Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Biological psychological and sociological reasons for crime
Biological psychological and sociological reasons for crime
Social structure and social process
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the criminal justice system, different theories are looked at to see why criminal acts are committed and what mindset must a person have to commit these acts. Two theories that come up are that of the social structure theory and the social process and social development theory which can both be argued as to why criminal behaviors exist in society today. This paper will take a look at the Tent City, Arizona video and how it supports the social structure theory. This paper will discuss how the tent city video supports the social structure theory in addition to the primary subject or content of the video. It will also discuss social issues raised in the video and major principles of sociological theory addressed in the video. To conclude, …show more content…
The social structure theory is the societal and economic evaluation of groups of people. Social structure theory can also be referred to the social class system. Society is broken into “the rich”, “the middle class”, and “the poor”. This is the most simplistic breakdown of the social structure theory but it will allow us to examine Tent City, Arizona. The social structure theory is used in the jail system in Maricopa County on a macro-level but the social structure theory is removed on the micro-level of Tent City. In Tent City there is no social structure, there are no extras allowed in the tents. The inmates go in and only have the tents. They do not have anything with them and things like tobacco are not allowed. The structure is not one based on economics or possessions that can be bartered. Inmates have a class system in some of the other jails but in Tent …show more content…
If the jail were to segregate the inmates by race and keep them away from each other, violence in the jail would decline. Inmates mostly assault other inmates from another race and rarely their own, so if these inmates are segregated by race in different areas from each other, the incidence of assault would more than likely decline. At this point you could focus on crimes within specific races and the threat of a race war is not much of an issue. Another ramification possible with the inmates of different offenses is the fact that the more aggressive offenders or more seasoned offenders can manipulate and teach the minor offenders to do things they may not have known or wanted to do in the past. For some inmates they feel needed and capable of learning the ropes from these offenders. By the time they get out, they are more knowledgeable of different crimes and how to commit them when manipulated by the seasoned
He is a decorated veteran, scholar and successful business leader upon graduating. In comparison to the other Wes Moore who never seemed to escape his childhood and ended up in prison. The theory that best explains the authors’ noninvolvement in a life of crime vs. the criminality of the other Wes Moore is the social disorganization theory. Shaw and McKay, the founders of this theory, believed that “juvenile delinquency could be understood only by considering the social context in which youths lived. A context that itself was a product of major societal transformations wrought by rapid urbanization, unbridled industrialization, and massive population shifts” (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2015). The theory is centered around transitional zones and competition determined how people were distributed spatially among these zones (Lilly et al., 2015). This model founded by Ernest Burgess showed that high priced residential areas were in the outer zones and the inner zones consisted of poverty (Lilly et al.,
As a social process theory, drift and Neutralization sees a crime to be a part of wider social interactions. It views social order as non objective and non consensual and posits that there is not a single fundamental social goal that is held by all social groups; rather there are many different overlapping social values within a society, both conventional and delinquent: legitimate and illegitimate. Drift and Neutralization Theory posits that individuals learn values and delinquent behaviours through their exposure to sub-cultural values. “Deviant or delinquent (or criminal) subcultures do not reject ‘dominant’ values and beliefs. Instead, there is tension between inclinations to adhere to mainstream values and beliefs.” This sees that criminals can drift between deviant and conventional behaviours and how to use various techniques of neutralisation to rationalise their criminal activity. In analysing McVeigh’s motives, his learned sub cultural values can be examined to demonstrate how he was able to rationalise his violations of the law and how he came to drift from non delinquent to delinquent actions. The techniques of neutralisation; denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of
This documentary Lockdown: Gang vs. Family by Gail Mitchell (2007) was a good way to prove the sociological theories that were mentioned in this paper. After reading more about the theories, I applied them to my life and my peer’s lives and it could be a proven fact for everyone and not just criminals. It is just more applicable
Two major sociological theories explain youth crime at the macro level. The first is Social Disorganization theory, created in 1969 by Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay. The theory resulted from a study of juvenile delinquency in Chicago using information from 1900 to 1940, which attempts to answer the question of how aspects of the structure of a community contribute to social control. The study found that a community that is unable to achieve common values has a high rate of delinquency. Shaw and McKay looked at the physical appearance of the neighborhoods, the average income of the population, the ethnicity of the neighborhood, the percent of renters versus owners, and how fast the population of the area changed. These factors all contribute to neighborhood delinquency.
2. Did you easily find the National Criminal Justice Reference Service when you searched for NCJRS on the search tools?
Morris (2000) argues that we should see youth crimes as a social failure, not as an individual level failure. Next, Morris (2000) classifies prisons as failures. Recidivism rates are consistently higher in prisons than in other alternatives (Morris, 2000). The reason for this is that prisons breed crime. A school for crime is created when a person is removed from society and labeled; they become isolated, angry and hopeless (Morris, 2000).
