Crime Doesn't Pay

Journal 10

Reading Content

I don't believe criminologists should emphasize specific research designs in the search to understand crime. For the same reasons that one theory can't explain all crime, one research design cannot help you understand all of crime either. Different types of designs are used to test different types of things, what one design tests is not what another has the ability to test. Taking from each design may help explain the big picture. Like the book says, when it comes to crime research, don't put all your eggs in one basket.

One of the ethical issues addressed is giving subjects a treatment while giving others a placebo and that it could mean someone is victimized or someone is denied treatment. The alternative may be that nobody gets treatment.

One of the reasons arrest may not be a deterrent in the case of domestic violence is because of what may or may not happen after the arrest. Maybe the person is arrested, but there is not much of a consequence after that. Do they do any jail time or pay any fines? The arrest itself is not necessarily the deterrent action, but it is what follows.

I like the idea of integrating theories. It seems like the best way to explain crime is by taking a piece from many theories to explain the criminal behavior as opposed to taking one entire theory to explain. I don't understand how so many of these theorists can actually look at their theory and think that it is all encompassing in explaining criminal behavior. There are so many different types of crime with so many different types of people committing the acts, that it just seems illogical that there could possibly be one explanation.

Yes, I do believe that new theories are needed. While, there are many valid components of past theories, we must keep looking for improvement and new ways to fix the surmounting problems. There are more people incarcerated now than ever and there just doesn't seem to be an end or even the possibility of reduction in crime in the near future, so new ways of approaching situations must be addressed. Control balance theory takes the integrative approach of understanding crime and while this may not be a hundred percent explanatory, it is another tool to help create effective policy. Life-course criminologists believe their theory points to important policy changes for American criminal justice, by showing that incarceration is not the answer and there needs to be a focus more on prevention.

I don't necessarily think new questions or new paradigms are needed when you don't really have complete answers or understanding of old questions. But, at the same time, maybe the reason there aren't complete answers is because the right questions haven't been asked, or new thoughts need to come up that have evolved with the times.

The article of topless dancers gave a seemingly accurate account of women in this profession and the stigma that goes along with being part of this culture. Without reading further, one of the rationalizations when someone asks what the dancer does is that she is paying her way through college. She wants to let them know she is not a tramp and that she has brains and won't be doing this forever. She could be getting her PhD in physics and the patrons will still see her as just a hot body. Dividing the social world has to have negative repercussions on the dancer. She is virtually living a lie and having to keep up a certain impression to those who may judge her and cause her harm. Describing themselves as entertainers seems like a better way to approach the situation, because in actuality they are just that and they don't need to give out anymore info. But, if they were jugglers or ballet dancers, they would probably specifically say that, so you are still fooling yourself and having to rationalize your behavior. People who are stigmatized contribute to the perpetuation by lying about what they do and showing they are ashamed of their behavior. Whatever the reasoning, it certainly doesn't help in removing the stigma.

It is amazing the lengths people go to in order to partake in deviant behavior, as exhibited in the article the Tea Room Trade. Like the topless dancers, they are taking part in something that is considered immoral. But, the big difference is what they are doing is illegal and it is something that is most likely not part of their mainstream lives. They too are living a double life.

It takes a certain type of person to be a systematic check forger. They are people who like to work alone and I believe they think this is the safe and smart way to get money as opposed to robbing someone in a physical context. That aspect of check forgery lends something else to the psychology behind it.


Web Content

The question in the module asks if white collar crime is crime. Absolutely. They are breaking the law and there are victims involved, so it is definitely crime. White collar crime seems to be at a different level though, because when most people think of crime, they think about drugs, murder, rape, assault. I believe one of the reasons for this is that most people don't have a grasp of what goes on at those levels. Most people don't understand the inner workings of finances, but they do understand crime committed by common criminals. Also, with the white collar criminal, he doesn't necessarily consider what he is doing a crime but he doesn't see the effects it has on other people, or tends to disassociate himself from the victims.

