Outline and assess the role of the police in the social construction of crime (50 marks)

In this assignment I will be examining and investigating the effects of crime on individuals, communities and business and discussing the role of services that support victims of crime and witness. There are a lot of people and communities that are impacted negatively by crime. However in the public service, there are approaches used in order to reduce crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour. This is done by using websites and wardens to keep track of recent crimes. Also I will be writing about how both public and third sector

The investigation of crime, society’s reaction to it and approaches to prevent it are all areas that have interested me from my adolescent years. I have an interest and passion for Criminology studies for the strict purpose of wanting to fulfill a deeper understanding of the causes and consequences of crime and exploring how crimes affect our society. This shady interest in the criminal world has encouraged me to pursue the subject at degree level and to seriously consider a career in a related field. At the beginning of the course my understanding on crime and criminology was mostly derived from the internet or media. These tools became very useful for me to learn different subjects of crime.

Crime is often described as socially constructed, which influences our understanding of who commits a crime. Firstly, labelling theorists argue that crime is a social construction based on the powerful’s reaction to certain behaviour, those who are deviant are people that have been labelled as such. Marxists claim the bourgeoise construct crime in order to criminalise the proletariat, get away with their own deviance and maintain their own dominance. Neo-marxists look at how moral panics create a social construction of crime and can criminalise certain groups. Finally, feminists, argue crime is constructed in a patriarchal way and that the criminal justice system is harsher to female offenders. Whereas others criticise these theories for

Firstly, Oxford Dictionaries (n.d.) currently defines crime as ‘an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law’ and a social construct as ‘a concept or perception of something based on the collective views developed and maintained within a society or social group’. Christie (2004) offers an alternative perspective that crime, as an entity, does not exist and is a social construct. He mentions that ‘crime does not exist. Only acts exist, acts often given different meanings within various social frameworks. Acts, and the meaning given them, are our data.’ He discusses the theory that crime is utilised as a universal classification for a range of bad ‘acts’. Within the context of crime, these ‘acts’ consist of a range of behaviours that members of a society have reached a moral consensus on what is seen as

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

The concept of ‘crime’ is something that depends on time, place, and other influences. For this reason, researchers have been trying to get criminologists to rethink their definitions of ‘crime’ and consider the idea of ‘social harm’ which could help better explain the causes of human suffering and the definitions of ‘crime’ and ‘criminals’ and broaden the application of criminal justice. What this rethinking can do for criminologists broadly is give them a broader picture of human psychology as well as the range of harms that individuals, communities, or whole societies experience. In this context this can include crime in the sense of activities of individuals as well as government and institutions.

When a juvenile commits a crime, it is not considered a crime, however it is considered juvenile delinquency. A massive problem throughout the US is juvenile delinquent acts. Juveniles acting out in a delinquent manner can be caused by many things. However, there is not just one reason why a juvenile may commit these acts. Instead there are many reasons that could lead up to delinquency. In this essay, I will be discussing a few theories as well as ways juveniles may receive treatment.

Social Construction is defined by Society: the Basics as “the process by which people creatively shape reality through social

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.

As Nils Christie argued, crime is a property of the state (2004). As such, it can be defined by the same systems of ideals which influence the state. Crime statistics, which refer to a category of human acts that society view as deviant, can consequently be argued to be without objectivity (Dorling and Simpson, 1999). The statistics they provide are thus arguably not exact. To a certain extent one could infer they are reflections of society, of those who present the data and most importantly of those who accumulate it. The facts themselves become a socially constructed foundation for social knowledge, which inevitably become subjective. This essay aims to discuss how ideological biases within the Police and to a certain extent the

The Culture of Control, Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society, David Garland (2001) is certainly one worth the read. Garland, one of the leading criminologists, begins the book with a fantastic insight on ‘history of the present’ of penological developments in the US, compares it with Britain in late 1970’s. He picks out indicative theories by Foucault and several examples to support his arguments. He portrays an intricate argument about the rise of crime control and punitiveness. Garland continues throughout to link new developments in both countries to identify each countries crime control stratergy and the effect of their strategies. He ends it with further theories and opinions on crime control and social order. Garlands purpose of writing the book is to give a deep analysis and an absorbing read of crime control in USA and UK to his readers. The purpose of the following review is to give the readers a brief understanding of some issues by Garland on crime and social order in contemporary society.

Throughout the years, the association between a criminal offense and a criminal have become more relevant. Although there are many theories that try to illustrate the concept of why crimes happen, no theory has a profound influence of understanding an individual’s nature, relationship, development, and a society itself (Coleman & Ganong, 2014). To further explain, “theories of crime are defined in relation to modernity, spanning their development from the enlightenment to the present, with the advent of postmodernism” (Miller, 2012, p. 1798). In other words, theories of crime are an approach to understanding an individuals behaviour and actions in their environment, society, and themselves that may lead to crime. Nevertheless, within this paper, it will be comparing the case of

a. Imagine asking 100 strangers to describe a criminal. Predict whether those descriptions would be likely to focus on street criminals, or the variety of topics covered in this video.

Crime is a social construct because it is an idea that is established by a society to control the behaviors of the people within the society (“Radical Concept of Crime”). What is considered to be criminal varies within different area and cultures and even time. Things that were legal two hundred years ago are illegal now. For example, in the 18th and 19th century when slavery was allowed in America, there were a lot of people who saw nothing wrong with it because they had been socialized to accept and justify it. If you ask most Americans now about slavery, they would say that it was a tragedy or that they just cannot understand how it happened. This is because we are now being socialized to think of slavery as wrong. Even though many citizens

Crime is considered to be some breech or violation of behaviors which stand in opposition of rules or norms instituted by some governing body. Some actions are considered to be crimes throughout most societies in history; murder or physical abuse can serve as an example as an example. However, the majorities of things that are considered crimes are more of a subjective nature and vary widely in different societies. In many societies it is a crime to be an atheist or to be homosexual for example, while in other societies these items are tolerated and in some cases are considered social norms. Furthermore, when an individual is considered to have committed a crime, the punishments for these crimes also can vary widely depending on the culture, the social norms, the position of the authority figure, as well as a plethora of other factors. This paper will analyze some of the different forms of crime and they develop and how they are treated in different societies.