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?

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.

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

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/

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

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

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.

References

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. (1998) Criminology theory: Selected classic readings (2nd edition). Anderson Publishing Co.

Williams, F. & McShane, M. (2014) Criminology theory (6th edition). Pearson

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?
  

A social control theorist would explain that a person's environment has a lot to do with a WHY a person might commit a crime, not necessarily as a defense for the behavior. “...the rise of the study of criminal justice as a discipline helped move criminology in a more pragmatic and system-oriented direction. The increase in the government’s interest and funding for criminal justice projects and crime fighting served to enhance the pragmatic nature of the movement. As a result, criminology was relatively free of theoretical work and until about 1990 was left with its final theoretical inventions from the 1960s (Williams, 1984). The theory meeting nearly everyone’s personal explanation for criminal behavior was Hirschi’s version of social control theory. “(Williams & McShane, 2014, p.162). In addition, the presence of crime within a society is considered a normal situatiom.

• 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?
  

A social control theorist would want to know about Gardner's family and how it disciplined him during his formative years as well his peer groups as a child and especially as a teenager. This information would give the social control theorist an idea of the social norms that he learned as well as the punishments and rewards used to teach him those norms.

• 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?
  

Yes, the environment, especially as a young person, has an effect on a person's ability to live by social norms as opposed to deviant standards. Turner discusses the factors that affect a person's resiliency to even bad environments. He categorizes them as ”four different domains: (1) intrapersonal; (2) family; (3) peer; and (4) neighborhood.”(2001, p.28)

• If Gardner, frustrated with his life, had taken up a career of crime, which criminological theories could have been utilized to defend his actions?
  

No theories could DEFEND criminal actions, but had Gardner turned to crime we could use several ideas to EXPLAIN his behavior. If we use differential association theory, we sould compare “bad” Gardner to “good” Brescia, who “might have learned positive values from people who might have been close to him. He, therefore, refrained from ever doing anything against the law. ( South University Online, 2010, para. 2) We could have then have then looked to “bad” Gardner's past associates to see if they were deviantlly oriented. Similarly, we could have used social learning theory to discuss the concept 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.We discuss here six basic principles: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, negative punishment, discriminative stimuli, and schedules.” (Williams & McShane, 2014, p.179). We could have then attempted to examine those factors in young “bad” Gardner's life

• What social control mechanisms might Gardner have encountered in his early life that could have aided his behavior later in life?
  

Family, school, peers that would have reinforced social bonding, church, the support of neighbors, and and a variety of youth programs could have all played a part in why Gardner chose to perservere in his 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

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 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

Which criminological theories best describe Oprah's life and success? Why?



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

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

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 and anomie theory have a similarity in that they can describe an individual's deviance based upon reaction to societal norms; however, they can be differentiated in that labeling theory is based upon the assumption that this deviance can be based upon the individual's reaction to being labeled by society as a criminal, while anomie theory explains deviance as a reaction to the strain placed on the individual when contrasting the goals set by society on the individual, and that individual's ability to attain those goals within the guidelines set by society. Thus, labeling theory places more emphasis on how social norms shape the individual.
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?
  

Labeling theory is effecitve at explaing the situation under the theory's assumptions: Tim 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) Thus it can be seen that police are looking for suspects based upon labeling premises, which are then justified by making the arrests. It aalso present the danger that an individual may be labeled with courtesy stigma for being associated with a suspect, annd on the officer's radar in the future

• 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?
  

I think that this differs from case to case. The head of Travis County's DWI unit within the DA's office, Rosemary Lehmberg, was arrested for a hit and run DWI, and yet remained head of the unit.

• Could expanding the number of activities that are labeled as crimes actually create more criminals rather than deterring crime? Why?
  

Criminalization of activity that had previously been normalized will certainly create more “criminals” in a technical sense. Logically speaking, the more “crimes” that exist means more opportunity to violate those laws.

• 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?
    

There is a difference of opinion on the effectiveness of shaming programs. Supporters claim that “When those techniques work, as Cornell University law professor Stephen P. Garvey explored in an analysis of shaming punishments, society saves money because offenders do not have to be locked away for eons, victims have a sense of being made whole again and punishment becomes more than retribution (Cole, 2006, para.6). But what factors make a shaming program work? The first factor would have to be the individual himself; does the individual place higher values on his own outlook on life, or is he susceptable to the views of his peers. The second factor would have to be whether his subculture shares the “shame” assigned by the criminal jutice system. Culture conflict suggests that a subculture does not share all the values of socity as a whole, and shaming will not work in which the subcultural mores of a neighborhood of a different ethnicity do not assign a criminal marker to the behavior being punished by the criminal justice system.