The theory directly links the type community with the crime rates it has. Social Disorganization Theory was developed by Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay in the Chicago School in 1942. They discovered that crime rates were not even across all communities. Despite changes in population Shaw and Mckay noticed that the crime was concentrated and stable among certain areas. Communities who were economically deprived, had high crime rates and increased population turnover were the cities that they considered to be socially disorganized. According to Regoeczi and Jarvis (2013), Extensions and revisions of this theory have included more explicit discussions of the intervening processes between such structural factors as economic deprivation and residential instability and crime rates. A persons physical and social environments are partly responsible for the decisions that they make. Shaw and Mckay did not directly correlate low income neighborhoods with crime, bust instead low income neighborhoods had higher turnover rates and the people who would move into the neighborhood were usually immigrants which then resulted in racial heterogeneity. Aspects of a person’s neighborhood can be looked at and used to predict whether there will be higher crime rates in the neighborhood. This theory is used to help law enforcement predict where the higher crime will be and therefore allow them to prevent
According to the video “The Criminal Justice System Myth v. Reality: Crime has been steadily increasing” during the late 1980's early 1990's the crime rates overall had gone up because of the increased number of juvenile crimes and homicide rates for youth. It’s these kinds of trends that caused population growth in prisons. Additionally juveniles being sent from juvenile courts to adult courts and changes in policies such as mandatory minimum laws that required time in prison for drugs and crimes related to homicide.
If given this prompt at the beginning of this semester I would have answered with a resounding yes, the criminal justice system is racist. The classes I have previously taken at LSU forced me to view the criminal justice system as a failed institution and Eric Holder’s interview in VICE - Fixing The System solidified that ideology. The system is man-made, created by people in power, and imposed on society, so of course there will be implicit biases. The issue is that these internally held implicit biases shaped the system, leading the racial and class disparities. VICE – Fixing The System addressed heavily the outcomes that we see in today’s society based on these implicit biases. Additionally, this documentary focuses on the ways that mainly
Instead of providing a place where segregation is at a minimum, prisons all across America are dealing with gang violence and race issues. These issues are known as “Prison Politics” to some. No matter who you are, or where you’re from, when entering prison you become identified by your skin tone. The level of gangs and cultural groups are so high, that often inmates have no choice but to follow the crowd. Sure, they could choose not to cooperate in the gang life, but where does that leave them? Then they will become the targets with no defense. The pressure to become accepted is so important in prison survival, that some inmates will throw away their morals just to protect themselves. Prison officials often condone the promotion of racial segregation. If one person of a specific race was found suspicious, they have the right to lock down every person of the same nationality. They often bunk same races together to cut down the risk of altercations. This is probably for the best at the time being, but it makes you wonder why they don’t attempt to do something about gang involvement. You hear about classes on drug intervention, schooling, and religion. Why don’t they have a class on racial acceptance? I’m sure it wouldn’t convert the beliefs of many inmates, but it would at least show some effort to bring down the segregation
Therefore, the community has informal social control, or the connection between social organization and crime. Some of the helpful factors to a community can be informal surveillance, movement-governing rules, and direct intervention. They also contain unity, structure, and integration. All of these qualities are proven to improve crime rate. Socially disorganized communities lack those qualities. According to our lecture, “characteristics such as poverty, residential mobility, and racial/ethnic heterogeneity contribute to social disorganization.” A major example would be when a community has weak social ties. This can be caused from a lack of resources needed to help others, such as single-parent families or poor families. These weak social ties cause social disorganization, which then leads higher levels of crime. According to Seigel, Social disorganization theory concentrates on the circumstances in the inner city that affect crimes. These circumstances include the deterioration of the neighborhoods, the lack of social control, gangs and other groups who violate the law, and the opposing social values within these neighborhoods (Siegel,
From the beginning of the Criminal Justice System, the obsession was with prison and punishment. In the last few years, this focus forced the jail and prison populations to skyrocket higher than any other place in the world. There is never a class we are not reminded there are currently 2.3 million people in United States prisons and jails. The criminal justice system or the correctional system has not changed yet remained its focus on deterrence and isolation not on the proactive ways of dealing with crime.
The criminal justice system is composed of three parts – Police, Courts and Corrections – and all three work together to protect an individual’s rights and the rights of society to live without fear of being a victim of crime. According to merriam-webster.com, crime is defined as “an act that is forbidden or omission of a duty that is commanded by public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law.” When all the three parts work together, it makes the criminal justice system function like a well tuned machine.
Firstly, in order to gain a better understanding of the problems that plague our correctional system we must fully understand the enormous overcrowding problem that exists in the majority of state and federal prisons. Since 1980 the prison population has quadrupled and only the numbers continue to rise (Schmalleger, 2012).To help reduce the overcrowding problem within our prisons, taxpayers have funded 102 new correctional facilities since 1980 (Shelden, 1999).... ... middle of paper ... ... Offenders that are incarcerated within the prison quickly find a group of people commonly associated with their ethnic groups to establish a rapport with.
The criminal justice system views any crime as a crime committed against the state and places much emphasis on retribution and paying back to the community, through time, fines or community work. Historically punishment has been a very public affair, which was once a key aspect of the punishment process, through the use of the stocks, dunking chair, pillory, and hangman’s noose, although in today’s society punishment has become a lot more private (Newburn, 2007). However it has been argued that although the debt against the state has been paid, the victim of the crime has been left with no legal input to seek adequate retribution from the offender, leaving the victim perhaps feeling unsatisfied with the criminal justice process.