Social Disorganization Theory Of Crime

The predominate theory of the social structure perspective that will be applied to Boyz N the Hood is Robert Merton’s Anomie/Strain theory and Robert Agnew’s General Strain theory which closely applies to Merton’s. The strain theory holds that crime is a function of the conflict between goals people have and the means that they can use to obtain them legally. Most people desire wealth, material possessions, power, prestige, and other life comforts. Although these social and economic goals are common to people in all economic standings, strain theorists insist these goals are class dependent. Members of the lower class are unable to achieve these goals of success through conventional or legal means. In return they feel anger, frustration, and resentment, which is referred to as the “strain.” Lower class citizens can either accept their conditions and live out their days being socially responsible or they can choose alternate means of achieving success illegally. These means can include but are not limited to theft, violence, or drug trafficking.

Frank Schmalleger explains the theory of social disorganization as one that depicts both social change as well as conflict, and lack of any agreement as the origin of its cause for both criminal behavior as well as nonconformity to society and closed associated with the ecological school of criminology (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 152). The philosophy behind the organization and structure of a society and how that contributes to criminal behavior within society is by stressing poverty, economic conditions, lack of education, lack of skills, are not sought-after in the work place, and divergent cultural values. Criminal behavior is the result of the person’s assignment of location within the structure of society.

Based on the social disorganization theory; Shaw and McKay account for high crime begins with poverty, low socioeconomic status and the inability to “control the teenage population,” (Sampson, 2016). Shaw and McKay also knew that within the community, delinquency was a trait that was picked-up by and from other delinquents. Furthermore, if the ability to control young

For years, gang crime has been loathed by society, as society has perceived it to threaten the well-being of its members. In addition to the fear of gang violence, concerns have been raised of gangs polluting youth; hence, policing strategies have emerged more increasingly in an attempt to put an end to the delinquency. Nevertheless, for society the causation of gang crime has been discussed to a lesser extent; thus, the objective of this essay will be to depict a viable explanation of gang crime through the use of two criminological theories. To accomplish the task at hand; I shall, define gang crime, provide a description of social disorganization theory, illustrate how the application of social disorganization theory provides an explanation of gang crime, describe differential opportunity theory, demonstrate how differential opportunity theory can explain gang crime, and exemplify as to which theory provides a superior explanation of gang crime. In the end, it will be clear that social disorganization theory is a superior explanation of gang crime in comparison to differential opportunity theory, due to its ability to deliver a more enhanced explanation than the one that is provided by differential opportunity theory.

Social Strain Theory and criminal offending are seen by most theorist as a way of understanding what could be the causes of youth committing crimes. Theorist are very concern if social strain theory really does have the answer to why this is happening, but they also believe that the result may be inconclusive, because of all the different variables and independent variables that could be used in their research. We will take a look at this theory, and see if they and ask our participants from the state of Georgia inner-city neighborhoods a few question that they will supply their own answer to, and then ask them an open-ending question face to face and ask them to choose the answer that best state why they might commit a crime or not. If we are able to understand the results then we hope we can implement it into policy. And by incorporating it into policy, then we might be able to design a strategy that will help LEOs or other agencies to reduce youth offending, deter criminal acts and future crimes. Lastly, so with the implementation of social strain theory into the policy and the evaluation of the data, discussion and the questions we can create a foundation for further research studies to build on our results.

This breakdown of organization and culture within a community leads to a lack of informal social control which in turn leads to higher crime rates especially in the juvenile population (Simons, Simons, Burt, Brody, & Cutrona, 2005). Social disorganization theory asserts that strong levels of connection within a community along with a sense of civic pride motivate individuals to take a more active role in the community therefore acting as a deterrent to crime.

Social disorganization theory was established by Shaw and Mckay (1942) in their famous work “Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas”. The main argument of the social disorganization theory is that, the place where people live will influence the individual’s behavior, and this may lead them to crimes. More precisely, certain characteristics of the neighborhood/community will strengthen or weaken the informal social control within the community, and this has mediating effect on crimes.

