Explanation to Crime and Deviancy Essay

Crime is often described as socially constructed, which influences our understanding of who commits a crime. Firstly, labelling theorists argue that crime is a social construction based on the powerful’s reaction to certain behaviour, those who are deviant are people that have been labelled as such. Marxists claim the bourgeoise construct crime in order to criminalise the proletariat, get away with their own deviance and maintain their own dominance. Neo-marxists look at how moral panics create a social construction of crime and can criminalise certain groups. Finally, feminists, argue crime is constructed in a patriarchal way and that the criminal justice system is harsher to female offenders. Whereas others criticise these theories for

Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the usefulness of functionalist approaches in explaining crime

In comparison Merton’s theory put forward a entirely different rationalisation of the causes of crime, and juxtaposing major ideals about who commits these crimes, Marxists points out that absence of egalitarianism of opportunity is at the centre of the capitalist system and Merton contends that not all individuals who lack genuine opportunities look to crime to do so. (Eglin and Hester, 2013).

Strain theory and New Deviancy Theory (NDT) are mirror images of those above. Strain theory understands human nature to be socially constructed, where, committing a crime is produced by society not from individual instincts, favouring a deterministic perspective but also recognising that individuals rationalise from inside their determined position to achieve their aspirations. However, methods of innovation, ritualism, retreatism, or rebellion are not included under human rationality. Combining voluntaristic and determinacy is a main feature in NDT, although, they argue that while individuals are born free, they lose their agency in societal frameworks that manage behaviour; the state. The problem with this is that it ignores class conflict and therefore denies the basic causes of crime.

The concept of ‘crime’ is something that depends on time, place, and other influences. For this reason, researchers have been trying to get criminologists to rethink their definitions of ‘crime’ and consider the idea of ‘social harm’ which could help better explain the causes of human suffering and the definitions of ‘crime’ and ‘criminals’ and broaden the application of criminal justice. What this rethinking can do for criminologists broadly is give them a broader picture of human psychology as well as the range of harms that individuals, communities, or whole societies experience. In this context this can include crime in the sense of activities of individuals as well as government and institutions.

This essay will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of sociological explanations of crimes with links to Durkheim’s anomie theory, Merton’s strain theory and the Labelling theory which will draw upon different academics that will highlight these specific areas of research. In sociological terms, crime is a social concept as it does not exist as an autonomous entity, but it is socially constructed by people. It can be analysed that sociological explanations of crime attribute deviance to various aspects of the social environment. For example, crime is strongly related to modern city life where this type of social environment creates cultural enclaves which results in producing criminal or deviant behaviour (Carrabine et al, 2014).

There are numerous Marxist theories that help us to understand crime and deviance in different ways, however they are all based around the same ideas. They believe capitalism causes crime in three different ways including, selective law enforcement, criminogenic capitalism and ideological nature of the law.

Crime is the product of the social structure; it is embedded in the very fibres of society. In this essay, I aim to explore different theories as to why crime exists within society and how we as a society therefore construct it. Crime is a social construct; it is always in society and is on the increase. It is inevitable. Where does it come from? It comes from legislation, from the making of laws.

Conflict theory would best describe the motive that Andrew Luster portrayed within his crime. This type of theory reflects that humans try to increase their wealth and fortune at the expense of others; to get what they want even in opposition. This is the fundamental view that crime is the economic and social forces within society. The elite and wealthy usually aim for the poor in hopes of de-humanizing them and feeling worthless. This would apply to the social norms, in which, the social norm is for men to be dominant and women to be submissive (Arndt 2014).

Conflict criminology is the view that human behavior is shaped by interpersonal conflict and believe that those who retain social power will use it to further their own ends. Conflict criminology is all about inequality in society. It suggests that our laws and our norms reflect the interests of influential members of society. Conflict criminologist hold to the belief that social order is maintained through competition and conflict, and the 'winners' are those with the most power and the greatest economic and social resources, benefit by taking advantage of the 'losers.' Radical criminology is many times referred to as left or neo- marxist. They represent an abundance of voices and see society as a system. Radical criminology is based on

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

Social conflict theory is the only one out of the vast number of criminology theories that deals directly with this problem. From out of it’s Marxist roots arose a theory which challenges the way in which today’s society views it’s legal system and the implications it has on it’s working class citizens. The nature and purpose of social conflict theories is to examine the social controls made by the ruling class and imposed on the rest of society.

First off, there have been ample amounts of disapproval in relation to the general theory of crime, because many scholars feel that Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) failed to include the

The functionalist theory interprets all parts of society: the functional and dysfunctional. Although crime and deviance may seem to be dysfunctional to society, they are important aspects of society because they help to create social norms and social order. Crime and

     In general the definition of a crime is an act punishable by law, usually considered an evil act. Crime refers to many types of misconduct forbidden by law. Crimes include such things as murder, stealing a car, resisting arrest, possession or dealing of illegal drugs, being nude in public , drunk driving, and bank robbery. Crime is an act that has been timeless and has been committed practically since the start of time. For example, ever since Cain killed his brother Abel (B.C.), people being charged with witchcraft in the 1600’s, prostitution, to the current crimes of modern day(A.D.). Even though crime has existed throughout time it has progressed and branched out taking many types forms.