Assault In Wesocket Case Summary

Frank Schmalleger explains the theory of social disorganization as one that depicts both social change as well as conflict, and lack of any agreement as the origin of its cause for both criminal behavior as well as nonconformity to society and closed associated with the ecological school of criminology (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 152). The philosophy behind the organization and structure of a society and how that contributes to criminal behavior within society is by stressing poverty, economic conditions, lack of education, lack of skills, are not sought-after in the work place, and divergent cultural values. Criminal behavior is the result of the person’s assignment of location within the structure of society.

Based on the social disorganization theory; Shaw and McKay account for high crime begins with poverty, low socioeconomic status and the inability to “control the teenage population,” (Sampson, 2016). Shaw and McKay also knew that within the community, delinquency was a trait that was picked-up by and from other delinquents. Furthermore, if the ability to control young

Social disorganization theory was established by Shaw and Mckay (1942) in their famous work “Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas”. The main argument of the social disorganization theory is that, the place where people live will influence the individual’s behavior, and this may lead them to crimes. More precisely, certain characteristics of the neighborhood/community will strengthen or weaken the informal social control within the community, and this has mediating effect on crimes.

According to NJRS, aggravated assault victimization in 2004 (population 1,418, 660) occurred at a rate of 5.9/1000 age 12 and over, and in 2012 (population 996,110) and 2013 (population 994,220) the rate was 3.8/1000 age 12 and over (Truman 2013). According to the National Crime Victimization Survey for 2009, the rate of victimization for aggravated assault in 2000 was 5.7/1000 people age 12 and over (Truman 2009). In 2008, the rate was 3.3/10000 people age 12 and over and 2009 was 3.2/1000 age 12 and over (Truman 2009). The total number of aggravated assault of reported victimizations in 2008 was 839,940 and 823,340 in 2009 (Truman 2009). Victimizations declined drastically from 2000 to 2008 and very little from 2008 to 2009. NCVS showed that in 2009 that black males aged

When it comes to juvenile delinquency an adolescent personality is usually impacted from different factors such as early child hood experiences of witnessing a crime, seeing a violent act, being the victim of a crime, or being around others or family who engaged in criminal activity, these factors can either create an adolescent with a positive or negative attitude, or an anti-social behavior which could create a path for a delinquent behavior (Wilson, p. 34). A study has shown that family interactions accounts for about 40 percent of the cause of an adolescent with an anti-social behavior, the study also shown that aggressiveness which is a common trait of adolescent who engage in delinquent acts is usually created from peer influences (Wilson, p. 34).

Juvenile delinquency is a social issue in the United States today. Juvenile delinquency, is when “a violation of the law is committed by a juvenile and is not punishable by death or life imprisonment” (Juvenile Delinquency). The juvenile system is different from the adult system in many way and most juvenile delinquents are from the age of ten to the age of seventeen (Juvenile Delinquent). Once the delinquent or anyone is at the age of eighteen, they are considered to be an adult. Therefore, in the justice system they are tried as an adult. There are many different reasons why a child would commit crime, such as mental and physical factors, peer influence, home conditions, neighborhood environment and school conditions. Teens are greatly influenced by the interactions and surroundings they are around. Their behaviors can result from the parent and/or their peer influences. Parents play a great role in the child’s life and a teen’s peers also play a strong role in how the teen behaves when the parents are not insight. This research will examine links between the social environment of teens and how it influences the teens actions and behavior which leads them to commit an offense.

Barton (2010) tested the social disorganization theory on college campuses. The study uses the Unified Crime Report

To explain the increase in youth crime rates, Jacob attempts to articulate a relationship between social disorganization theory and Canadian youth crime with the purpose of explaining conditions that potentially have an influence on these statistics.

