A Brief Note On The State Of Virginia Department Of The Labor Bureau Of Labor Statistics Website

Akers & Sellers (2013) noted that there are various common theories that are pertinent to the study of crime as the extents of crime explanations range from the genetic/biological through to the economic and social perspective. Howitt (2012) divided these theories into four categories: macro-level or societal theories; locality or community level theories; group and socialisation influence theories; and individual level theories. This essay first describes the major theories of crime in the discussion section, which also discusses the impacts of crime at the individual and societal level, followed by conclusion based on the previous discussion.

The two primary data sources discuss in this abstract will be the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS). These data sources are reporting mechanism that tracks criminal activities in the United States and foreign countries. To articulate why crime exists and the extent of a crime, criminologists use records that are collected, compiled, and analyzed by government agencies such as the federal government’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (Siegel, Larry J., 2006, p 31). The official data is used to focus on the social forces that affect crime in regards to the relationship between crime and poverty, criminologist uses the data which provides

Each of these three contemporary sociological theories of crime are similar in that they focus mainly on crime in poor or disadvantaged areas. This focus is obvious with social conflict theory and social disorganization theory but not as much with rational choice theory although it is there. With rational choice theory the concept of what is to be gained

Merton’s theory came after the 1930s depression in America, the opinion in society at this time in order, to gain financial prosperity can be obtained by those individuals willing to work hard. However, in reality lots of individuals were at the time experiencing severe poverty, because the opportunities to prosper was not available. So, in truth it can be argued that Merton’s theory is more focused on social context, and it does not explain crime in multiple societies, and in different eras in history. (Carrabine, 2009, p80)

The book’s fourth chapter, “Where have All the Criminals Gone?” in particular, includes several subjects the authors acknowledge will “provoke a variety of reactions, ranging from disbelief to revulsion, and a variety of objections” (140). By this point, readers already know the authors’ view that the legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade caused the drop in crime during the 1990s because this idea first appears on page four. Rather than simply explaining why abortion lowered crime rates, Levitt and Dubner use a chart to introduce seven explanations commonly cited by experts for the sudden drop in crime during the 1990s, then examine the authenticity of each one. The first possible cause is “a fairly uncontroversial one: the strong economy”

Another factor that might have led to the increase in crime is the increase in the population of the poor. Generally, the poor tend to be susceptible to crime more than the well-established considering their low levels of income and lack of employment. Their increase in the county will definitely lead to an increase in the crime rate (Braga, 2006).

In chapter 4 the chapter considers a variety of possible explanations for the significant drop in crime and crime rates that occurred in the 1990s. Based on articles that appeared in the country’s largest newspapers, the authors compile a list of the leading, commonly offered explanations. The next step is to systematically examine each explanation and consider whether available data support the explanation. What the authors, in fact, demonstrate is that in all but three cases–increased reliance on prisons, increased number of police, and changes in illegal drug markets–correlation was erroneously interpreted as causation and in some cases, the correlation wasn’t even that strong.

The aim of this essay is to compare, contrast and evaluate two sociological theories of crime causation and two psychological theories of crime causation.

Unemployment is a stressful and difficult matter. Sometimes being unemployed is out of your control. Most times the thought of having no financial support or ability is the hardest part of unemployment, luckily you’re not alone. The West Virginia government is here to help you through these times! Insurance programs as well as benefits are offered towards the unemployed whilst you look for a job. Discussed here will be the type of program offered, eligibility, and how to receive the benefits given.

When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior. Psychologists have come up with various theories and reasons as to why individuals commit crimes. These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behavior, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory,.

In this essay I will examine how government polices since the last general election have impacted crime levels. The economic model of crime pioneered by Gary S. Becker in 1968 describes how criminals weigh up the costs and benefits of criminal activity against the legal alternatives. The model has four main aspects in it, which are: the utility derived from legal work (U (W)), the likelihood of getting caught when engaging in criminal activity (p), utility from successful crime (U(W ͨ )) and the disutility from punishment when getting caught (U(S))

What makes people want to commit crimes? Are criminals any different than us? Does committing a crime mean there is something wrong with you, such as a psychological problem? Do all criminals have the same kind of personality? Is a criminal born or made? Questions like this and many more will be elaborated on throughout this paper.

In this study, we will attempt to examine the relationship, if any, between criminal activity and the unemployment rate. My hypothesis is that higher unemployment leads to higher crime rates. Our belief stems from the fact that the cities in the United States with the highest crime rates all have a poverty level higher than the U.S. average of 15.1%.2 For Example, Detroit had the highest reported violent crime rate of 2,072/100,000 people, with almost 40% of their population living below the poverty level.3