Examining realist theories Using material from item A and elsewhere assess the value of the right realist approach to crime and deviance (21) Right realism is a conservative and extreme functionalist view of crime. They see it as a growing problem that destroys societies. Sociologists such as James Q Wilson have stressed the point that it cannot be tolerated. The right realist views closely correspond with those of the neo-conservative views in the 70s and 80s. They both argue that ‘nothing works’ right realists are more concerned with solving crime rather than understanding the causes.
The origin of social disorganization theory can be traced to the work of Shaw and McKay, who concluded that disorganized areas marked by divergent values and transitional populations produce criminality. Strain theories view crime as resulting from the anger people experience over their inability to achieve legitimate social and economic success. These theories hold that most people share common values and beliefs but the ability to achieve them is differentiated throughout the social structure. The best known strain theory is Merton's, which describes what happens when people have inadequate means to satisfy their needs. Cultural deviance theories hold that a unique value system develops in lower class areas.
Using material from item A and elsewhere, assess different Marxist views of the relationship between crime and social class. (21) The traditional Marxists believe that the main cause of crime is the capitalist society. They believe that crime is inevitable because capitalism is criminogenic, by it’s very nature it causes crime. David Gordon argues that crime is a rational response to the capitalist system and hence it is found in all social classes, even thought the statistics make it seem to be a largely working class phenomenon,. Poverty may mean that crime is the only way that the working class can survive, as crime may e the only way that they can obtain the consumer goods encouraged by the capitalist advertising, resulting in utilitarian crimes such as theft.
However subcultural theorists developed this idea claiming that people experiencing strain seek different forms of success. More specifically Cloward and Ohlin put forward the idea of the 'illegitimate opportunity structure’, which they used to explain subcultural crime. This structure was operable outside of the mainstream structure and ultimately lead to the attainment of success and money through deviant means. For example, Cloward and Ohlin argued that organized crimes such as the drugs trade could be explained by failures in mainstream capitalism. Cloward and Ohlin argue, that the majority of criminals involved in the drugs trade were unable to succeed within capitalism and were driven to an illegitimate means of obtaining wealth.
Outline and evaluate functionalist explanations of crime and deviance Crime and deviance can be defined as behaviour which breaks the law or goes against society's norms and values. Downes and Rock defined deviance as behavior which may be considered as banned or controlled behavior which is likely to attract disapproval or punishment. Crime is harder to define, however Pease (2002) defined crime and deviance as an action that is deemed so disturbing by citizens or disruptive to society that state intervention is justified. The macro perspective of Functionalism sees society working like the human body, this is described through the organic analogy. The agents of socialization work together to form equilibrium within society.
‘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.
Firstly Marxists believe that poverty may mean that crime is the only way the working class can survive therefore this results in the form of a relationship between crime and social class. Moreover crime may be the only way they can obtain the consumer goods encouraged by
General Strain Theory Can were on lives or the lack of money cause someone to commit a crime? Or can the stress of losing someone trigger so many emotions that it will cause someone to kill in revenge? According to the General Strain Theory this may be the case. Criminology today an integrative introduction defines Strain as the pressure that individuals feel to reach socially determined goals (Schmalleger, 2012, p.157). General Strain Theory is considered to be a social structure theory which looks at the formal and informal economic and social arrangements (or structure) of society as the root causes of crime and deviance (Schmalleger, 2012, p.151).
When people think about crime several things come to mind: murder, rape, drugs and assault. People should not forget that white collar and corporate crimes such as embezzlement and toxic waste dumping are equally as important. If you asks those same people, they would agree that crime hurts society and that laws where created to protect society. Unfortunately, citizens tend to forget that crime is socially constructed and how society perceives the social problem of crime determines how the problem is treated. According to the articles “Making slave Labor Fly,” and “Crime and Policy,” politicians have devised many ways to control how society believes social problems should be treated to further their own agenda.
In the article titled “The Folly of Capital Punishment”, Jeffrey Reinam concludes that capital punishment is immoral to our society; and thus, should not be legalized. Reinam reasons the death penalty is unjust, inhuman, and goes against the progress of civilization. Reinam’s primary argument and rebuttal to Ernest Van Den Haags deterrence argument, is that the death penalty goes against the advancement of civilization. Reinam explains that throughout history we take steps to "lower tolerance for one's own pain and that suffered by others". Due to the states high visibility, size, and moral authority, it is capable to have an impact on citizens beyond the immediate act it authorizes.