Social Class Discrepancy In Atonement By Ian Mcewan

This essay will introduce two competing perspectives of policing, they are the orthodox and revisionist perspectives. This essay will then relate the orthodox and revisionist perspectives to the themes of lack of structure, industrialisation and finally hostility. It will then discuss whether the creation of the Metropolitan Police by Sir Robert Peel in 1829 was an effective solution to the changes within society as well as the challenges brought about through crime and disorder. The orthodox view is that the Metropolitan Police were, in fact, a rational decision made to adapt to the needs of the society. They argue that the establishment of the ‘new’ police was inevitable. The revisionist view would state that the ‘new’ police were not a rational decision. They believed that crime and disorder were not increasing, it was just that the ways of counting crime were largely different to previously. The revisionists also believe that the new system was in part beneficial for which to tackle issues that may have occasioned due to the new ‘dangerous class’ (Monkkonen, 1981, p147). In this essay, there will be reference made to the Brixton Riots in 1981 with a clear explanation as to how the orthodox and revisionist perspectives relate to modern policing activities.

Since the 19th century, law enforcement and punishment has developed rapidly into the justice system we rely on today. Obscure laws that had become irrelevant in an industrial and post-industrial era were fast being replaced, and despite its lack of existence at the beginning of the 1800’s, policing standards are, today, high. The necessity for this drastic change in approach to crime has stemmed from the needs of industrial Britain, and the increased awareness of the public, and government, and their perception of crime and punishment. Rather than individual cases having a direct impact on these changes, in general they provide an insight as to the reactions of the public at the time, and along with the myriad of other cases, allow us

Unfortunately for the 99%, the lower class is at greater risk for incarceration than the financially elite - regardless of the virtually non-existent gap between the socio-economic crime rates. It all comes down to money; the upper-class have more of it and, subsequently, more access to education and legal aid, giving them the tools to evade persecution. Although a life of extreme poverty can place greater emphasis on survival rather than morals, leading to increased crime and incarceration rates, the affluent are just as likely to commit crime, just less likely to be vilified and jailed for it.

7) In criminological theories, we saw how police activity is largely geared towards minor visible crimes committed by individuals from the lower stratums of society as oppose to “white collar crimes” committed by those of higher stratums (Dubé, CRM 3701, 2011). Abolitionists argue that by severely punishing some of the poor in order to deter society from committing crimes; we are only further contributing to the inequalities in today’s society.

They had already set their mind that these boys committed the crime and used their power to make the boys tell them what they wanted to hear. They used their power to hold the boys at the police station until they “confessed”. The boys did not know of their rights that they had and were detained for a long period of time until they were made to believe that if they were to confess, they could go home. Another way that criminal law was used to control the working class in the documentary is with bail. If someone has money, they can pay for a temporary release from jail. In the film, two boys were able to be released on bail, but three of the boys’ families weren’t able to come up the money, so they had to stay in jail. It is clear that if someone is of the working class, it would be difficult for them to come up with the money because of financial issues. If someone was rich, they would be able to pay the bail or fine without having to worry about providing food on the table or paying bills. Because of this, it seems like these criminal laws are set up to benefit those who are wealthy and weed out those that are poor. Those associated with the lower class are usually associated with crime and violence and because of that, these criminal laws are targeted towards a group of people who are at a disadvantage.

So far, both theories are able to explain the crime inequality observed insides neighbourhoods; however, when it comes to explaining the difference in crime rates between neighbourhoods with similarly low levels of poverty, social disorganization theory is not able to fully explain why such difference may occur, as it places a greater focus on the internal dynamics of the neighbourhoods than on the external contingencies (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 92). Based on Table 4.5 of Divergent Social Worlds: Neighborhood Crime and the Racial-Spatial DivideI, minority low-poverty areas have roughly two and a half times more violence than their white counterparts (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 88). Social disorganization theory insists that residential instability (percent of those who owns and percent of those who rent) , population heterogeneity (internal differences, including ethno-racial differences), poverty (percent of those who live in poverty), income, deteriorating neighbourhood, and population loss (percent of those who leave due to deterioration) are mechanisms that leads to the absence of informal social control and increases social disorganization, causing the loss of control over youths who then hang out at spontaneous playgrounds and form gangs with delinquent traditions that get passed down through cultural transmission. If such was the case, then one would expect neighbourhoods with similar and comparable local conditions to have similar average rates of crimes. However,

It is a mistake to think of crime as a lower class problem. Crime is a problem for all people. The lower classes commit crime for survival while the upper class commits crime to supplement capital and maintain control.