Computer crime is something that has taken on a new form by being an avenue for creating new types of criminal behavior. Hacking, pornography, and identity theft are just a few of the crimes that have made easier or created with the advent of this technology. You can go to the website www.hackers.com to learn about the good part of hacking and not what the name has come to mean, which is destruction and unlawful material gain. Law enforcement has had to step up to this new challenge by creating groups that specifically work with computer crimes and groups that are concerned with cyberterrorism. You can go to www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime to learn about different types of computer crime and how to report it. There is a great chance of increased cyber attacks by terrorists. They are capable of going into your bank accounts, shutting down power, putting their messages up on government websites and a host of other activities. Some of this has already been done, but for more information, you can check out www.cofc.edu/~finchj/cybfear.html.

So What

Crime not only needs to be explained through integrative theories, but also through integrated disciplines. There are so many factors that go into the making of a criminal which include psychology, economics, sociology. If there aren't now there should be groups that have members from the various disciplines working together to help make sense of crime and to come up with effective policy and programs to combat crime. Also, what needs to be addressed is the new types of crime that are being committed with increased frequency such as computer crime and white collar crime. White collar crime may have been around for a while but with technology, it has taken on a new face. I don't think it will be easy to change people's perception on this type of crime, but with the breaking stories that have been featured lately, it definitely increases people's awareness to something they have vague understanding of.
The way people reach a conclusion of what is deviant seems to be derived by what the law is, and what goes against their beliefs or the types of behaviors they engage in. But, then the question is, how did they form their beliefs and it takes us back to the idea of social construction and what their parents and their parents know to be right and what culture and religion has taught them. Once a behavior is stigmatized and considered deviant, it is very hard to change the perceptions.

Journal 9

Reading Content

Instrumental Marxism emphasizes the role of law enforcers, law, and government in subjugating the working class. Radical left wing domestic terrorist groups such as the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers subscribed to this socialist idea, and as a result, were extremely violent. Couldn’t you say that the police are actually pawns of the capitalist society and are led to believe that they are an important part of the process? Maybe the capitalists created the laws, but the police are actually just workers like the proletariat. Hmmm….They have that sense of false consciousness where they think they are crucial to maintaining order, and from that they gain a false sense of power that gives them the ammunition to continue enforcing laws.

It is amazing how every crime committed by the working class fits neatly into the capitalist order as an explanation of deviance. Crimes of accommodation take place within the social order and are blamed on capitalist institutionalized brutalization, but what exactly is capitalist institutionalized brutalization? This is not a very clear concept and it surely does not include reasons such as biological or psychological. In essence, these theories advocate violent crimes because they encourage revolutions and therefore the theories seem more like vendetta. For example, the Attica prison uprising used Marxist rhetoric.

Krisberg brings up the point that the poor, the lower classes, and minorities do not commit more crime, but are more likely to suffer negative processing at the hands of the injustice system. I believe the problem lies in the types of crime these groups are committing that may bring more attention. If these groups are committing more murders, rape, assault, they are going to be targeted because of the implications to society. While white collar crime may be detrimental, it is not associated with violence and when people think of crime, they usually think of violence and the chance that it may affect them.

Relative deprivation addresses the discontent a person may feel when knowing how little they have and how much another person possesses, thus leading to crime. But, if the focus in a family is not only on material things, and the focus is not on what everyone else has, then may not necessarily be a problem. The problem with this also is that you could have someone in an upper middle class who has less money than a blue blood, but does the same chance exist for them to resort to crime as the person from a lower class.

There is very little in the form of theory that specifically addresses females involved in crime. Many of the ideas that are addressed in the theories could be generalized though, but you don’t come across many studies that focus on female involvement.

Chesney-Lind saw a feminist perspective on female delinquency as appropriate because girls’ victimization shapes their status as young women and the victimizers are mostly men who keep women at home.

Polk’s article looks at gender issues in crime and offers explanations for violence committed by males and females. For example, males who take their own lives, are more likely than women to kill their families also., but women are more likely to kill their babies than men. The former shows how the man may view his wife as property and the latter it is based on form of altruism where the mother wants to commit suicide and doesn’t want to leave her baby behind. While women can be violent, there are different reasons behind why they commit violent acts versus why the men do it.

The previous article addresses gender violence and Chesney-Lind’s article addresses why girls become delinquent and that you cannot use the same delinquency theories for boys to explain female delinquency. The author believes you must look at female behaviors in a patriarchal context.