• 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?
  

Culture conflict theory suggests that a homogenous community will have better chances of having shaming programs work, in that there are no competing moral values. In addition, a community that is smaller will have stronger interpersonal relationships then a larger community in which there are more strangers. Stronger relationships will carry more moral weight upon the individual.
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

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

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

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

Week 3 Discussion 1 - Criminological Theory.

***Note for Blog*** Discussion was based on Martha Stewart's insider trading***

• Can differential association theory be used to explain Stewart's criminal behavior? Why or why not?

I think the primary factor in Stewart's criminal behavior was her rational decsion to commit a crime; however, apects of differential association theory can be used to decribe the environment she was in. 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). (Williams & McShane, 2014) From the abnormally high rate of insider scandals at the time, we can see that the potential for such associates to exist in her environment. To counter, though, it must be stressed that Sutherland viewed cultural conflict as a primary factor in his concept of differential association theory. Williams and McShane assert that “ Sutherland viewed cultural conflict as producing social disorganization (the 'inconsistencies and lack of harmony') and, thus, crime” and further that “Sutherland viewed crime as a consequence of conflicting values; that is, the individual followed culturally approved behavior that was disapproved (and set in law) by the larger American society.” (2014, p69). The Martha Stewarts and other insider trading criminals of Wall Street were members of the subculture that SET cultural values for society, and couldn't be interpeted as being in conflict with them...except perhaps as we look at them from the view of strain/anomie theory.

• Can anomie or the different variants of strain theory be used to explain Stewart's criminal behavior? Why or why not?

Again, I think that Stewart made a rational decision to break the law, but that her case can be described in terms of anomie/strain theory. The “strain” in this theiry results from conflicts between cultural goals (such as wealth and societal standing) and institutional guidelines. Merton states that “To say that these two elements, culture goals and institutional norms, operate jointly is not to say that the ranges of alternative behaviors and aims bear some constant relation to one another. The emphasis upon certain goals may vary independently of the degree of emphasis upon institutional means” (Williams & McShane, 1998, p.124). Merton then goes on to clarify that “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). This can be decribed as Adoption II, or innovation. And yet again, I must assert that it was Stewarts decision set the value of her cultural goals ahead of the institutional guidelines to legitimately attain them.

• Can other sociological theories, such as focal concern, differential opportunity, and subculture theories, potentially explain Stewart's behavior? How?

Cloward, Ohlin, and Miller seemed to focus on specifically on lower-class environments, which do not apply to Stewart.
For a disturbing perspective on Cloward's views, research the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” for destroying a capitalist republic, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward-Piven_Strategy

• Can some white-collar crimes be more appropriately explained through sociological theories of crime? If yes, what types and how? If no, why?

White-collar crime can be more appropriately be explained through Classical rationales than through Positivist rationales. Indeed, the prevalence of “wealthy” criminals can be seen as a counter-example to many Positivist schools in which poverty is THE cause of crime. There are other potential factors as well; America is subject to the guiding myth of the “outlaw hero”, and popular culture has a long list of Hollywood movies in which the bad guy is the hero of the movie. Not all of these movies have a machine gun wielding gangster as the hero, either; the hero of 1987's Wall Street was a white-collar criminal who famously decried “Greed is good!”
I also wanted to note that Stewart was convicted of making false statements to the federal government, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to make false statements and obstruct justice. Although these crimes were based on her insider trading deviancy, they are crimes against the state, and in a state that is acting in good faith, these are more serious offenses then insider trading. It is also likely that Stewart was a scapegoat for the finacial industry during a time when the market had crashed, and people were looking for heads. Following this idea, it is possible that Stewart would not have been investigated in a "business-as-usual" environment. .

References

Williams, F. & McShane, M. (1998) Criminology Theory: Selected Classic Readingss (2nd edition). Anderson Publishing Co.

Williams, F. & McShane, M. (2014) Criminology Theory (6th edition). Pearson

Week 2 Follow-up - Criminological Theory

• Social disorganization and social control theories are both considered positivist theories of crime. Why do you think this is so? How are the ideas of these theories different from those of classical school theorists?
  

Social disorganization and social control theories are both considered positivist theories of crime because they are based upon empirical research of crime and what causes it; whereas Classical thought is focused on legal frameworks and the prevention of crime. There is also the issue of free will, as the Social disorganization and social control theories both seek to assign the cause of an individual's decision making on environmental conditions while the Classical school would assign the cause of the decision making to that individual's rational thought process.

• In their article "Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas," Clifford R. Shaw and Henry D. McKay hold “too much focus upon the individual delinquent” as the reason why our large cities have undiminished queues of juvenile offenders. Do you agree with their assessment? Why?
  

