Deviant Places The Ecology Of Crime Analysis

Criminologists have long tried to fight crime and they have developed many theories along the way as tools to help them understand criminals. In the process of doing so, criminologist have realized that in order to really understand why criminals are criminals, they had to first understand the interrelationship between the law and society. A clear and thorough understanding of how they relatively connect with criminal behavior is necessary. Therefore, they then created three analytical perspectives which would help them tie the dots between social order and law, the consensus, the pluralist and the conflict perspectives. Each provides a significantly different view of society as relative to the law. However, while they all aim to the same

This essay will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of sociological explanations of crimes with links to Durkheim’s anomie theory, Merton’s strain theory and the Labelling theory which will draw upon different academics that will highlight these specific areas of research. In sociological terms, crime is a social concept as it does not exist as an autonomous entity, but it is socially constructed by people. It can be analysed that sociological explanations of crime attribute deviance to various aspects of the social environment. For example, crime is strongly related to modern city life where this type of social environment creates cultural enclaves which results in producing criminal or deviant behaviour (Carrabine et al, 2014).

The Elijah Anderson’s article, “Code of the Streets” is a perfect illustration for cultural arguments because it involves environments that are susceptible to learning a criminal culture; even up to a point of promoting that type of criminal behavior as “normal”. It also has links to Differential Association and Social Learning theories of crime

Environmental crime prevention is based on the phase of ‘broken windows’, Wilson and Kelling use this point to stand for all the various signs of disorder and lack of concern for others that are found in some neighbourhoods. They argue that leaving broken windows unrepaired sends out a signal that no one cares. In these neighbourhoods, there is an absence of both formal social control and informal control. The police are only concerned with serious crime and turn a blind eye to petty nuisance behaviour, while respectable members of the community feel intimidated and powerless. Without curative action, the problem deteriorates. As item A shows this causes families and respectable people to move out and the area becomes a magnet for deviants.

Crime is the product of the social structure; it is embedded in the very fibres of society. In this essay, I aim to explore different theories as to why crime exists within society and how we as a society therefore construct it. Crime is a social construct; it is always in society and is on the increase. It is inevitable. Where does it come from? It comes from legislation, from the making of laws.

Kelling and Wilson’s article “Broken Windows” focuses on the importance of disorder in generating and sustaining crime that is more severe. The writers explain that disorder is not directly related to serious crime, but instead leads to increased fear as well as withdrawal from residents, which allows more serious crime to move in because of decreased levels of informal societal control. Kelling and Wilson believe that police can play a key role in disrupting this process. If they put their focus on disorder and minor crimes in neighborhoods that have not yet been overtaken by serious crime, they can help reduce fear and resident withdrawal. The promotion of advanced levels of informal social control can help people take control of their neighborhood

Brym, R.J., & Lie, J., & Rytina, S. (2010) Deviance and Crime. Sociology: Your Compass for a New World. 3rd Canadian Edition. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Toronto: Nelson

The focus of this theory is on the association between social control, the neighborhood structure, and crime (Kubrin & Weitzer, 2003). Social disorganization is the incapability of the community to solve significant problems and achieve common goals. The theory posits that residential mobility, poverty, ethnic heterogeneity, and weak social networks decrease the ability of the neighborhood to manage the behavior of people and hence the likelihood of crime is increased (Kubrin & Weitzer, 2003). Therefore, the social and physical environments of neighborhoods can increase the chances robbery. Factors such as unemployment, vandalized buildings, and poverty can thus be used to explain the occurrence of robbery. When the robbery rates have increased in a neighborhood, an examination of the social and physical environment can yield answers to robbery patterns.

