Can Crime Be An Act Of Resistance?

As human beings we all see and hear about crimes from a day to day basis. We all question why we have crime and what makes a person commit a crime.

No human being is born with an innate desire to commit crime; growing up in an impoverished community with subpar education and little opportunity

The motivation of criminals encompasses more than one common denominator, however, the degree of culpability and causation are within close proximity of one another. People every day engage in illicit acts for a myriad of reasons that run the gamut from white-collar crimes such as embezzling large sums of money to retail thefts. Gang related and drug-crimes that result in violence have plagued metropolitan areas throughout American. There is never any justification for taking someone’s life unless it is in self-defense, but people kill indescribably for material goods or money. Is it the Americans’ insatiable appetite and relentless pursuit of obtaining wealth and prosperity in achieving the American dream? Yes and no. For some people, this is the underlining-motivator for committing criminal acts regardless of the consequences. The perception of wealth in America as a viable solution for resolving problems is a mirage not a remedy. Even though this is a common known cliché that “money doesn’t buy happiness,” people continue to risk their freedom and commit criminal acts for such a dream. These are just a few irrational explanations of why people under the general strain theory, whether first offenders, or career criminals commit crimes. There are many exceptions, such as domestic violence, sexual assault, mental health problems, drug and alcohol addiction that contribute to criminal behavior as well.

What makes a someone want to commit a crime? Many things go into the makings of a criminal. There is more to it than just their background, ethnicity, and what others think of them all play a role. How does “stigma” explain the social construction of crime? What is racial profiling? Does the social construction of crime have real consequences?

Poverty fosters large crime rates. Where you find poverty, you often find crime. Urban areas are commonly known to be densely populated. High population along with the close proximity of businesses provide criminals with larger amounts of potential targets. For many impoverished people, the potential benefits of crime outweigh the risks of being caught. The pressing need for material goods, such as food, can steer people to commit crimes. Often threats and violence produce larger quantities of goods, which provokes people to commit even more violent acts. These acts are carried out primarily by people from poorer segments of the population and who are more likely to live in urban areas.

People have a tendency of ascribing external stimuli as reasons for actions and behaviour of man. If a person becomes a criminal, we look for reasons in his background and social setting. However, it is not always necessary that a poor person will take to crime to alleviate his misery.

There are many theories that try to explain why crime is committed. There's the strain theory, the Social disorganization theory, the Different association theory and many others. But the one that I think best explains why crime is committed is the social bond theory. It is very straightforward and it explains what leads to a crime. The social bond theory states that a person's view toward a society determines if a person will be a criminal or not. This theory has some downsides to it but I will try to defend it against some theories. I will also try to defend this theory against some criticism.

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

Other criminal acts are due to how much will power and individual has to obey the law which is known as the Social control theory. Social theorists claim that a person’s actions and feelings of strong emotions are influenced by internal and external forces. People who do not have well valued morals and lack self control are more likely to commit a crime. Individuals that are poor, do not have a good job, and or do not have a close and respectable support system of friends and family, do not have much to lose. Everyone needs to obtain some sort of social tie or bond in their life otherwise the person has no boundaries for themselves. Travis Hirschi states, “Lawbreaking is often the most immediate source of gratification or conflict resolution, and no special motivation is required to explain such behavior” (Hirschi, 1969). If a person has nothing else going

How does Class, state ,and social controls within a capitalistic society lead to increase crime due to the criminal laws and criminal justice system imposed on the lower middle class.

The article contains offenders committing crimes based off where they come from. For example, poverty is one of the main causes of why 70% of offenders commit crimes. Other causes of why offenders commit crimes are peer pressure, and lack of knowledge. Many people doesn’t have any what to do with their lives. It could be the cause of many things, such as; someone shutting them down mentally or physically. Lack of confidence gives the offenders no hope of making it out. So they commit crimes to make it out. Most people grew up of not having the same lifestyle as a rich person. I personally think it makes them jealous, so the offenders take it away from others. Deterrence is one way to prevent criminals from committing crimes. Theorist had come

People commit crimes for various reasons. These various reasons got to do with social, economic, and cultural reason. These factors trigger an individual to do criminal activities. Social reasons are peer pressure, and school failure. Economic reasons are poverty. Cultural reasons are hatred. The combination of these factors is behind a person who commits crimes.

Figuring out why people commit crimes is one of the central concerns of criminology. Do most criminals act rationally after weighing the costs of crime? Is society ever to blame for an individual to commit a crime? Do mental diseases or even genetics factor into whether a person will live a life of crime. Over the years, many people have developed theories to try to answer these questions. In fact, the number of theories of why people commit crimes sometimes seems to equal the number of criminologists. I explore these questions and much more in the paper that follow.

It is possible to consider the notion that some people may be more predisposed to committing a criminal behaviour or could become a criminal by committing an offence (Gottfredson, Hirschi 1990). For example, people in certain areas have a higher rate of crime. This higher crime rate in those areas seems to remain constant over time (Hayes, Prenzler, 2009). There may be many reasons influencing this phenomenon including socio-economic, and the limited resources associated with this (including less money and fewer services). This may be a factor contributing to the reason people living in these areas become a criminal – that is, to survive (Baumer & Gustafson, 2007).

Poverty and the relationship it has to crime is a long standing sociological, humanists and historical phenomenon. From the plight of the third world to the violence soaked inner city streets of the 1980’s, the relationship of crime and poverty has been the source of a great deal of social commentary. In societies throughout the world and throughout history there has always been a traditional measure of deviance through relative income gaps. Both poverty and crime as well as their connections are heavily weighed topics of political and social discourse. Opinions in these areas contain a great deal of variance. The prejudices of the old guard from the professional police era still utilize association with poverty as a measuring stick for social deviance. Meanwhile, intelligent social science continues to give insight to factors such as social disorganization, socialization into violence, as well as, the far reaching impact political, economic and justice based policies have on those in poverty.