For All We Think We Know About Crime There Is Still Much

The social control theory suggests that “people engage in criminal activity when their bond to society has weakened” (Ortiz, 2011). This theory

Throughout history we have seen many theories being implemented in the criminal justice system. People come in and try to set in something new that they think will improve the overall performance of the criminal justice system. To fully understand how theories work, it is critical to first be fully aware of what theories actually are. A theory is a set of interrelated variables formed into hypothesis, that specify a relationship among variables. Criminal justice is the main umbrella that all the other perspectives come under. “The theory of criminal justice involves four main philosophies that drive the policies that determine how a government handles its problems with crime. The first two, punishment theory and retributive theory focused on the satisfaction of the victim for such punishment. The other two primary theories of criminal justice, deterrent theory and reformation theory, are aimed at preventing future crimes. They seek to achieve this aim either by discouraging others to commit the same crimes or transforming the individual criminal into a productive member of society.” (Wikipedia. Theories of criminal law) That is the criminal justice theory in a nut shell, but when you look deeper you find other fascinating perspectives that have been implemented in the criminal justice system. One of these key perspectives is the social control perspective. Social control theory lets us understand and lower levels of criminal activity. The idea is that an individual’s basic

Sociological theories of crime contain a great deal of useful information in the understanding of criminal behavior. Sociological theories are very useful in the study of criminal behavior because unlike psychological and biological theories they are mostly macro level theories which attempt to explain rates of crime for a group or an area rather than explaining why an individual committed a crime. (Kubrin, 2012). There is however some micro level sociological theories of crime that attempts to explain the individual’s motivation for criminal behavior (Kubrin, 2012). Of the contemporary

This is highly evident in the city of Chicago and its suburbs because in the inner city in some places the homicide rate is 116/100,000 but in suburbs like Naperville the homicide rate is 1/100,000. So there must be something about the ecological differences in which people live that shapes their choices in the first place. One reason there is a great difference in the rates of crime in places that are so proximal to each other is the norms and beliefs that are upheld in that community. For example, in the inner city many people commit crimes due to the “street culture” that in a way provides an incentive to commit the crime if they want to have the lavish styles that their peers are part of. So in reality, it is difficult to determine a single force that drives a criminal to commit a certain crime. Hence, it has been difficult for the criminal justice system to implement programs and control methods in order to control crime. For example, if the criminal did act on rationality than implementing harsher punishments would deter the criminal from committing the crime. However, this control method has provided mix results and in some cases crime has even gone up more when harsher penalties were implemented. This is partially because some criminals don’t act on just rationality but on uncontrollable forces as well. Finally, there is some criminals that don’t even care about the consequences of committing the crime and only think about the

In his article, Crime as Social Control, Christian Parenti discusses crime’s impact on society. Crime acts as a deterrent and an incentive, in both cases adding to the concept of social control. As a deterrent, crime produces anticrime movements in neighborhoods throughout the states. However, fear of crime and the repercussions of combating crime block further mobilization. The result is an incentive towards increased criminal activity due to the incapability of society to get involved or focus on the actual issue. As social control, crime dwells into the fear of people, beckons society to stay away from the issues, and leaves minorities in the hands of government intervention. This leads to the fragmentation of neighborhood ties resulting in mistrust and broken family ties, especially when dealing

There are numerous perspectives that explain the sociological criminology theories and social process criminology theories that have essential roles with individuals who choose to commit crime. Social process criminology theory have social forces that affect individuals when it comes to committing crime. Whether the cause of behavior is learned through alcohol abuse, domestic violence or group affiliations, social process theory has an adversarial effect on criminal behavior. Social process theory stresses the importance of group involvement and socializing with non-criminal peers within the groups. Social process theorists believe that criminality is determined by a person’s participation within different individual group affiliations.

This final theory is an extension of Hirschi 's (1979) original idea of micro and macro dimensions which are called cross-level or multilevel integrations (Barak, 2002). The general strain theory is also known as cross-level or multilevel integrations including the reintegrative shaming theory, power control theory, control balance theory and general integrated theory (Barak, 2002). These theories combine theories like social bonding and social learning theories with structural theories such as social disorganization and strain theories but does not address macro level factors that influence crime, and instead focus solely on criminal behavior at the micro level. So far, very little theories suggested have encompassed all levels of explaining criminology (Barak, 2002). This is a social structure- macro model which states that differential opportunities are not only crime class specific, but also are accompanied by motivations for both crime and punishment.

As asserted by Bohm & Vogel, Conflict Criminology assumes that society is based on a conflict between competing interest groups which may not always be equal in resources and power and where one group is dominate and the other subordinate. Examples of such groups are women vs. men, corporations vs. labor groups, whites vs. minorities and children vs. authority figures (2011). Here the assertion is that one’s behavior is based on their position in society, and as the stigma associated with crime and criminal behavior is the result of the dominant groups' ability to do so. As the dominant group uses crime as a means of diverting the attention away from their actions, it redirects the focus of the subordinate groups on one another thereby allowing

There are different perspectives on explanations of criminal behavior such as Biological and Psychological explaining crime. The two perspectives have been considered exterior in criminology since majority perspective come from sociology. Sociology focuses on how law-abiding citizens become criminals and conventional lack of opportunity. Therefore the two perspectives had to take a back seat in history because they were seen as naive and not take serious. “Sociological theories cannot explain how one person can be born in a slum, be exposed to family discord and abuse, never attend school, have friends who are delinquents and yet resist opportunities for crime, while another person can grow up in an affluent suburban neighborhood in a two-parent home, attend the finest schools, have every financial need met, and end up firing a gun at a president” ” (Adler, Muller & Laufer, 1991).

It's also known as the social bond theory. Under the social control theory, individuals break the law due to a breakdown with their societal bond. Social control theory is used to help us understand and reduce levels of criminal activity. It's based upon the

behavior occurs because relatively powerless individuals are unable to achieve society’s goals through socially acceptable means. (Perry, 2001). The unfairness of the justice system often goes unnoticed especially when it affects people different than ourselves. Crime is a product of social interaction and therefore the intersection of people’s identities plays a role in the way the crime is punished and labelled. Inequalities of gender, race, and class produce criminal activities (conflict theory).

The idea that societal strains are a contributing factor in the causation of crime in society isn’t a new one. Conversely since it was first proposed as a theory on criminology by Merton, it has been a hotly debated subject among sociologists. Trying to discern the reasons that people commit crimes or societal wrongs has been a topic for scholars and philosophers throughout written history. Ever since society moved past the age of believing in devils, sociologists have attempted to define the causation of misdeeds in order for societal leaders to better prevent and control crime. Much like treating the cause of a disease instead of just the symptoms; enter Social Strain Theory.

Society consent that social behavior is a direct result of an outside source. With regards to this, there has been raging debates over the years about why individuals commit crimes, how crimes should be handled and deterred. This has led to emergence of a myriad of criminological theories that attempt to give a hunch on the cause of criminality behavior. The ongoing exploration of the possible cause of criminal behavior has been in the quest to seek the best remedies in ultimately reducing types and levels of crime. Criminological theory is the explanation of the relation between the characteristics of individuals and the likelihood that the will engage in criminal behavior (Akers, 2013; Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2014).

Many people have different theories as to why crime exists. Some believe crime happens because of the individual’s culture, education (or lack there of), or even their race. Others believe crime is associated with whom we surround ourselves with. There are three sociological theories that suggest why crime happens in society; they are social learning theory, social control theory, and social reaction (labeling) theory. These theories suggest it is our relationships and social interactions that influence our behavior.

What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality