CRIME AND DEVIANCE A2 SOCIOLOGY

DEFINITIONS OF CRIME AND DEVIANCE
MEASURES OF CRIME (crime statistics, self report studies, victim surves, interviews, observation)
THEORIES OF CRIME (functionalist - strain, subcultural, ecological; labelling - interactionist; marxism; neo-marxism - new criminology/critical criminology, gilroy, hall; new left realism; new right realism; postmodernism)
GENDER AND CRIME (chivalry thesis, liberation and crime, carlen, hiedonsohn, masculinity and crime)
SUICIDE (durkheim, halbwachs, gibbs and martin, douglas, atkinson, hindes, taylor)
PUNISHMENT AND SOCIAL CONTROL (definition, crime prevention strategies, formal agencies, informal agencies, links to realism, victimisation)
MEDIA AND CRIME (representations of crime, media causing crime, moral panics)
ETHNICITY AND CRIME (ethnicity and criminalisation, explaining differences in offending - left realism and neo marxism-, ethnicity and victimisation
GLOBALISATION (globalisation and crime, green crime, human rights and state crime)
RESEARCH METHODS (primary methods, secondary sources, alternative theories of methodology, key concepts - validity, reliability, practicality, representetive, generalisation, quantitive/qualitative, positivist/interpretevist)
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES (functionalism, marxism, feminism, action theories, postmodernism, sociology and science, can sociology be value free?, sociology and social policy)

Crime
-A crime refers to a behaviour that is against the criminal law as opposed to the civil law. This enables the state to punish the offender through the legal system.
-Two different types of crime...
     Indictable - legal term for serious crime e.g. murder
     non-indictable- legal term for less serious crime e.g. dropping litter

Deviance
Deviant behaviour is behaviour which differs from  the norms, values and expectations of society. e.g. an older person dating a considerably younger person.
Theoretically, it doesn't have to be behaviour that society is critical of, but it usually is.

Reactions to Deviance:
- Positive sanctions: Showing approval, e.g. giving someone a medal for heroic behaviour
-Negative sanctions: Showing disaproval e.g. sending someone to prison, ignoring someone
-Indiference: Neither approval or dissaproval e.g. reactions to being left handed

Official criminal statistics are published annually, but always 2 years out of date. The British Crime Survey (questionaire to a sample of people asking if they've been a victim of crime) has been running since the 80s; and it's results tends to corroborate crime statistics.

Shows: Young people (especially males aged 16-24) are most at risk of violent crime, Children under the age of 1 are most vulnerable to murder (family members usually in rage), Old people are least at risk of violent crime and Afro-Caribbeans are over-represented in the prison population.

VALIDITY OF OFFICIAL STATISTICS:
Alison Morris: The dark figure of crime
-'We only know what recorded crime looks like, not what actual crime is. It could be up or down we just don't know.

- Positivists tend to favour criminal statistics as it produces quantitative date. Interpretevists are critical of this.
-An interactionist point that isn't obvious is that although they generally point to the dis-advantages of criminal statistics, they do point to ONE use. That criminal statistics tell you something about the prejudices of those who compile the stats.

Advantages:

- Reliability: can make comparisons because they are recorded every year.

-Representativeness: They allow comparrisons to be made between variables such as gender, ethnicity and age to see what type of crime affects what social group.

-Practicality: they are cost effective as they are available on the gov. website and open for anyone to use. Also due to the easy accessability, they are very time effective.

Disadvantages:

-Validity: not all crime is recorded by the police and this impacts the vaildity of stats e.g. police can issue a warning without making it official, if they arrested every drunk person on a saturday night, theyd never manage the paperwork. Also if a crackdown is ordered on a paticular group, police records will show an increase in the area of crackdown; but nothings changed in reality,
Some crime isn't reported- could be down to fear of repraisal, mistrust in the police, embarrasment if its a sexual crime Etc.
Furthermore, they are always 2 year out of date.

- Reliability: (counter argument), you can't always make comparissons- they may not be true. Definitions of crime change over time and this can reflect in stats. An example is the 1998 British gov reclassifying some offences as serious offences, seeing crime go up as a result; if they kept the old classifications they would've gone down.

These are anonmous questionairres usually given to young people; they are used more in the USA than in England. They involve asking people about their own illegal activities and shoe higher rates of crime and deviance that official statistics. The results tend to show that middle class crime, and female crime is under-estimated.