Introduction: Throughout history there have always been many different theories of crime and why people commit crimes. In the late 1930s a new theory rose to the forefront; this theory was called the anomie theory. Anomie means a lack of ethical standards. The anomie theory was proposed by Roberton Merton. It stated that society, as a whole, generally shares the same goals relating to having success in life; whether that is having a family, wealth, power, or just happiness. Society generally agrees that these are things that are to be sought after. Furthermore, Merton proposed that society, as a whole, also has a list of generally accepted ways to achieve such goals (Merton, 1938). Criminal activity, such as robbery, murder, and corruption, are among the things that are not accepted by society as appropriate means to achieve these goals. Merton’s anomie theory was built upon in 1992 by Robert Agnew who developed the general strain theory. General strain theory argues that when members of society are unable to achieve the general goals that society has set forth, they will, in order to avoid further rejection, further alienate themselves from society. Agnew also argued that if these individuals feel as if their shortcomings were a result of their environment failing them they will likely develop very negative feelings towards society, causing them to

Engagement in Criminal Behavior Social control theory explains engagement in criminal behavior by the five informal social controls which are, social and organizational ties, neighborhood attachment, happy with the police work in the neighborhood and legal cynicism, if these norms are not followed then this is where deviant and criminal behavior comes into play. If the area is not involved in any type of groups for instance, religious groups, neighborhood watch program, crime prevention program etc, many different programs they have available keep citizens, especially youths out of trouble because neighbors are constantly keeping an eye out, and spreading wisdom to the children as well. Before laws are established in certain communities many suburbs

Deviance and crime are wide-ranging terms used by sociologists to refer to behavior that varies, in some way, from a social norm. Cultural Norms are society's propensity towards certain ideals; their aversion from others; and their standard, ritualistic practices. Essentially the 'norm' is a summation of typical activities and beliefs of group of people. This essay will evaluate the sociological theories associated with crime and deviance and to compare and contrast these main theories. And find links between these theories to today’s society. There are various Sociological deviance theories, including Structuralist: why do some people break the rules? ,

Deviance is a violation of social norms, behavioral codes or prescriptions, which guide people into actions and self-presentations conforming to social acceptability. There are many forms of deviance. Among the many forms of deviance, organized crime stands out in many aspects of society. Organized crime has been around for many years in America and for centuries in Europe. It is distinguished by its durability over time, expansive interests, hierarchical structure, buildup of profit, investment of profit, access to political protection, and the use of violence as an end to particular means. Organized crime is able to thrive throughout the world by supplying, or appearing to supply, services that the lawful economy is unable to

In conclusion of our field research on the “Impact of poverty on deviant behavior” our two assumptions supports the findings. Assumption one “The government wants change because they think it will make the community a better place”. This corresponds with the findings because within our research the government made drastic changes within communities around the world. This affected many families because they were separated and relocated to neighborhoods that has better resources and jobs. The government feel that the transformation of the public housings was a success when in reality it abandon many residents. This led them to do dreadful things in order to survive in the poverty that they live in.

Criminologists and sociologist have long been in debate for century's to explain criminal behaviour. The two main paradigms of thought are between 'nature' and 'nurture'. Nature is in reference to a learnt behaviour where a multitude of characteristics, in society influence whether a person becomes deviant such as poverty, physical abuse or neglect. Nurture defines biological features which could inevitability lead to a individuals deviant or criminal behaviour, because criminality is believed by biological positivist to be inherited from a persons parents. However, I believe that criminal behaviour is a mixture of characteristics that lead to deviant acts such as psychological illness & Environmental factors. Therefore, this essay

Similar to Park and Burgess who were interested in knowing how the city affects criminal behavior, Shaw and McKay also wanted to know how the social forces influence crime. They used Burgess’s model of Concentric Zone to investigate the relationship in crime rates and delinquency in the different zones of the city. They came with the same conclusion as of Park and Burgess that areas located near the CBD were experiencing high disorganization and were also experiencing high delinquency (Shaw & McKay, 1942). They extended the explanation offered Park and Burgess of ecological theory by introducing their theory of cultural transmission. The argued that delinquent values were established in criminal areas and were then passed on to new generation of youngsters (Tierney, 2006, p. 92). They suggested that this was due to the absence of strong enforced norms from institutions such as the family and the