The following major crime offender characteristics, age, sex, race, and social class, can greatly influence criminals in their own different ways. However, the most the characteristic that can have a bigger impact in some cases is social class. Out of the four characteristics listed, this is the only one that can be changed. The age, sex or race of a person cannot be changed while social class is in fact changeable. A person can change either legally or illegally their social class. If a person is raised in poverty or the lower class of society, regardless of of their sex or race, they desire to have nicer things and live a better life. Living in the lower class society is a motive in itself to have more

There is seen to be a link between power and crime, the more powerful you are, the least likely to be committing a crime, so the lower classes are discriminated here as they don’t have the same power a middle-class or upper-class businessman might have therefore they are labelled to be trouble-makers, they are treated harsher by the criminal justice system than their peers, but the lower class is seen more favourably than ethnic minorities, especially ethnic groups that have less power than them. In the 1960’s, researchers found that blacks were more severely sentenced than whites. Hagan in 1974 reviewed many of the findings supporting racial discrimination and found that studies were not allowing for the possibility that black defendants may be charged with more serious crimes than whites, and may have more serious criminal records (cited in ‘Theoretical Criminology’). Lizotte in 1978 found that blacks have been shown to receive harsher sentences because they are less likely to make bail, since they are less affluent, and this reduces their ability to provide an effective defence.

British society is split into hierarchical categories with “higher” “middle” and “lower working” class. The British class structure is shaped like a pyramid cut into three

Crime and criminalization are dependent on social inequality Social inequality there are four major forms of inequality, class gender race and age, all of which influence crime. In looking at social classes and relationship to crime, studies have shown that citizens of the lower class are more likely to commit crimes of property and violence than upper-class citizens: who generally commit political and economic crimes. In 2007 the National Crime Victimization Survey showed that families with an income of $15000 or less had a greater chance of being victimized; recalling that lower classes commit a majority of those crimes. We can conclude that crime generally happens within classes.

Data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) from 2013/2014 have been used. The CSEW is a face-to-face survey asking households about their perception and experience of crime in the 12 months preceding the interview. The information at my disposal are part of a special unrestricted access teaching dataset produced by the UK Data Archive. Out of a sample of 35,371 households chosen in England and Wales for the actual survey, I had access to a 25% sample of 8,843 households. Representative of households were chosen through the Postcode Address File which excludes aggregative accommodation such as residential halls and prisons.

Briony Tallis: Briony Tallis is the protagonist of Atonement. Though Briony has two older siblings, Leon and Cecilia, they are both at least ten years her senior. Therefore, Briony grows up virtually as an only child and as a result is quite self-centered. Briony is introduced to readers when she is working on her play The Trials of Arabella. Through Briony’s writing process and inner thoughts, readers are made aware of her obsession with order and control. This obsession combined with her self-absorbed mindset fosters Briony’s unaware naïveté. Briony believes that she understands everything that occurs around her, when in reality, she cannot understand adult concepts and ideas that do not yet pertain to her. It is this obliviousness that leads to her rape accusations against Robbie—Briony is unable to see the love between her older sister Cecilia and Robbie, the servant’s son. Once Briony matures, she begins to realize the depth of the consequences of her actions, and throws herself into atoning her “sins.” In doing so, she writes her own novel involving a couple that represents Robbie and Cecilia, and feels that she can relieve herself of guilt by admitting to her wrongdoings and rewriting the fates of the two lovers. However, the novel simply paints Briony’s naïveté in a new light—though she has grown up, she is still unaware of the dire

Social class and crime and punishment has always been an issue in the UK if not globally. For the elite, the criminal justice system serves a purpose to deter and prevent crime, but the reality is that the poor are punished for crimes they commit more so than those of a upper class who commit the same crime. The question is who is to blame for this image of the poor being criminals and the working class crime phenomenon, is it the moral Panic created by the media to distract from the reality of the white collar corporate crime being carried out by the most powerful of society or is it down to Poverty, Labelling, economic and social positioning which all contribute to deviant behaviour. The aim of this essay is to provide a critical criminological view of the punishment of the poor with a wide range of theories and ideas to contribute to the understanding of the poor being punished from the 18th century to today 's contemporary society. It will aim to develop an understanding how criminals and deviant behaviour were defined and perceived from historical periods to now.

Classical criminology is “usually seen as the first ‘real’ criminology” (Tierney,2009), due to its emergence in the eighteenth century, heralded by scholars Jeremey Bentham and Cesare de Beccaria. It is centred on the ‘act’ rather than the ‘offender’, as well as the use of punishment as a deterrence. Yet whilst classical criminology has evolved slightly over time, it’s narrow minded focus on the ‘offence’ rather than the ‘offender’ can result in the overlooking of crucial details that may have facilitated the offence. Such details can include low-socio economic upbringing, mental health issues or social inequality. Therefore, when dealing with youth crime in Melbourne, only a limited amount of crime is explainable as classical