ADVANTAGES:

- May be more valid than official crime statistics
-They can be compared with official crime statistics to see what groups are over represented
-They can uncover 'victimless' crime such as illegal drug use

DISADVANTAGES:

-It's very possible that people might lie when filling out a self-report study. Despite guarantee of anonymity, some people may feel embarrassed and ashamed of their deviant activities; and younger people may exaggerate due to bravado and the desire to appear tough.
-Under-reporting may occur due to forgetfullness, especially if an older person tries to remember their teenage years.

Participant observation is a primary research method in which the sociologist studies a group by taking a role within it and partaking in it's activities. It may be overt, where other participants are aware of the researchers true identity/motive, or covert, where the sociologists identity/purpose is kept secret.

ADVANTAGES:
-COVERT Observation should allow for the most verstehen - achieving empathetic understanding. It is the best method to allow the researcher to immerse themselves into the lives of those being studied.
-If the group don't know they are being studied, this should be a method with a high degree of validity. Even if the observation is overt, if the researcher spends enough time with them, they will gain the trust of those getting observed, and should still be highly valid.[VALIDITY]
-The researcher may discover areas to research that they were unaware of initially [Validity?]
-The method is inexpensive [PRACTICALITY]

DISADVANTAGES:
- There are ethical problems such as lack of consent if the research is covert. Also, researchers, when observing a group involved in criminal activity, may have to partake in criminal activity to keep their cover. These issues are in essence, breaking the law.
-Small samples may not be representative; by looking at one group, at a paticular time can not be a representative piece of research that applies to other groups/wider society. [REPRESENTATIVE]
-Theres a danger of going native or becoming too involved in the group that the researcher is observing. This may effect the way observation findings are recorded. [VALIDITY]

Interviews are a method of gathering information by asking questions orally, either face to face, or by telephone. Structures interviews use pre-set, usually close-ended questions producing quentitative data. Unstructured interviews are more like a guided conversation and use open-ended questions producing qualitative data.

ADVANTAGES:
-The method of unstructured/informal interviews allows people to speak openly and without the restrictions of a social survey. Qualitative data produced.
-This method allows for some degree of verstehen, or empathy, with those who are interviewed; puts them more at ease and are more likely to be truthful and open in this environment, as opposed to a closed anwsert questionaire.
-This method should provide a truthful reflection as long as interviewees tell the truth [VALIDITY]

DISADVANTAGES:
-Small samples may not be representative and may not allow generalised statements to be made. [GENERALISATION]
-The age, sex, gender or social class of the interviewer could influence the anwsers given by the interviewee [VALIDITY]
-The interviews and the subsequent analysis of data may be time consuming and expensice in terms of wages (people involved in the process) and hiring a suitable venue for interview. [PRACTICALITY]

Functionalist view of society is based on consensus; consensus values are essential to the maintenence of social stability. Durkheim argues that it is necessary to have a certain amount of rule breaking in society. Society is seen by functionalists to run more smoothly if the rules are re-inforced by people seeing offenders being punished; it makes the boundaries of acceptable behaviour clear to all.

DURKHEIM- A little bit of crime is helpful  
-Argues that although some crime is beneficial, too much crime can be harmful. This is typically associated with the societal condition of anomie (when the collective conscience is weakned); normally seen as a result of times of stress or change, and can potentially lead to the collaspe of social order.

COHEN- A warning on areas of concern
-Argues crime gives an indication that theres something wrong with society e.g. unemployment, and the needs of the people who've been laid off to do something may lead to an increase in crime.

CRITICISMS:
-They don't specify what the 'right amount' of crime is
- Just because functionalists see crime to strengthen solidarity, that doesn't mean it was created to do this; benefitting society doesn't have to be it's sole purpose. It also ignores the dysfunction of crime for the victim.
-Crime might create friction within society, rather than solidarity. E.g. sets one group agaisnt another; youth, ethnic minorities.

Merton is a functionalist who talks about things being dysfunctional.

