The Theoretical Approaches Of Sociology View Crime And Deviance

This journal article discusses how the government has increased “mandatory sentencing” using “aggressive initiatives” for drug related crimes. Additionally, these government implemented sentencing guidelines have made the prison population grow

‘Using material from item A and elsewhere, assess the usefulness of Marxist approach to an understanding of crime and deviance’ (21 marks)

We jail a grand amount of the population most times, who don’t necessarily produce any harm or those who have not committed violent crimes. Most arrest, convictions, and sentencing are a product of drug related issues. “Sentencing policies of the War on Drugs era resulted in dramatic growth in incarceration for drug offenses” (The Sentencing Project, 2016, p.3).

The effectiveness of criminal justice regulations on all controlled substance has been effective so far. Although, there are still some lapses engaged in this situation, but so far it’s something to be considered and continue to work on. Since 1984 when Congress passed crime legislation (Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984; Title II of P.L. 98-473)53 (Clear, Cole & Reisig 2013), that among other things, enhanced penalties for CSA violations and amended the CSA to establish general criminal forfeiture provisions for certain felony drug violations. Even though numbers of prisoners keep increasing, but drug abused fellows and companies, and individuals involved have been completely reduced to a barest minimum level.

In the early to mid-1980, there was a drug epidemic in urban cities across the nation. As a result of this, Congress created the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which gave drug offenders a higher sentence in the criminal justice system. Over the past thirty years, the United States has seen an unprecedented rise in the rate of incarceration. Between the years 1972-2000, the rate of incarceration has risen at an astonishing rate of 500%. This act in particular, had no toleration towards these offenses, consequently leading to the disappearance of probation “federal courts sentenced [twenty-six] percent of convicted drug offenders to probation. By 2014, the proportion had fallen to [six] percent, with judges sending nearly all drug offenders to prison” (“Public Safety Performance”). Not only has the rate of incarceration increased so has the sentences for these offences “from 1980 to 2011, the average prison sentence imposed on drug offenders increased [three] percent—from 54.6 to 74.2 months—even as it declined [three] percent for all other offenders” (“Public Safety Performance Project”). This leads to the larger issue in the incarceration system, which is that penalties do not match the offenses. With the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 in practice, it influenced the establishment of a five-year mandatory minimum for small drug traffickers. If a

Other writers on crime and deviance strongly disagree with the Marxist analysis. For instance Functionalists might attribute more to imperfect socialisation and see crime as a necessary element of society to help bring about social change but also to reinforce the collective conscience of society. Interactionists criticise Marxists for ignoring the processes involved in criminality and the system, for instance Becker and Lemert focus much more on

For the vast majority of crimes committed in the United States, the fate of those who have been found guilty is left in the hands of a judge, after a trial by jury. However, since the 1950’s the fate of nonviolent drug offenders has been shifted to the hands of the partisan prosecution with the expansion of mandatory sentencing. Mandatory minimum sentencing is a system which sets minimum jail sentences for crimes, which not even judges can overturn. In the decades after the 1950s, with the increasing war on drugs, minimum sentencing laws have spread further and further into nonviolent drug related crimes, the effects of which have been almost universally negative. Mandatory minimum sentencing for nonviolent drug crimes has proved to be a cost ineffective system which exacerbates the problem of mass incarceration while failing to deter crime, provide rehabilitation, and lower drug usage.

Labelling Theories' Contribution to the Sociological Understanding of Crime and Deviance Becker is the main sociologist studying labelling theory on deviance, he argues that 'social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance.' Meaning acts only become deviant when observers perceive it and define it as deviant. An example of this would be the act of nudity, it is accepted in the bedroom between husband and wife or on a nudist camp, but when a stranger was to enter the bedroom, or someone was to streak across a sporting event, others would usually see this as deviant, and this deviancy would become a label on the individual. Several factors affect what the

The topic I have chosen strikes huge debate amongst sociologists, there is no one reason that either crime or deviance is committed and because of this, several theories - including the two main theories I will be focussing on, functionalism and feminism - have impacted sociological thinking majorly. For instance, a functionalist perspective sees society as a body of separate but interdependent parts all of which must function properly for society to then function properly (Kirby and Kidd, 2000). Therefore, deviant and criminal behaviour would be seen by functionalists as behaviour that is out-with the norms of a particular society and so is detrimental to the proper functioning of society, thus such behaviour is considered dysfunctional. A man who made a huge impact on functionalist thinking - Durkheim -

Assess the contribution of the Marxist theory to the sociological understanding of crime and deviance.

We spend many police and legal resources to investigate, hold trials, and punish drug offenders, and in the last 10 years, the number of drug offenders still remain very high. Also, repeat offenders count for no less than 90% of drug offenders each year from 2007 to 2011 . This data indicates the way we fight drugs is not efficient, and that those who return to society from the correctional facilities is not

Both of these approaches portray the idea that criminals are different from the rest of us. Sociologists do not agree with any of these, and examine crime and deviance with the social context into consideration. attempt to examine questions like what makes the acts deviant or criminal? What are the causes of deviant behavior? Who commits these acts?

Several theories have been developed to explain the concept of deviance and crime in the society. They include conflict theory, functional theory, the feminist theory, the labeling theory, control theory, and learning and socialization theory (Clinard & Meier, 2010, p. 74). Conflict theory explains that crime is related to the pluralistic nature of society whereby those in power make rules to protect their interests, the violation of which amounts to crime. Functional theory explains that deviance is part of the social structure and functions as a means of adapting to strains in societal structures. Labeling theory holds that deviance arises from the reaction of the society to a certain behavior. Further, the control theory, on the other hand,

Deviance and crime are wide-ranging terms used by sociologists to refer to behavior that varies, in some way, from a social norm. Cultural Norms are society's propensity towards certain ideals; their aversion from others; and their standard, ritualistic practices. Essentially the 'norm' is a summation of typical activities and beliefs of group of people. This essay will evaluate the sociological theories associated with crime and deviance and to compare and contrast these main theories. And find links between these theories to today’s society. There are various Sociological deviance theories, including Structuralist: why do some people break the rules? ,

Drug abuse and crime is not a new concept and the statistics around the problem have continued to rise. According to (Office of Justice Programs, 2011), there were an estimated 1,846,400 state and local arrests for drug abuse in the United States. Additionally, 17 percent of state prisoners and 18 percent of federal inmates said they committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs (Office of Justice Programs, 2011). Based on this information, we can conclude that our criminal justice systems are saturated with drug abusers. The United States has the highest imprisonment rate and about 83 percent of arrests are for possession of illegal drugs (Prisons & Drug Offenders, 2011). Based on these figures, I can conclude that we should be more concerned about solving the drug abusers problems and showing them an alternative lifestyle rather than strict penalty of long term incarceration which will inevitably challenge their ability to be fully functioning citizens after release.