Social Problems

Answer

Crime and Deviance: A Sociological Perspective

CONTENTS

1.0 Sociological causes, perspectives and explanations linked to Crime  2

1.1 The Chicago School/Social Disorganisation Theory  3

1.2 Subcultural Theory  3

1.3 Social Control Theory  3

1.4 Right Realism/Rational Choice Theory  4

1.5 Left Realism/Relative Deprivation  4

1.6 Feminist Perspectives/Gender 4

1.7 Brocken Windows Theory  5

2.0 Social factors contributing to the existence of the crime  5

2.1 Socioeconomic status and Crime  5

2.2 Cultural Causes of Crime  5

2.3 Structural causes of Crime  6

2.4 Politics and Crime  6

3.0 Sociologists and Expert Perspectives on Potential Solutions to Crime  6

3.1 Expansion of Crime-reduction Role beyond the Justice System   7

3.2 CCTV Surveillance  7

3.3 Other interventions  7

References  8

Crime and Deviance: A Sociological Perspective

This paper focuses on crime and deviance as a social problem. It is structured into three parts: Part 1 covers sociological causes, perspectives and explanations on Crime. Part 2 covers social factors contributing to the existence of the crime, while Part 3 concludes by discussing expert perspectives on potential solutions to crime.

1.0 Sociological causes, Perspectives and Explanations Linked to Crime

Numerous sociological studies attribute crime to external factors, as moderated by personal experiences around social and professional contacts. Seven theories on sociological causes of crime and explanations of crime are subsequently discussed:

1.1 The Chicago School/Social Disorganisation Theory

The Chicago School Theory draws from spatial analysis of residential places to delineate delinquency and truancy as integral features of deprived neighborhoods, characterized by poor “housing, poor health, socio-economic disadvantage and transient populations” (Hardyns & Pauwels, 2018). Overall, this postulation demarcates crime as a product of community undercurrents and not physiological or psychological factors.

1.2 Subcultural Theory

This theory contends that materially deprived youth unable to attain middle-income status will resignedly abandon that quest for a new subculture (Brownfield, 2018). For instance, in school, in school settings, students will invariably strive to satisfy their colleagues, at the expense of their teachers. In effect, such students will pursue delinquent endeavors, including deviant behavioral patterns such as drug use, truancy, and disregard for authority. Brownfield’s postulations affirm the availability of differential prospects for youth from proletariat classes.

1.3 Social Control Theory

While this theory fails to outline underlying foundations of crime, empirical evidence affirms its efficacy in explaining why individuals conform to societal laws. To put it differently, social control theory emphasizes “conformity rather than deviance” (Han, Kim & Lee, 2016). Fundamentally, the theory finds anchorage on the seminal theorizations of Travis Hirschi (1969), which predicts that people will generally stick to societal expectations as a result of strong social cohesions. In contrast, they will invariably pursue aberrant interests should the bonds be broken or weakened (Han, Kim & Lee, 2016).

1.4 Right Realism/Rational Choice Theory

Right realists perceive individuals as levelheaded beings with the capacity to make sensible, independent decisions, which extends to determination on whether to commit or not to commit an offense. Accordingly, Brooks (2016) argues that the final decision will inevitably be preceded by careful consideration of potential “benefits and disadvantages” connected to the act. Empirical evidence traces the origin of this theory the failure of available sociological theories arrest runaway crime as well as real origins of crime. Cumulatively, rational choice theory states that “individuals not only decide to commit crime, but decide when and where to commit crime” (Brooks, 2016).

1.5 Left Realism/Relative Deprivation

The principal postulation of this theory is that crime unduly impacts the less privileged members of society in comparison to their more influential peers (Winlow & Hall, 2016). Indeed, an enduring tenet of left realism is relative deprivation, a postulation that crime thrives on sentiments of unfairness and structural discrimination. 

1.6 Feminist Perspectives/Gender

The gender perspective dovetails with gender disparity to argue that crime is disproportionately carried out by males. Evidently, the feminist narrative cites social issues such as domestic violence, with men as perpetrators. In addition, it demarcates circumstances of such occurrences with particular emphasis on “gendered norms” and rules governing masculinity and femininity and the oppression they represent (Schulz, 2017). Effectively, this trajectory ties in with hegemonic masculinity, a mechanism through which male dominance is expressed.

1.7 Brocken Windows Theory

The broken-windows theory designates neighborhoods with slight indications of disorder as potentially susceptible to widespread criminal incursion (Ren, Zhao & He, 2019). It also means that intensified sentiments of chaos elevates distress and weakens societal dominance over criminal elements. Lack of interest in communal security is effectively whittled down by preoccupation with personal security and sentiments of failure to produce the desired response associated with the task.