For Merton, the existence of shared social norma/values, led to there being approved goals and approved ways of reaching these goals. He looked to 1930s USA and the 'American Dream'; this saw the goal as success by the possesion of wealth. But, the majority of the population could never achieve this goal by the approved means like hard work and for those who's path to success was blocked, Merton identified a range of alternatives...
- Conformity and Ritualism (no changes in behaviour)
-Innovation (could mean turning to crime)
- Retreatism (could mean drug and alcohol abuse)
-Rebellion (could mean belonging to a dissident group, rejecting of mainstream values)

Merton explains how normal and deviant behaviour can arise from the same mainstream goals, but he summarised that the more anomie (disjuncction between goals and means) there was, the more crime there was likely to be.

CRITICISMS:
 -His theory only suggests different reactions, not why people choose the reaction that they do. If they are seen to choose their reaction, this leaves the question of whether deviance is just an individual choice. It ignores the role of 'group deviance'
-It only accounts for crime related to monetary gain, and can't really be applied to crimes of violence, vandalism etc. It's also hard to see how it could account for state crimes e.g. genocide, torture.
-It takes official statistics at face value- it is too deterministic in its belief that because 'they experience the most strain, all working classes are seen to deviate'.

Subcultural theorists believe that deviance is the result of groups holding different values from the 'mainstream' of society. They blame the structure of society for the reason why some groups fail to achieve mainstream goals.

COHEN- The delinquent subculture
-Develops on previous theories in two ways: he points out that devianve is a COLLECTIVE rather than individual response to the structure of society and that Merton's view (although highly plausible for the explanations of adult professional crime) doesn't explain NON-UTILITARIAN crime (crime not for monetary gain).
-He outlines that lower class youths hold goals of the mainstream, but can't succeed due to CULTURAL DEPRIVATION (wc values prevent success at school). He see's this to result in STATUS FRUSTRATION and the response being rejection of mainstream values and daviant behaviour becoming a valued activity with attatched satistaction.
-The overall outcome is a DELINQUENT SUBCULTURE

WALTER B MILLER- WC values are different from MC values from the very begining
-Argues that the lower class of society is a group with distinctive values, these being: toughness, smartness and excitement. He refers to these as the FOCAL CONCERNS and the response to the low paid jobs.
-Delinquency is seen as an exaggeration of these focal concerns in youths; bordering criminal behaviour.

CRITICISM:
 'Matza- Delinquency and Drift' to criticise Cohen and Miller; he's not a subcultural theorist.
-Argues that subcultural theorists are too deterministic; not everyone are full time criminals.
- Instead, he argues, deviants do accept mainstream values most of the time- they are 'part-time criminals'.
-There are three stages which explains why crime might be possible, might be attractive and might be committed
-Thus, he talks of a Subculture of Delinquency (rather than a delinquent subculture, made up of the lower class youths); far less of a generalisation.

Subcultural theorists believe that deviance is the result of groups holding different values from the 'mainstream' of society. They blame the structure of society for the reason why some groups fail to achieve mainstream goals.

COHEN- The delinquent subculture
-Develops on previous theories in two ways: he points out that devianve is a COLLECTIVE rather than individual response to the structure of society and that Merton's view (although highly plausible for the explanations of adult professional crime) doesn't explain NON-UTILITARIAN crime (crime not for monetary gain).
-He outlines that lower class youths hold goals of the mainstream, but can't succeed due to CULTURAL DEPRIVATION (wc values prevent success at school). He see's this to result in STATUS FRUSTRATION and the response being rejection of mainstream values and daviant behaviour becoming a valued activity with attatched satistaction.
-The overall outcome is a DELINQUENT SUBCULTURE

WALTER B MILLER- WC values are different from MC values from the very begining
-Argues that the lower class of society is a group with distinctive values, these being: toughness, smartness and excitement. He refers to these as the FOCAL CONCERNS and the response to the low paid jobs.
-Delinquency is seen as an exaggeration of these focal concerns in youths; bordering criminal behaviour.

CRITICISM:
 'Matza- Delinquency and Drift' to criticise Cohen and Miller; he's not a subcultural theorist.
-Argues that subcultural theorists are too deterministic; not everyone are full time criminals.
- Instead, he argues, deviants do accept mainstream values most of the time- they are 'part-time criminals'.
-There are three stages which explains why crime might be possible, might be attractive and might be committed
-Thus, he talks of a Subculture of Delinquency (rather than a delinquent subculture, made up of the lower class youths); far less of a generalisation.