Web Content

I was interesting in learning more about the Attica riot in 1971 where the inmate leaders used Marxist rhetoric. The website http://deepdish.igc.org/lockdown/attica/attica.html has some background information on the riot. The prisoners held forty guards hostage and they had a list of demands for better living conditions including showers, education and vocational training. What it became was a story about class subjugation especially with respect to race. The analysis of the situation is that blacks have always been oppressed and the prison system has become a stepping stone in their life. The book refers to them possibly feeling like political prisoners and that their crimes are against capitalism. If they feel they are in this situation because the powers that be have not given them a fair shot in life than I can see the Marxist undertones. The consequence of the uprising probably was not help them in heir situation, but to give them harsher sentences. The riot was probably justification to society that blacks should be locked up because this is how they act, and they don’t belong in society.

The article at http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/macelroy1.html explains about a new program in the Philadelphia Police sex crimes unit where various feminist organizations will assist the police in deciding which sexual assault complaints should be taken seriously and how they should be classified. The groups who are on the committee are working under the premise that that rape is part of patriarchy (white male culture) and that men have created a culture or mass psychology of rape by which all women are oppressed. Men as a class oppress women as a class, largely through the threat of rape. Thus, rape is not an act of sex but of power. This is the view of the radical feminist and one that is taken by Chesney-Lind. This program came about because of thousands of complaints by rape victims and because of some heart wrenching stories run in the paper addressing the insensitivity of the police. The power of the media paved the way for change because the commissioner was looking for a way to boost his ratings. I don’t see how this program can work without bias knowing how strong the radical feminists feel about their theories of males and power. I don’t think it is a good idea to bring in these outside groups to help determine if there is a crime or not. Maybe the police need to focus more on sensitivity issues and maybe some of these groups could conduct training, but not be actively involved in the process. It sets a precedence where you now may having other groups wanting to come in and help determine there is a crime. Not their job!

So What

So, what are the implications for this theory on crime and what has come out of these theories in the form of policy that have been effective in the fight against crime? One example is this program in Philadelphia, but this answer was more of a band-aid approach to fix a wrong, and I believe also the wrong approach. My view of radical feminists has always been that of a bully. I believe they have such powerful messages that they support to the core and there is a certain level of hatred that goes along with their beliefs. With that much passion about an issue, it is hard to see the big picture and take into account other people’s ideas. Marxism comes across the same way to me. These theories are also deterministic in nature, blaming forces outside the individual for causing the criminal condition. This theory, more than the other deterministic theories seems to make more of a point to blame outside forces, and there are no parts of it where the individual takes any responsibility for their actions.

Journal 8

Reading Content

To answer the question posed in the book asking if you were ever called names, at age 19, I was told by a doctor that I had learning disability. It was a complete shock, and I completely ignored the label, because everything I had done up to that point showed quite the contrary. I had always gotten A’s in school, and always had positive reinforcement from my parents and teachers telling me how intelligent I was. I was able to ignore the label because of my previous accomplishments in school, with athletics and socially. My parent’s continuous reinforcement also contributed to my confidence and ability to put the comment in perspective and see it as just simply a label by someone who didn’t know me at all. Apart from that, delinquent behavior was not in my realm of thinking.

Garfinkel looks at status degradation ceremonies as providing ritualistic and public denunciations of individuals viewed as unworthy. There is a conflict between Garfinkel’s thoughts and the idea of deterrence. These types of ritualistic ceremonies are in place to act as a deterrent, but obviously he wouldn’t see prison as deterrence, but as a system that perpetuates crime.

If such systems as formal labeling and secondary deviation are indeed true, then why is it that an individual doesn’t see these things as a deterrent? What is not addressed is the continuation of criminality because you are just being placed back into your environment and you have criminal associations, not because you have been labeled. Using the labeling theory as a justification to be a criminal seems to me a simplistic rationalization.

Retrospective interpretation is used often with rape victims. When a woman is raped, the first thing they do is look at her sexual history to make sense out of what happened. Not that she is a criminal, but too many people see the victim at fault. You are seeing this with the Kobe Bryant case where they want to see him as the angel and are trying to find things in the woman’s past that would explain why she is claiming she was raped.

