The Ecalation Of Crime In The Victorian Era

It was suspected during the time period that overcrowding was the cause of the increased crime rate. People saw that the population growth—must like the popularity of gin—coincided with the rise crime. As London became an industrial city it needed a more unskilled workers to power its “textile, iron, metal goods, and pottery production” factories (“Crime and Punishment” par 2). This caused unskilled workers from “small rural towns” and “villages” into the city in hopes of finding work ("Crime and Punishment," par 1). This may seem like a good idea, but unfortunately the population of the city rose quicker than expected and thus hadn’t had an adequate amount of time to adjust to the booming population growth—over 400 percent in just 50 years ("Crime and Punishment," par 1).

In their theories, Marxists say that certain types of crime are more likely to be punished compared to others. Street crimes (brawls, binge drinking, theft, muggings, social unrest and disorder) are more likely to be pursued than white collar crime (fraud, tax evasion, ‘insider training’ and even gambling and prostitution). This is because the capitalist governments who have run the country are sympathetic to those who are of the same belief and class, but have just got carried away with their search for wealth. In this society of greed, the working class have to turn to crime just to stay alive and to obtain the materialistic goods or lifestyle, which is typical to a capitalistic state, and that general standard of living and attitude to life, is enforced on them, when living in this type of society. Money and personal gain, and the ‘every man for himself’ attitude is what life is like in an unfair, and socially unequal way of life under a capitalist government.

In comparison Merton’s theory put forward a entirely different rationalisation of the causes of crime, and juxtaposing major ideals about who commits these crimes, Marxists points out that absence of egalitarianism of opportunity is at the centre of the capitalist system and Merton contends that not all individuals who lack genuine opportunities look to crime to do so. (Eglin and Hester, 2013).

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

Why do people commit certain crimes? Crimes are committed for many different reasons by people, but there is category of people who commit crimes in response to a State in which is biasedly against them and is posed to create some sort of statement and in many instances poverty can contribute to crime. Lets take the instance that if someone has grown up in a situation of poverty and is in a hopeless situation some individuals given those circumstances will turn to crime to get out of their poor conditions. Some may argue it is not an excuse because they are many who are poor who do not commit crime but on the contrary there are also many who are rich that do commit crime and get away with it due to their power or legitimacy. So we see that clearly if the conditions are bad or poor for somebody chances are that they is a higher possibility that some of those people might be involved in crime. There are some determinants that factor out in this consideration which is depending on the area and environment the individual surrounds themselves around with, there is a saying that “you are a product of your own environment”, due to this proposition the poor people get lack of opportunity to network with wealthy and educated individuals up in the hierarchy. They can only resort to the streets because of their environment, these people grew up in poverty and all around them is gang-affiliates, violent and drugs. The norms is that society considers

In society, things are not as they seem at times. The criminal justice system was created to help deter crime and to punish those who break the law. Laws are put in place to be fair to all citizens. Your economic situation, gender, race should not become a factor for you to be given “due process”. Years have come and gone and the crime rates increases and decreases with the years. There have been many senseless killings and everyone has their point of view as to the causes. The focal point of this report will be the findings from the readings of, “The rich get richer and the poor get prison by Jeffery Reimer and Paul Livingston”. I will discuss the causes of the rise and fall of the many different types of crimes ; why the rise and fall of crime rates; what contribution has the criminal justice and or police system has contributed whether positive or negative; and lastly discuss which economic group ends up in prison and why.

Criminal activity during the 1920s played a major role throughout the entirety of the decade, as it related to the newfound culture the Roaring Twenties entailed. As the nation strove to achieve the American Dream, parties, money and social representation became a main contribute to an individual’s persona. As these factors were sought to be obtained, many criminal engagements were enacted. These crimes included but were not limited to, bootlegging, organized crime, scandals and murder, which were set by the infamous Al Capone and the Mafia, with contribution to the corruption of the FBI, the KKK and their racial and religious prejudice, Leopold and Loeb, and Warren G. Harding, in relation to the Teapot Dome Scandal. All of these acts are relative to modern society as they paved way for greater emphasis on civil and political issues in the following decades, as society began to regard national security and pushed toward a movement to enact stricter laws and regulations towards individual matters.

The purpose of this essay is to discuss whether a perspective of social harm is more advantageous and useful over that of crime. In order to explore these advantages, this essay will look at the aetiology of crime from a legal perspective; which is arguably very narrow and individualistic in nature. As well as from a perspective of social harm, which is possibly more progressive as it broadens an understanding of ‘crime’ over that of many other serious harms.

The 1920s are usually characterized as a time of care-free, social rebellion against the restricting ideals of the post WWI world, but it has a darker side than this. Prisons populations and crime rates rose to an all time high from where they were pre-Prohibition. Gangsters soon became the richest, most powerful men in the country and all due to the bootlegging of liquor. In New York and Chicago especially, the gangs were as diverse as the people living there, all fighting to control their areas, causing insane amounts of violence and death. Although Prohibition's aim was to decrease drunkenness and crime, it would ultimately cause more harm than good with the emergence of speakeasies which kept people drunk and gangs who increased crime

People have a tendency of ascribing external stimuli as reasons for actions and behaviour of man. If a person becomes a criminal, we look for reasons in his background and social setting. However, it is not always necessary that a poor person will take to crime to alleviate his misery.

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

Crime has always been, and always will be a factor in society. It has existed since ancient times. The first recorded laws were “Hammurabi’s Laws”. A set of rules engraved in a large pillar in the middle of the Sumerian city-state of Babylon. Back then the punishments were simple. If you stole something, then your hand was cut off. In the modern day our laws are not so simple. Now a days something minor like theft, or minor drug possession could land you a harsher sentence than embezzling millions of dollars. Today the laws are dictated by a scared people and a justice system that doesn’t do its job. The punishments for crimes often do not fit the crime committed. More often than not one’s social status can directly impact the sentence one would receive.

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

How does Class, state ,and social controls within a capitalistic society lead to increase crime due to the criminal laws and criminal justice system imposed on the lower middle class.

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.