Theories of Crime

deviance

behaviour that moves away from conventional norms and values e.g. facial tattoos, burping at a meal.

functionalist basic view on crime

agree on 3 principles of crime and deviance showing it is a normal part of everyday life which can being some benefits to wider society.

• crime and deviance is not only inevitable but also necessary.

• crime and deviance acts in a positive way to reinforce ideas or right and wrong in society. 

• there is such thing as a “perfect amount of crime” which is healthy and beneficial for society. 

Durkheim’s 5 positive functions of crime

1. remarking social boundaries- crime reaffirms social norms and values, and the boundaries of accepted behaviours so people know how they are expected to act.

2. media coverage- when a serious crime is shown on the media which reminds everyone that if they commit serious crimes, others will know about it e.g. the sex offenders list.

3. increased social cohesion- crime brings the wider community together in their disapproval which strengthens the relationship between individuals and shows criminals their behaviour is not welcome.

4. the safety valve: crime allows people to do lower level acts than breaking down social order through actions with more serious consequences.

• Kingsley Davis: better for a man to cheat with a prostitute than take out frustrations through domestic abuse.

5. warning light to a malfunctioning society- crime alerts us to a malfunction in society which can then be dealt with. it is a symptom of larger issues. e.g. high stealing rate may indicate poverty.

emile durkheim ‘society of saints

would be populated by perfect individuals meaning there would be on crime.

however there would still be deviance as the general standards of behaviour would be so high that the slightest slip would be regarded as a serious offence e.g. being slightly impolitie would get strong disapproval

evaluating durkheim

had an immense influence on sociology and led to discussion about crime having positive functions.

highlights the reality that crimes do reset social boundaries.

first to analyse deviance in terms of broad sociological theory.

says a necessary amount of deviance is needed but offers no way of knowing how much. 

does not explain why certain people are more likely to commit crimes than others. 

would argue that murder is functional as it strengthens social bonds but the affect on the victim is not functional for them.

no explanation of why people crime just for why it is functional

too optimistic about people being cooperative, people are self interested and so commit crime.

not all crime is functional- can isolate people further and cause them to not leave home. 

functionalist, Robert merton, strain theory

people commit crime due to the way our social structure is organised.

focused on the american dream (anyone can achieve success if they work hard enough) and utilitarian crimes e.g. theft, embezzlement

conformist - accepts goal- legitimate means

innovator- accepts goal- illegitimate means (criminal)
ritualist- rejects goal (just given up)

retreatist- rejects goals- illegitimate means (deviants e.g. alcoholics, homeless)

rebel- rejects goal for alternative- illegitimate means as society see them as weird e.g. karl marx, martin luther king

functionalist, albert cohen

focuses on non-utilitarian crime e.g. vandalism, trespassing

young people experience status frustration as their social position has a long term negative impact on their lives.

• especially w/c boys who live in deprived areas as are more likely to struggle with education and lack the qualifications needed for employment

• these boys look for acceptance from others who also have norms and values different from mainstream either in a a deviant or criminal subculture. 

• looking for revenge so are therefore uninterested in money. 

• use deviance, intimidation and non-utilitarian crimes to earn status and respect from peers.

functionalists, cloward and ohlin

suggest varied social circumstances lead to 3 types of subculture.

1. criminal subculture- develops in a more stable w/c area with an established pattern of adult crime meaning adults create learning opportunities to encourage young criminals to do utilitarian crimes for a financial reward rather than non utilitarian. 

2. conflict subculture- develops in a socially disorganised area with high population turnover and a lack of social cohesion. leads to gang warfare through violence and street crime in order to obtain status within a subculture. 

3. retreatist subculture- emerges among w/c youth who are “double failures” (failed in mainstream and within a gang) so withdraw to druga ddicition, alcoholism and utilitarian crimes to fund these e.g. drug dealing, prostitution. 

functionalist, hirschi, control theory

developed control theory to explain why most people conform and refrain from crime.

we are controlled by 4 social bonds which hold individuals back from getting involved in crime. 

1. attachment- people are attached to those around them like friends and family and are sensitive to and interested in their needs and wishes. 

2. beliefs- people share moral beliefs such as respect for rights of others and need for obedience to the law.

3. committed- people are committed to everyday tasks like work. they have a stake in conformity so will not risk crime. e.g. cambridge girl involved in london riots.

4. involvement- people are involved and kept busy with work, school, family, sports teams, religious groups. they have no time or opportunity for crime. 

hirschi- opportunity theory

all human being still suffer from weaknesses which make them unable to resist temptation and then turn to crime, but these social bonds restrain them.

if these social bonds are weakened or broken then their self control is weakened so they turn to crime. 

however, not everyone who is lacking the 4 social bonds is a criminal but these people are more likely to give in to temptation when opportunities for crime present themselves. 

malestream

the study of crime and deviance is mainly done by male researchers and the criminal justice is dominated by men (1:2 female:male police officers)

feminists argue that male sociologists suffer amnesia and distort studies. female issues are forgotten, ignored or skewed e.g. females are victimised in sexual violence

frances heidensohn, feminist

applies control theory to understand low female crime rates (are only 5% of prisoners)

women are held back by the patriarchy while men have more freedom to more opportunity for crime. women would commit just as much crime as men if they were treated equally. 