Two types of Marxism: Classical/traditional Marxism, and, Neo-Marxism/Critical Criminology (same thing)

The Bourgeosie is seen to expliot the Proletariat and is able to keep it's power partly through it's ability to use the law to criminalise working class activities. The laws created by the state reflect the interests of the ruling class.

CRIMINOGENIC CAPITALISM (Capitalism causes crime)
-Argues that crime in capitalism is inavoidable; it's very nature produces crime. Rises is crime can be argued to be as a result of the setting of a capitalist society, for example:
-Poverty: Peple need basic things to live and can only get these by commiting crime, it enables the working class to survive.
- As crime might be the only way to get consumer goods encouraged by capitalist advertising, it may give rise to utilitarian crime (theft). This is typical of the middle class; capitalism causes greed for further financial gain and thus, giving rise to white collar crime.
- Alienation (feeling out of controll of your own life; frustrated and agressive) felt by both sides of society can lead to non-utilitarian crime such as violence and vandalism.
-Therefore, all types of crime are seen as a rational response - by all classes - to the capitalist system they live within.

PEARSE- Law is enforced to divert attention away from the ills of capitalism,
-Some laws that are occasionally passed, appear to be benefitting the working class rather than capitalism. E.g. workplace health and safety laws.
-Argues such laws benefit the middle class too- for example, keeping the labour source fit for work. By giving capitalism a 'caring face', such laws create a sense of false class conciousness among the workers (that they have a higher level of meaning to society, than reality suggests).

The Law is seen to mainly benefit the Bourgeoisie, but the Proletariat do win concessions.TAYLOR, WALTON AND YOUNG- The New Crinimology
-Agree with traditional Marxists that: capitalist society is based on exploitation and class conflict, the state makes and enforces laws in the interests ot the ruling class, and that capitalism should be replaced by a classless-society.
-Also differ significantly from traditional marxists and much of their book is a critique of them and other perspectives...
-Argue traditional marxists view is deterministic e.g. it sees workers commit crime of of economic necessity. They reject and take a volounteristic view; that people make choices/have free will.
-Suggests other theorists need to reconsider:
The act of crime itself and it's meaning for the offendor (was it a form of rebellion against capitalism?) - INTERACTIONISM CRITIC.
The wider origins, in the structure of society: especially the issue of who has the power of defining what acts are deviant/criminal, and why are some acts treated more harshly than others.- T.MARXISM CRITIC

STUART HALL - Policing the Crisis
- Argues that informal social controll - especially the media - is used to divert attention from the ills of capitalism, divide the working class and weaken the opposition to capitalism.
-Points to the moral panic about mugging in the early 1970s; he states the percentage increace in violent crime was less than it was in the 1950s, yet no moral panic in the 50s.
-Reason for the need of a 'moral panic'- crisis of hegemony (proletariat questioning the right of bourgoisie rule over them), industril unrest and student protests etc.CRITICISMS OF HALL- He's contradictory- he says crime wasn't rising but then it did rise due to unemployment in the 70s.

CRITICISMS:
-Romanticises crime        -Ignores the victim          -Too general and idealistic.

Approach questions the assumption that criminals and deviants were in some way different from non-criminals and non-deviants. They have looked to explain by looking at the process of social interaction in which some actions, individuals and groups were labelled as deviant, and others were not.

BECKER: No act is deviant untill it's labelled as deviant.
- Whether the label 'daviant' is applied depends on who commits the act, who the act is committed against and when and where it takes place etc.
- For someone to be labelled as a 'criminal'/'deviant' it imposes a master sustus on them, and because peoples self-concepts rely so much on how others see them, this can become a self fulfilling prophecy. The person labelled may even join a deviant group where their new identity will be confirmed and re-inforced- they will have started a deviant career.

CICOUREL: The negotiation of justice.
- Argues officers decisions to arrest are influenced by their stereotypes about the offenders; points to his study in America of how the police react towards WC and MC youth.
-Found that although both groups behave in the same way, the working class get treated as they are delinquents/deviant and the police take a more agressive approach, often leading to arrest. The middle class with the same behaviour was interpreted as 'youthfull high spirits', requiring a word off the police but no more.
-The result was that the working class became a self fulfilling prophecy; they got a label, then a court appearence for 'offences', then gained a labell from wider society.

