Whereas, Marxists believe that capitalism creates potential criminals. Functionalists believe that all crimes are functional and has both positive and negative effects to society. Durkheim, French sociologist, hold beliefs that “too much crime or deviance constitutes to a threat, too little is unhealthy”. The three main positives are that it reaffirms boundaries by the public degradation ceremonies such as criminal trails to remind everyone of social norms and to reinforce society’s toleration to deviance. Another positive is that crimes change values, when someone is prosecuted it results in public outcry which triggers sympathy, this changes values in society.
The inevitability of crime -Functionalists see too much crime as destabilising society; they also see crime as inevitable and universal. They believe that every society has some level of crime and deviance and a crime-free society is a contradiction in terms -Durkheim- views”crime is normal...an integral part of all healthy societies” -Two reasons crime& deviance are found in all societies: *Not everyone is equally socialised into shared norms and values, so some will be prone to deviate. *In complex modern societies, different groups develop their own subculture with distinctive norms and values so what the members of the subculture regard as normal, mainstream culture may see as deviant. -Durkheim’s –In modern society there is a tendency towards anomie (normlessness) whereby the rules governing behaviour become weaker and less clear-cut ,because modern societies have complex division of crime on of labour ,leading to individuals becoming different from each other, -This diversity means that shared culture or collective conscience is weakened, resulting in higher levels of crime and deviance, e.g. Durkheim sees anomie as a major cause of suicide in modern societies.
Parsons calls this agreement value consensus. One of the strengths of Functionalism is that it asserts that there are purposes for social conditions or facts. For example, under a functionalist point of view the newspaper deliverer and the sewer worker all contribute to the function of the entire unit without serving these purposes, the social structure would not function properly. However a weakness of this approach postmodernist would argue, that functionalism assumes that society is stable and orderly. As such this explanation of obtaining social order through a ''shared culture''
He was also one of the first to use crime statistics to collect data for experiments. Durkheim argues that crime is functional and a necessity to society rather than a pathological concern. He also states that criminality is a symptom of a diseased society and makes the reference that crime has been present throughout history in societies of all types; therefore crime must represent a condition of normality. Durkheim argues that crime is functional in the way that by punishing criminals, society reaffirms its own values. This being the case, if crimes were not committed then the crimes within a specific society would become indistinct.
Social Organized Crime Perspective Larry Fulse CJA /384 May 26, 2014 Dorothy Massey Social Institution is defined as an organizational system which functions to satisfy basic social needs by providing an ordered framework linking the individuals to the larger culture. This paper will provide more information as to how social institutions apply to organized crime, also which empirical and speculative theories are most applicable when applied to organized crime and criminal behavior. Organized crime within our social institution would exist because a small amount of the people who living within our society would willingly choose not to agree to abide by rules, regulations, morals, and laws both written and unwritten. Organized crime exists because and could be applied to our social institution. When we consider theories that are most applicable to the idea of a social institution and how they may apply to organized crime or criminal behavior in generally it is important to consider at least two theories.
There are many different theories of how to help prevent crime around the world. Choice theories are theories based on many beliefs that people have a choice. After reading our text; all the different theories the book talks about it comes down to one think for most of the choice theories; having the choice. The rational choice theory is one that is solely based on choice of the criminal. It is said that the criminals know what they are doing is wrong, and will end them with punishment by law in some form or another but see that the benefits of committing the crime are worth more than the punishment they will suffer for committing the crime.
Using material from item A and elsewhere assess the usefulness of sub-cultural theories in explaining sub-cultural crime and deviance in society today. Subcultures, such as the ones mentioned in item A consist of a group of people whom share the same norms and values together, yet oppose mainstream culture. Criminals are seen to become part of a subculture as their values are different to normal society. These criminal individuals have rejected society’s norms and invented their own as they feel that society has rejected them, which means they become materially deprived and blame society as it has not met their needs. However, the criminals resort to things such as burglary to maintain materialistic property.
Specific deterrence generally targets individuals who have been punished or currently being punished for a criminal act with the hope of preventing them from committing crimes in the near future. General deterrence separates itself in that it works to prevent people from engaging in criminal acts by setting an example. In order for the deterrence doctrine to present itself in a plausible manner, effectiveness of punishment must be indentified. Bentham and Beccaria discuss reasoning to why the deterrence doctrine upholds according to these three terms known as certainty, severity and celerity of punishment. Each category differs yet all remain equally as important in order for deterrence to occur.
Jock Young is the main key figure of Left Realism. It is similar to Marxists as they see society as unequal due to capitalism, but they believe social gradual change will overcome capitalism, as they are reformists. As a result of this it will help develop practical explanations for reducing crime rather than a revolution to abolish it. The central idea behind it is that ‘crime is a real problem’ and disadvanatged groups are the main victims and they must take it seriously which other sociologists are criticised for not doing so. Such as Traditional Marxists, who focus on corporate crimes but it neglects the working class crime and its effect.
The key message of this contribution is that more efforts should be undertaken to bridge the gap between the arbitrary empiricism of a variable driven criminology and the abstract writings of grand theorists. Key-words: analytical criminology, social mechanisms, micro-macro issues, middle-range theories, action oriented theory Theoretical improvement in the study of crime as social fact and individual act Why are some societies more crime-prone and why do some individuals commit acts of crime at a higher frequency then others? These questions remain fundamental for criminology as science and criminal policy. The answer to such questions