998, p.268). This theory, based on the individual, is also
a a micro-level theory.
Differential
association theory is similar to cultural transmission theory, in
that criminal behavior “is learned” and that
“The principal part of the learning of criminal behavior occurs
within intimate personal groups. Williams & McShane, 1998, p.80).
There is another similarity in that differential association theory
is also a micro-level theory.
“Symbolic
interactionism developed from a belief that human behavior is the
product of purely social symbols communicated between individuals. A
basic idea of symbolic interactionism is that the mind and the self
are not innate but are products of the social environment “
(Williams & McShane, 2014, p.52). Finally, symbolic
interactionism is a micro-level theory.
There
are three commonalities to Chicago School theories: the theories are
based on Positivist grounds; they are based on consensus, or the
concept that consensus “is the initial pattern of human behavior”
(Williams & McShane, 2014, p.56); and finally, with the exception
of culture conflict theory, the theories are micro-level theories.
I
don't feel that income disparity is a cause for crime at all. For
example, “someone
in New York would have to earn more than $21 per hour to be better
off than they would be on welfare.” (Tanner, 2013, para. 3). When
I was making that equivalent salary, I was a troubleshooter/backup
manager for a high volume IT data center. There may be a correlated
factor; victimization surveys show that higher rates of crime are
linked to higher rates of population density. (I am stil digging
through my PDF's for the source, but I remember using this data last
quarter)
Social
control theories have more to do with crime then do social
disorganization theories. My opinion on this is based on my concept
that an individual makes a free will decision to violate social
norms. Having said that I will not claim that social disorganization
does not play a factor. Kelling and Wilson describe the “broken
windows” concept as demonstrated by Zimbardo in the Bronx, New York
City. A car was “ car in the Bronx was attacked by "vandals"
within ten minutes of its "abandonment. (1982, para. 14) This
phenomenon is not limited to New York; “In 1990, eight years after
Wilson and Kelling first presented the "Broken Windows"
theory, Northwestern University Political Science Professor Wesley
Skogan published "Disorder and Decline: Crime and the Spiral of
Decay
in American Neighborhoods." Using neighborhood surveys and
field observations from six major U.S. cities, Skogan confirmed
Wilson and Kelling's hypothesis: that causal relationship exists not
only between disorder and fear, but also between disorder and serious
crime.” (Orlando, 1997, p.7). However, it is still the criminal
decides whether or not to “take advantage” of a poorly policed
situation. Therefore, I will lean more towards social control
theory.
References
Kelling,
G. & Wilson, J. (1982, March 1). Broken windows: The police and
neighborhood safety. The
Atlantic. Retrieved
April 15, 2014 from
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/?single_page=true
Orlando,
J. (1997). Fighting crime from the ground up: The "Zero
Tolerance" approach.
GW Policy Perspectives. Retrieved
April 15, 2014 from
ww.policy-perspectives.org/article/download/4187/2937
Tanner,
M. (2013, August 2013). When welfare pays better than work. Cato
Institute.
Retrieved April 14, 2014 from
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/when-welfare-pays-better-work
Vito,
G. & Maahs, J. (2011). Criminology: Theory, research, and policy.
Jones & Bartlett Publishers
Williams,
F. & McShane, M. (2014) Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson
No comments:
Post a Comment