Most, if not all, acts of crime are categorized as deviant behaviour, for example, murder. Deviance is behaviour which drifts away from society’s established norms and values, but is not necessarily perceived as crime, such as queue jumping (Haralambos and Holborn 2009). The functionalist approach to crime and deviance is one of value consensus. They emphasise social stability and collective public values, a ‘collective conscience’. Functionalist define crime and deviance as functional and necessary to society as a whole, with just the right amount of crime to avoid anomie; normlessness.
Assess the usefulness of functionalist approaches in explaining crime The functionalist approach to analysing deviance and the causes of crime looks at society as a whole. It explains crime that the source of criminal behaviour lies in the nature of society itself rather than in psychology or biology. Functionalists such as Durkheim see deviance as an inevitable and necessary part of society and too little is unhealthy. Some also consider crime to have positive aspects for society. In this essay we will assess the usefulness of these functionalist theories, and look at how it helps us explain crime.
It can depend on the investigation being held, the place and the difficulty of being able to solve the case. The investigator mindset is to find out why the crime happen, how it could’ve been prevented, and also investigate all the evidence that was found. These concepts can associate with the optimal mindset of an investigator manifest by how much the investigator knows, how much training the investigators has, and the experience that the investigator already has. The more training and
Inchoate Offenses. Provide your opinion of whether or not criminal liability and punishment for inchoate offenses are “fair” or not. How do the concepts of actus reus and mens rea fit with inchoate offenses? Should someone charged with an inchoate offense suffer the same punishment as the primary actors of the crime? Should people be criminally convicted for the crime of conspiracy where no underlying crime actually occurs?
Many people ask, why does crime occur, who commits the crimes and why. We also ask the question of whether or not economic class, race, ect, has anything to do with why crime occurs. Theories have been conjured upon these acts to try to give meaning on why, what happens takes place. In this essay I would like to take the time to explain these theories to help others understand and maybe change their own viewpoints. Crime can affect the way individuals perceive others generally creating bias and prejudice within a person’s frame of thought; hopefully we can make someone think a little differently.
‘Outline and explain ways in which data about crime is collected’ Crime can be defined as deviant activities that break the law in any particular society. Finding out how much crime takes place isn’t easy, and attempts to measure crime can prove misleading. This doesn’t mean that crime statistics aren’t affective, but it does mean that no single measure can be fully relied upon. Many sociologists see crime statistics as a social construction, as collecting crime data is a result of the cultural expectations of society, and by understanding who commits crime and what sorts of crimes are committed, we can get a clearer picture of why people commit crime in the first place. Different sociologists have presented different theories and concepts to explain what drives a person to commit a crime, and research and statistics give us an idea of the type of crimes committed and the places that they’re most likely to occur.
Unit 24 - Assignment 1 Introduction For this assignment I will be describing the elements of a crime which are Mens Rea and Actus Reus. Mens Rea is Latin for 'guilty mind' and it is the mental thinking behind the crime which has been committed, it refers to the intentions of the person who committed the crime. For example, when someone commits theft their intention is to permanently deprive the owner/s of the object. Actus Reus is Latin for 'guilty act' and it can either be an act or a failure to act. For example, when someone commits theft they must've physically taken something.
As explained in item a, the labelling theory explains how actions become labelled as criminal or deviant. The labelling theory explains how crime and deviance is a social construct as the laws and norms are constructed by society. The theory can be seen as useful in explaining crime and deviance yet this can be disputed. First of all, the labelling theory aims to answer the question, why and how people get labelled. One researcher found that police made decisions on whether to arrest youth based on their physical cues.
Symbolic interactionism first emerged in the 1930s and began to grow around the 1960s. Unlike conventional functionalist criminology who are methodologically positivistic and rely on the Official Crime statistics as social facts, Interactionists views OCS as a social construction compiled by the police, courts and Criminal Justice System. Interactionists take a micro approach when studying crime and deviance as they are particularly interested in the studying individuals in society the process of interaction to discover why certain groups are more susceptible to deviancy than others. The term labelling theory derives from Interactionism which argues that individuals are presented with different labels, some of which are stigmatized such as a delinquent. This is the work of Becker who argues “Deviancy is not a quality of the act a person commits but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an ‘offender’.
What is the definition of justification? How does justification differ from an excuse? Compare and contrast the criteria between excuse and justification. What is criminal capacity? How does criminal capacity impact the defense process?