2.0 Social factors contributing to the existence of the crime

Four social factors linked to crime as follows:

2.1 Socioeconomic Status and Crime

Wikström and Treiber (2016) cite a number of studies that validate the hypothesis that socioeconomic deprivation positively correlates with heightened criminality. This view is corroborated by studies that view the nexus between socioeconomic status and criminal tendencies as strong (Patel, 2018). However, while majority of repeat offenders tend to belong to economically disadvantaged families, many individuals from impoverished backgrounds do not always end up being perpetual lawbreakers. In fact, extant research data show weak statistical significance between the two variables (Wikström and Treiber, 2016).

2.2 Cultural Causes of Crime

Much sociological scholarships allude to the dearth of post-race/ethnic state data and their attributions to crime. Yet, disparity and bigotry continue to pervade society, in spite of sustained efforts to eradicate them. Over the years, systemic discrimination have been regularized, legitimized, and defended as integral mediators of crime and collective control. In so doing, prevalence of crime has been unfairly demarcated as “racially/ethnically-based events” (Patel, 2018). These dynamics have mostly been entrenched through sentiments surrounding the concept of “black criminality”, a popular association of black Americans with heightened criminal activity.

2.3 Structural Causes of Crime

Proposed by Emile Durkheim, this theory posits that radical social transformation will be precede by disintegration of social norms (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). The theory suggests that crime thrives in incongruence between cultural aspirations of a people as evidenced by wealth and status on one hand, and the structural mechanisms (education, employment) for attaining them. Evidence from sociological data show that the resultant agitation between “means and goals” as the main reason that perpetuate use of illegitimate methods to attain success (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

2.4 Politics and Crime

Through the lens of policing in indigenous communities from longitudinal studies stretching from precolonial to modern times, Cunneen (2020) suggest that marginalized groups bear the greatest burden of incarcerations and police brutality, and are subsequently more likely to display deviant behavior. For instance, the studies show that the Aboriginal, Islander, and Torres Strait people are up to 27 times likely to be apprehended, and 16 times more likely to be imprisoned in comparison to the privileged white population (Cunneen, 2020).

3.0 Sociologists and Expert Perspectives on Potential Solutions to Crime

This section discusses three main interventions as possible solutions to crime. These are:

3.1 Expansion of Crime-reduction Role beyond the Justice System

Situational crime prevention (SCP) is a sociological approach that advocates for extension of crime-reduction functions beyond the justice system. Cross-sequential studies by Freilich and Newman (2017) have alluded to SCP’s limited application to law, as it mainly pertains to “anticrime effort in governance”. This approach calls for meticulous scrutiny of particular crime varieties to discover the underlying facilitators of their Commision (Freilich & Newman, 2017). Subsequently, proposed interventions will be tailored for specific situational factors. Theoretically, going beyond the justice system is effective as it takes away the offender’s drive to commit crime (Freilich and Newman, 2017).

3.2 CCTV Surveillance

Findings from systematic reviews and meta-analysis of the impacts of closed‐circuit television (CCTV) surveillance cameras on crime by (Piza, Welsh, Farrington & Thomas, 2019) associate the former with “a significant and modest decrease in crime”. The cameras were found to be most effective in open spaces and car parks. CCTV cameras were also linked to considerable decrease in crime incidences on inhabited spaces as well. The impact was particularly noteworthy especially in CCTVs with “active monitoring” and those fitted with “multiple interventions” to augment the cameras.

3.3 Other Interventions

Systematic reviews by Weisburd, Farrington and Gill (2017) identifies seven potential solutions to crime:

Developmental and Social Prevention: These are “community‐based interventions” that are anchored on “deterrence, rehabilitation, or incapacitation” of felons as a strategy to curtail disruptive behavior (Weisburd, Farrington & Gill, 2017).

Community Interventions: Potential solutions in this case include a spectrum of approaches ranging from public participation and involvement, in combating the spread of crime and behavioral disorders at community level, to solutions for vulnerable youth and neighborhood “correctional and reentry services for adjudicated offenders” (Weisburd, Farrington & Gill, 2017).

Situational Prevention: Situational prevention strategies are aimed at criminal activities and the manner of interaction between the “immediate environments” in which the criminals operate and the likelihood of commission of crime. Prevention approaches considered include, mitigation of susceptibilities in domiciliary and industrial settings to alter the behavioral patterns of prospective felons, would be victims, and their custodians to preclude the possibility of crime.

Policing: This approach includes policing programs, instructions, and activities aimed at influencing occurrence of crime and results of policing initiatives.

Sentencing/Deterrence: crime prevention and deterrence has traditionally been accomplished by sentencing of criminals by a competent court, through legal processes. It also focuses on programs that are heavily weighted in favor of deterrence of potential criminal activity.in criminal justice settings.