I disagree with Shaw and McKay on this point. First of all, they list five factors which contribute to social disorganization, and thus crime. These factors are: poverty, cultural heterogeneity, physical dilapidation, high mobility, and “other” social ills ( such as high rates of disease and high infant mortality). My objection to certain of these factors causing crime would be that they share a common factor with the decision to commit crime in of itself, which is low impulse control. People with low impulse control make decisions which impact their level of economic stability, their education, their health...and whether they stay within the bounds of legal behavior. Secondly, there is no evidence that policy based on social disorganization theory has any effect on reducing crime. Despite $628 million in private grants (Perry, 2013, para 35), a federal building program worth $258 million(Detroit News, 2013, para 116), and approximately $325 million a year on social services (Nichols, 2012, para 8), Detroit remains “...plagued by violent crime, bad schools, abandoned buildings, foreclosures, and unemployment”. (Perry, 2013, para 11).
There are other criticisms of Shaw and McKay. “First of all, social disorganization as an explanation of delinquency downplays the significance of ethnic and cultural factors. ... In addition, the duplication of Shaw and McKay's work in different countries has usually supported their argument that delinquent rates are highest in areas with economic decline and instability. However, such research has not reproduced the findings of decreasing rates from the center of the city outward. In fact, in some countries the wealthy are often near the center of the city, while the poorer zones of the city are found near its fringes. Not to mention, Shaw and McKay's work does not address nondelinquency in delinquency areas. The large percentage of nondelinquents in delinquent areas should be addressed if this theory is to be considered a major explanation of delinquency. “ (Wong, 2011, para. 7)

• What five environmental stressors most impact crime in a community and those who inhabit it? Why?
  

Poverty, cultural heterogeneity, physical dilapidation, high mobility, and “other” social ills ( such as high rates of disease and high infant mortality). I disagree with the premise as explained in the last paragraph.

• Explain how your views surrounding the following have changed:
  
• Causes of community decay.
  

I have had no changes on my views as to the causes of community decline

• Strategies used in attempting to combat community decay.
  

I have had no changes on my views as to ways of combating neighborhood decay.

• Complexities involved in community efforts to reverse cycle of decay and crime.
  

There are so many factors that would be involved in such efforts that it would be easy to jump on one factor as a critical element to recovery; however, my views have not changed.

• Approaches of macrolevel and microlevel theorists toward crime.
  

To be honest, when I first read about symbolic interactionism theory, it sounded like academic gobbletygook to me, a multisyllabic version of Bill Clintons' “it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is'”. However, as I was attempting to explain this theory in the last paper, I ran across the following statement, “HÜTTERMANN's (2000) ethnographic study on "street corner police" has shown this for the police. Interactions between police and male juveniles of a so called "street-corner gang" are not only determined by the public assignment to control, but just as much by a culture of masculinity that is as evident within the police force as among the young men of the "street corner gang. (Meuser & Löschper, 2002, Para 15). And I “got it”. Aggressive and violent youth may not understand police as a symbol of authority of law, but they can understand the possibility of possible harm to themselves from conflict with a stronger (or better organized) males. I can see the attempts of the other schools to explain crime, but overall, it seems like they explain human behavior within a criminal framework, not the cause of crime itself. The theory that made the most sense to me was the culture conflict theory, as this fits in with my distaste for “crime” as defined and legislated on mala prohibita grounds.

References

Meuser, M. & Löschper, G. (2002, January). Introduction: Qualitative research in criminology. Forum:Qualitative Social Research: ?Volume 3, No. 1, Art. 12. Retrieved April 17, 2014 from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/876/1906

Nichols, D. (2012, January 12). Funding at risk for Detroit's social services. Retrieved April 19, 2014 from http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news?ContentRecord_id=d19078af-a3ef-4432-a181-3e6b9ac804da&ContentType_id=abb8889a-5962-4adb-abe8-617da340ab8e&Group_id=2b5f5ef9-5929-4863-9c07-277074394357

Perry, S. (2013, October 20). Detroit tests what foundations can do to rescue troubled cities. The Chronicle of Philanthropy. Retrieved April 19, 2014 from https://philanthropy.com/article/Can-Philanthropy-Rescue/142415/

The Detroit News. (2013, October 4). Six decades in Detroit: How abandonment, racial tensions and financial missteps bankrupted the city. Retrieved April 19, 2014 from http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20131004/METRO01/310040001

Wong, C. (2011). Clifford R. Shaw and Henry D. McKay: The social disorganization theory. Center for Spacially Integrated Social Science. Retrieved April 19, 2014 from http://www.csiss.org/classics/content/66