In 1942, Clifford Shaw and Henry D. McKay produced Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, which aimed to explain crime in urban communities using social disorganization theory. Elliot and Merrill (1934) define social disorganization as “a breakdown in the equilibrium of forces, a decay in the social structure, so that old habits and forms of social control no longer function effectively” (p.20). Using this definition and the ecological approach, Shaw and McKay argue that low economic status, ethnic heterogeneity, and residential mobility led to the disruption of community social organization (Shaw and McKay 1942). This disruption is what essentially leads to delinquency and further crime. Numerous empirical studies and tests were conducted in order to determine the validity of the theory. Studies done in the United States and in other countries have also shown support for the theory. In addition, the theory has been extended and revised by multiple scholars and applied to nonmetropolitan areas. The numerous studies and tests of social disorganization theory will prove whether the theory is applicable to other metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas and whether the theory is still applicable to the modern era.

Social disorganization theory studies can help government and law enforcement policy-makers make informed decisions from the evidence to form strategies that help prevent criminal activity in disadvantaged communities to make it safer for

The social structure theory deliberates delinquency as a gathering of the person’s dealings with numerous groups, organizations, and process in the society. Any person irrespective of their prominence in life is likely to become delinquents if they continue with negative social affiliations. Every aspect of the society, social and economic must be viewed using the social structure theories to find the cause of crime and deviance. The social structure theories consist of four types which include social disorganization theory, anomie theory, differential association theory, and labeling theory. Several theories offer different answers to this delinquent of influential the key features of a social group.

David O. Friedrichs provided more accurate definition of occupational deviance because the term seems to be applied to activities drifted away from the original meaning of White Collar crime. It’s blended with the term conventional crime. Edwin Sutherland introduced the concept of white-collar crime in 1939. There were conceptual confusions with the term occupational crime, occupational deviance, and workplace crime because these terms are combined with white-collar crime. Friedrichs (2002) defined occupational deviances as “characterized as activity undertaken for one’s own gain, or to cope with workplace stress, and not for the benefit of one’s employer or organization” (p.249).

Social Disorganization theory has its roots in urban ecology and Burgess’s concentric model. As part of the positivist paradigm of criminology, it poses a scientific examination of the connection of social disorganization and crime mediated by structural factors. The macro-level research concludes that a weakening of social bonds between an individual and institutions of socialization will lead to delinquency. Over time, there has been much empirical support for the theory and extensions have been made to include more reliable measures of social disorganization within a community. This paper will discuss the origins of the theory developed by Shaw and McKay, then move forward to prominent empirical support, social disorganization research on suburban areas and lead up to valid criticism of the theory. Finally, there will be an examination of the policy implications originally posed and a proposal towards a more integrated approach addressing causes for social disorganization through the critical paradigm of criminology.

Deviance among adolescents in our society has many different causes and multiple theories throughout the history of criminal justice have been developed to attempt to explain, prevent and reduce incidents of status offenses and juvenile delinquency. There are theories varying from individual, to social and environmental. All of these theories have their merits and contribute in one way or another to the advancement of the understanding of juvenile delinquency and the treatment and prevention of delinquency within our society. Those that have proven to be successful we have applied in our justice system while those that are proven over time to be ineffective or defective we have discarded. There is no single theory that applies to all delinquent behavior in all situations. It is best to determine what theory may work best in each specific case based on the individual and the specific situation. Dodge’s information processing theory of social problem solving (Crick and Dodge 1994) was developed by Kenneth Dodge in an attempt to explain the interaction between the child’s cognitive development and their social environment. This theory combines elements of both the individual and the social environment and examines how these two variables interact with each other to present a model for juvenile delinquency. During my investigation of this topic I discovered that an adapted model of Dodge’s theory existed that seemed to be more encompassing of the causes of juvenile delinquency,

The complainant gave over all the email correspondence to the police. A number of them had cover headers and accordingly the police couldn 't examine them any further. Other than there was no email that could be taken after to Kolkata where the charged was staying as indicated by the complainant 's version. However the examining group could follow some of these messages to the corporate office of a substantial concrete organization and a habitation in Mumbai. An assault was directed at these premises.