1. home- women’s time is taken up in housework and monitoring others. this limits their opportunities to commit crime. daughters have bedroom culture compared to boys.

2. workplace- men hold power and authority over women as managers or supervisors. fear of sexual harassment limits freedom. the pay gap means that men get more money so are therefore more opportunities.

3. public- women are controlled through male domination and violence as women fear crime and sexual assault so may not go out after dark. 

evaluating heidensohn

outdated as there is now more women working and a greater involvement in work and public spheres.

female criminality is now rising.

women are also policed by female officers which is not evidence for the patriarchy. 

pat carlen, feminist

researched w/c/ female inmates using unstructured interviews.

suggested that women are encouraged to conform through choosing 1 of 2 exploitative but socially approved deals.

1. class deal- rewards that arise from working in paid employment enabling women to buy consumer goods and have a respectable home life.

2. gender deal- rewards that arise from fulfilling roles in the family and home, with material and emotional support from a male breadwinner.

• most women accept and achieve these goals but they are not available to all women e.g. unemployed, experiencing poverty abusive partners

• when these details are not accessible or if they break down then women choose crime because they have little to lose. 

corston report (2007) supporting carlen’s ideas

looking at the backgrounds of women in prison showed they had high levels of long term unemployment, the majority had left school with no formal qualifications. 

• 1/5 had no permanent residence 

• 1/3 long parents

• 2/3 single 

evaluating pat carlen

role of patriarchy is overstated e.g. more opportunities for financial success and a change in attitudes to family life. 

more control on women now because there is pressure to abide to both deals

only focused on female offenders who had accepted neither deal, so does not explain criminality of working women or mothers. 

marxist overview of crime

argue that the justice system is another tool used by the ruling class

superstructure/base model- economy is the foundation which the rest of the structure is built upon.

criminogenic capitalism (the genesis of crime is capitalism)

capitalism is an economic system which will inevitably cause crime

one group prospering means another group is suffering

e.g. alienation- leads to frustration and non utilitarian crime

constant advertising- leads to envy causing utilitarian crime

the state and law making

• chambliss

crime is a rational response for all social classes even though statistics make is seem like its a working class phenomenon

the state abuse their power to create laws that protect their interests

chambliss- all laws are there to serve the ruling class. they have the power to prevent the introduction of laws that would threaten their interests. few laws challenge the unequal distribution of wealth but most are based around protecting private property.

• even laws to do with health and safety seem to benefit the proletariat but they also keep them fit and therefore working, helping create false class consciousness because they think they are being protected.

selective law enforcement

capitalists themselves feel pressure to commit crime in order to get ahead or keep up

despite all social classes committing crime, the criminal justice system does not penalise all equally. 

white vs blue collar crimes

white: done by m + u/c linked to their position of power e.g. tax evasion, bribery, embezzlement

blue: done by everyone but especially the working class e.g. theft, squatting, murder

neomarxism

focus on crime as a voluntary act

w/c are seen as robin hood figures committing robin hood crimes as an act of rebellion against the ruling class and capitalism. 

see actions as necessary in a fight for social equality. 

e.g. theft, burglary, vandalism are symbolic and meaningful acts of resistance to ruling class oppression. 

evaluating marxist view of crime

shows a strong link between crimes and the interests of the ruling class

shows that some crimes are dealt with much more harshly

manages to explain why different classes commit crimes and the different types.

unrealistic to just get rid of capitalism

very deterministic that individuals are controlled by society, yet free will means individuals choose to commit crime.

lots of working class people do not commit crime

some crime is working class against working class rather than against ruling class.

prosecution of the ruling class does happen

communist states do have high crime rates

not all capitalist societies have high crime rates e.g. japan, switzerland

overall basis of left realism

• toxic mix

• marginalisation

• bulimic society

• square of crime

• inequality is the route of all crime (jack young)

• causes are poor education, lack of job therefore focus on reducing deprivation

• toxic mix: relative deprivation (judging themselves against others meaning they perceive themselves to be deprived) + individualism (concern with autonomy and freedom) → discontent leads to crime

• marginalisation: pushed to edge of mainstream society. lack organisation to represent them (unlike workers who have trade unions) so resort to violence to achieve goals as feel unrepresented

• bulimic society: working class constantly exposed to material goods which are taken for granted but as they cannot consume so this intensifies feelings of resentment and anger among young people.