Social disorganization is a macro-level theory which focuses on the ecological differences of crime and how structural and cultural factors shape the involvement of crime. A person’s residential location is a factor that has the ability to shape the likelihood of involvement in illegal activities. The social disorganization theory looks at how socioeconomic status and the environment affects individuals and motivates them to become a part of a gang. Shaw and McKay link area delinquency to three attributes of the social disorganization theory; economic deprivation, residential instability and race and

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,

The socioeconomic stratification system shows a great disparity when examine the two polar ends of the spectrum; one is a high elevated class and the other a poor lower class. The high socioeconomic status creates an affluent neighborhood of well-kept and normative values of society; such as violence is wrong and a person maintains respect though hard work and opening his/her pocketbook. Meanwhile the lower class status formulates a broken and rundown neighborhood where social stress and chaos roam the streets through juvenile gangs, which promote their own personal values (such as encouraging violence, sex, and drugs) known as “the code of the street.” Elijah Anderson’s book, Code of the Street: Delinquency, Violence, and the Moral Life

Many times individuals turn to a gang to escape a life of poverty or financial uncertainty. A sense of hopelessness and desperation can result from being unable to provide the basic necessities. “Young people living in poverty may find it difficult to meet basic physical and psychological needs, which can lead to a lack of self-worth and pride” (Lee, Dean, and Parker 1). Individuals who are faced with a lack of money many times turn to crime if they cannot earn enough at a legitimate job to support themselves or their families. “This partly explains why gangs exist in poor, rundown areas of cities” (Grabianowski 1).

When crime occurs we often see that it is analyzed in a microscopic point of view. The emphasis is on the “characteristics, environments, and motivations of individuals who commit criminal acts” (Akers 166). The analysis is then compared with individuals who do not commit crime. However, social disorganization theory serves to look at those differences in our communities with high and low crime rates. Some factors such as poverty hold a potential risk for higher crime rate.

This theory posits that criminal behavior is a result of disorganization and strain. This theory also seeks to explain, “how people living in deteriorated neighborhoods react to social isolation and economic deprivation. ” This theory advocates the view, that, as a result of these conditions, the lower socioeconomic class individuals form a separate and distinct sub culture whose values, norms and rules are the polar opposite of the society’s. Cohen’s Delinquent Subcultural Theory and Cloward and Ohlin’s Theory of Differential Opportunity will be used under the umbrella Cultural Deviance Theory of Crime to explain juvenile involvement in gangs with relation to Trinidad and

Community is seen as “complex system of friendship and kinship networks, and formal and informal associations’ ties rooted in family and ongoing socialization process” (Class notes, Soci. 421.15, Sept 23rd/2010). This paper discusses how Shaw and McKay’s social disorganization theory applies to “Street Corner Society”, and through this theory a strong association between social ties and crime rates will be examined. Essentially disorganization is seen as is the absence of social ties, which therefore leads to crime. “Street Corner Society” by William Foote Whyte looks at social ties that the corner boys of “Cornerville” share, even though social inequality is the main cause of failure in this community, social ties

Although my personal experiences are not involved in gang like activity, or serious deviant behavior, it still resembles the actions children make when they are left unsupervised. These behaviors become so normalized in these inner cities, which people just become accustom to delinquent behavior because it is so embedded within communities. This theories concern is only with how the “characteristics of geographical areas, such as whether they are disorganized, influence crime rates” (Cullen). Although I think that this is an interesting aspect to consider upon looking at crime rates, I do not think it is accurate to study a community without studying the characteristics of those who make up the community as well. Sampson and Wilson argue that social disorganization is linked to racial inequalities rather then it being a natural part of city growth. I think that this is an accurate statement, because racial inequality is what creates such a tremendous divide among communities, and I believe that if racial inequality did not exist, we would not have as much disorganization within communities. It has also been argued that “cultural values emerge that do not