JOCK YOUNG: It's not the deviant act itself, but the hostile societal reaction by the social audience, that creates serious deviance.
-Uses his study of Hippies in Notting Hill; how drug use became more and more central to the hippies way of life because of the reaction of the police.
-Argued that hippies did use marijuana, but not predominantly; it was only when they were arrested/convicted, that they became defined by their use and isolated. Isolation led to Hippies loosing contact with society and stronger association with other users, leading to further use; marijuana became the central feature of the sub-culture.
-Therefore another example of a self-fulfilling prophecy; and ironically, he argues its the social controll processes, that are meant to produce law-abiding behaviour, produces the opposite.

EVALUATION OF LABELLING THEORY:
-Labelling theory has been influencial, particularly with young offenders and there have been attempts to keep them out the criminal justice system.
-Braithwaite identifies a more positive role for the labelling process and distinguished between two types of shaming: Disintegrative shaminng (condemning the act, and the person; excluding them from society) and Reintegrative shaming (condemning the act, not the person; 'he's done a bad thing', not 'he is a bad person'). Argues Reintergrative shaming avoids stigmatising the offender as evil, whilst at the same time making them aware of the negative impacts of their actions.
- One criticism of interactionism is that it implies that without labelling, deviance wouldn't exist. Therefore is comes tot he strange conclusion that offenders arent aware of their deviant behaviour, untill society has reacted; when most are well aware they are going against the norms/values of society.

JOCK YOUNG: It's not the deviant act itself, but the hostile societal reaction by the social audience, that creates serious deviance.
-Uses his study of Hippies in Notting Hill; how drug use became more and more central to the hippies way of life because of the reaction of the police.
-Argued that hippies did use marijuana, but not predominantly; it was only when they were arrested/convicted, that they became defined by their use and isolated. Isolation led to Hippies loosing contact with society and stronger association with other users, leading to further use; marijuana became the central feature of the sub-culture.
-Therefore another example of a self-fulfilling prophecy; and ironically, he argues its the social controll processes, that are meant to produce law-abiding behaviour, produces the opposite.

EVALUATION OF LABELLING THEORY:
-Labelling theory has been influencial, particularly with young offenders and there have been attempts to keep them out the criminal justice system.
-Braithwaite identifies a more positive role for the labelling process and distinguished between two types of shaming: Disintegrative shaminng (condemning the act, and the person; excluding them from society) and Reintegrative shaming (condemning the act, not the person; 'he's done a bad thing', not 'he is a bad person'). Argues Reintergrative shaming avoids stigmatising the offender as evil, whilst at the same time making them aware of the negative impacts of their actions.
- One criticism of interactionism is that it implies that without labelling, deviance wouldn't exist. Therefore is comes tot he strange conclusion that offenders arent aware of their deviant behaviour, untill society has reacted; when most are well aware they are going against the norms/values of society.

Right realism sees crime, especially street crime, as a growing social problem that destroys communities, undermines social cohesion and threatnes societys work ethic. Approach has been evry influential in the UK, for example it's provided the justification for widely adopted policies such as 'zero tolerance' of street crime/disorder.

MURRAY: The Welfare states 'genorous revolution'
-Uses the example of the USA welfare state, and argues that it's 'genorosity' has created a culture of dependancy and weakened the work ethic. This has given a rise to lone parent families and a decline in marriage as the state will support the women and children; the father is no longer the only means for financial support so they no longer have the responsibility of having to work.
- He points out however, mothers alone aren't effective socialising agents and young boys with a lack of paternal guidance/discipline, will turn to other, often delinquent role models on the street. They seek to gain status through crime rather than supporting their families through a teady job; for Murray, this underclass is not only a source of crime, but a threat to social cohesion etc.

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY
-Despite the cultural factors put forward, there is nothing inevitable about a person turning to crime; it is always a matter of choice.
-This choice is based on the rational calculation of the likely consqeuences; if percieved that the rewards outweigh the risk, then people will more likely offend.