• Young and Lea: square of crime show inter relationships between 4 elements of crime and how this influences crime levels. 

overall basis of right realism

• biological differences

• underclass

• socialisation

• rational choice

focus on the criminals committing crime and therefore want to toughen sanctions on criminals as believe punishments are too lenient. (charles murray)

crime caused by combination of biological and social factors. some are innately more predisposed to commit crime than others so more likely to be aggressive and risk take. 

most crimes come from the underclass who Murray argue are unemployed, selfish and behave antisocially. 

• lone parent families provide a breeding ground for the underclass as the absent father (lack of male role model) leads to inadequate primary socialisation. 

lack of strict discipline at school and home meaning young people have less self control and rely too much on instant gratification which leads to more crime. 

ron clarke, rational choice: looks at balance of risk and rewards and argues that people decide whether or not to commit crime based on weighing up the costs and benefits of criminal activity and coming to a rational choice. we should increase the risk involved in crime by raising punishments so people decide not to commit crime. 

evaluating left realism

draws on a range of other theories e.g. status frustration, strain theory - more of a full explanation

focuses on practical solutions

neglects other responses to relative deprivation e.g. retreatism, ritualism

malestream- feminists argue that gender is a significant issue that is neglected particularly crimes like domestic violence where the victim is mainly a woman.

does not pay attention to white collar crimes despite a big impact. 

evaluating right realism

addresses immediate cause of crime

recognises importance of community response

does not address wider structural causes of crime like FUNC, FEM, MARX

some crimes do not offer obvious gain like vandalism and violence so does not mean offenders are weighing up risks and rewards.

rational choice theory- does not explain the attractiveness of risk taking in the thrill and buzz in committing a crime.

does not pay attention to white collar crimes despite a big impact.

Interactionist view on crime

• howard becker

• primary and secondary

• aaron cicourel

• deviant career

focuses on crime and deviance being socially constructed so is not a real issue that needs to be solved.

Howard Becker- an act is only deviant if society has a negative reaction to it.

• moral entrepreneurs are agencies that impose their definitions of deviance e.g media, police, legislature

primary deviance: not been publicly labelled as deviant e.g. using illegal drugs or child pornography have few consequences if no one else finds out about it.

secondary deviance: once the offender is discovered and publicly exposed, the label becomes the master status and has social stigma e.g. paedophile

cicourel- law enforcement agencies hold subjective perceptions and stereotypes which can affect whether criminal labels are attached. 

• studied delinquency in 2 californian cities where juvenile crime rats were consistently higher in w/c areas than m/c.

• due to police’s perception that m/c youth came from good backgrounds with family support so behaviour was a temporary lapse in judgement, while had opposite view on w/c youth so more formal police action and charges were taken against them.

deviant career: labelling process and societal reaction lead to a self fulfilling prophecy. those labelled as deviant or criminal face rejection from many social groups so become outsiders, then continue to act in way labelled so label becomes master status, then individual may join a deviant subculture.

evaluating interactionism

shows importance of reactions of others and those in power in defining and creating deviance.

shows how labelling can lead to self-fulfilling prophecy and deviant careers so reveals impact of prejudice and labelling. 

provides insight into nature of deviance not provided by structural theories.

does not explain the cause of deviant behaviour or the different ways people commit.

the deviant becomes a victim as there is too much of a focus on the labelling than the deviant

assumes an act is not deviant until it is labelled as such yet many know perfectly well they are deviant.

no real policy solutions to crime beyond making fewer rules and not ‘naming and shaming’ offenders. not much consolation for victims of crime. 

does not explain why there are different reactions to deviance or where stereotypes come from in the first place.

postmodernism

• transgressive approach

• henry and milovanovic 2 types of harm

• hate crime

• edgework

• argue that crime is a social construction based on the narrow legal definition despite the law being outdated so not reflecting diversity of postmodern society. 

• the definition of crime is an expression of a particular view among those with power denying people freedom. 

transgressive approach: looking past the traditional definition and look at crime differently being based on harm caused not rules broken. 

henry and milovanovic: 

• harms of reduction: power is used to cause a victim to experience some immediate loss of injury

• harms of repression: power is used to restrict future human development or reduce dignity and respect. 

hate crime: perceived by victim or any other person to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or disability.

• may be committed due to low self esteem and want to gain respect from others through harming or humiliating someone else.

katz and lyng:

edgework: individuals choose to commit acts that harm others as they get a thrill from risk taking and living on the edge. young people push the boundaries to see what they can get away with e.g. vandalism, shop lifiting, drunkenness

evaluating post modernism

offers explanation for non-utilitarian crime which have no material benefit.

provides fuller explanation of pattern of crime as ‘harm’ encompasses range of behaviour that have been neglected. 

looks at real life experiences

recognises other dimensions which cause crime.

does not recognise that consumer society can lead to resentment within those who can’t participate (right realism/ marxists)

does not explain why most people don’t use their power to harm others and have strong morals.