Right realism on tackling crime:
WILSON AND KELLING: Broken Windows article.
-Argues that is essential to maintain the orderly character of neighbourhoods to prevent crime taking hold, for example any sign of deterioration like a smashed window, or grafiti, should/must be dealt with immediatley.
-Any minor sign of neglect, is seen by Wilson and Kelling, to potentially lead to a climate of disorder, allowing more serious crime to become possible. ZERO TOLERANCE is a policing strategy that involves cracking down on minor infringements (broken window, unliscences street trading etc) to try create a situation in which crime is less possible.
- They see the solution to crime as harsher sentences and crime prevention e.g. Zero Tolerance and Target Hardening

EVAL. OF RIGHT REALISM:
- This approach has influenced government measures in Britain and the USA to combat crime.
- LEFT AND LIBARAL CRITICS see it as an approach that justifies inequality and criminalises the poor; they argue it fails to recognise that greed is a product of capitalist society, not an inevitable part of human nature.

This approach sees the causes of crime in the economic structure of society, and argues that disadvantaged groups within society are more likely to be the offenders, as well as being more at risk of being victims.

LEA AND YOUNG: The three causes of crime are relative deprivation, marginalisation, and subculture.
- They looked on the impact of crime on the daily lives of vulnerable groups, the offenders were often from these groups too, but their criminality could not be excused or justifies politically.
- Relative deprivation- refers to the gap between the expectations people have, and the reality of what they can obtain. E.g. groupd of ethnic minorities may find their path to status/wealth, being blocked by discrimination, and might turn to crime as a way of means.
-Marginalisation- refers to being pushed to the fringes of society, for example, in not having representatives or organisations to speak up for you. Therefore individuals can become frustrated and lash out.
-Subcultures- a group which holds values varied from the mainstream values arise as a resuly to such problems. They are not completley seperate from society as they still share the goal of wealth/status; in these ways crime is related to the economic structure of society.

KINSEY - Problems with tackling crime
-Aspects of society don't trust the police, and they are seen to have to use tactics (e.g. stop and search method) which then leads to resentment and the alienation of communities. Left realists suggest that the police improve their relationship with local communities by spending more time invstigating crime instead of stop and searching, and changing their priorities (seen to over-police minor drug offences, but under-police racist and domestic violence attacks).

Official statistics suggest that female crime was on a small scale and it was seen as of little imoprtance, limited to shoplifting and prostitution. It has been suggested that the criminology suffers from inherent male bias and needs to be transformed if it is to make further progress.

PATTERNS AND TRENDS:

- 4 out of 5 convicted offenders are male

- Males are more likely to commit crimes of violence

- Women are more likely to commit property crimes e.g. burglary

- Males are more likely to be re-convicted

POLLAK: CHIVALRY THESIS
-Argues that relativley low numbers of women offenders in official statistics may be the result of different treatment by the police/courts. Women are more likley to be able to avoid geting caught because they're able to decieve men e.g. through tears, sex appeal etc. and if they do get caught, they're more likely to be relativley lesser sentences.
-This can be seen as reflecting the assumption (by men) that females involved in crime are likely to have been 'led on' by a male companion.

IN FAVOUR OF C.THESIS:
Flood-Page et al - 'While only one in eleven female self reported offenders have been prosecuted/cautioned, the figure for males was over one in seven self-reported offenders.'

AGAINST C.THESIS:
Farrington and Morris- Did a study of sentencing of 400+ theft cases in a magistrates court and found that 'women WASN'T sentenced more leniantley for comparable offences.'

HIEDENSON: Control Theory (partiarchal control)
-Argues the most striking thing about womens behaviour is how 'conformist' it is; they comit fewer crimes than men because society imposes patriarchal controll on them in three key ways.
-Control at home: womens domestic role, with its constant round of housework and childcare, imposes severe restrictions on their time and movement. As a result, it reduces their opportunities to offend. Daughters are less likely to offend too as they are subject to patriarchal control; they develop 'bedroom culture'- which sees them hang out with friends at home, rather than in public places.

-Control in public areas/outside: Controlled in public areas by the threat/fear of male violence against them, especially sexual violence. The British crime survey found for example, over 50% of women avoided going out alone after dark for this reason. Also women fear of gaining a reputation as all their actions are open to scrutiny (their appearence, actions and demeanour), therefore they may avoid pubs for example; which Hiedenson describes as 'sites of criminal behaviour'.

-Controll at work: Womens behaviour is controlled by male supervisors and managers. Sexual harrasment is commonplace, as it helps keep in place the 'glass ceiling- shows women senior positions, makes them appear attainable, but prevents them from rising to them.