The study showing the impact of criminal convictions on employment is not by any means ground breaking. Common sense dictates that a person with no record will be chosen over someone with a conviction. While that doesn’t mean that the individual with no record is necessarily better (they may have committed a crime but didn’t get caught), but you have to make a decision based on the choices in front of you. Again, part of the decision to have to divulge a conviction to your employer is the deterrence factor. If I know I want a certain type of job, and I know an arrest or conviction will keep me from that, I will think twice about doing something to put me in that position. I don’t believe that a person should be discriminated solely on that arrest or the conviction, but the totality of the circumstances must be looked at.

The cultural conflict theory has interesting implications in this country given the multitude of cultures. While it is important for cultures to retain their individuality, there still must be a level of conformity when putting yourself in a different society where your culture and beliefs may be the minority. If your customs are counter to what is law, I believe those customs should be forgone because of the implications. You cannot have fair and equal justice if you do not enforce laws for one group solely based on their beliefs. The conflict comes from these groups not embracing what is popular law made by the ones in power, and find themselves more likely to break the laws that re contrary to their own interests and needs.

Assessing conflict theory, you can see the similarities to social strain. Cultures become frustrated because of a system they believe does not represent their interests. The crimes they commit may be a direct reflection of the frustration they feel such as targeting police, or other cultures that are in direct conflict with them.

Internet Content

Chapter 8 addresses the labeling of a criminal and society’s reaction to these spoiled identities. Normally, people who are former criminals face a level of prejudice when applying for jobs or just tying to be productive members of society. In the article at http://www.restorativejustice.org/rj3/Introduction-Definition/Reintegration.htm, it talks about the stigmatization of criminals and how reintegration can allow them to be productive parts of their community. The key is becoming part of a community that exhibits mutual respect and an understanding of deviant behavior. Types of communities that would exhibit these characteristics are ex-offender support groups where they can share their experiences, circles of support which are groups that use volunteers working with the police, community groups, and treatment professionals to address the needs of serious sex offenders as they are released from prison. The program reduces recidivism, aids the offender's transition into the community, and addresses the fears of the community. Also, religious groups that offer faith, moral support, and spiritual direction can be crucial to reintegration of the criminal.

The section in the book titled law enforcement practices under labeling mentions police responses to various identifiable groups in society, particularly ethnic and racial groups. There is a term called “driving while black” where police supposed ly target black drivers of certain types of vehicles for stops on the nation’s roadways. In the article, http://www.counterpunch.org/drivingblack.html, it talks about he issue of racial profiling in the case in New Jersey, where the governor fired the head of the state police for accusing blacks and Hispanics of being more likely a drug dealer and deserving of higher scrutiny by the police. The article goes on to mention different stories where minorities in different parts of the country have been stopped simply because of their race and investigations where higher percentages of minorities were targeted. The question I have to ask, is if studies support this type of enforcement. Is it possible that in these officers’ experiences, they have encountered more minorities taking part in this type of illicit behavior? There are many crimes committed that are more specific to certain classes or races. For example, white-collar criminals are typically white, upper middle class.

These questions bring up the whole issue of the terrorist and the association to people from the Middle East. Again, if the majority of the people who have engaged in terrorist attacks against Americans are from the Middle East, are we wrong as a society to be a bit more leery of this group. It is not a matter of violating civil rights, but it is a matter of looking at the totality of the situation and looking for other articulable facts to help make the officer’s case.

So What

Labels and stereotypes have always and will always exist in this world. For as many negative stereotypes that are out there, there are just as many positive labels and stereotypes that enable a person to succeed because they want to live up to the expectation. Whether true or not, they are what identify us as people to the outside world. In your mind, hopefully you are aware of what you are or what you are not. I don’t believe a specific label is going to create a criminal. It is what you have been taught and what is reinforced by the role models around you. If those you care and respect reinforce that label, than obviously the chance increases for an individual to be deviant. On the contrary, negation of a possible harmful label can result in deviant behavior never occurring. But, if you are part of a culture that is having problems adjusting to a new culture or engage in behaviors that are contrary to popular culture, than your label comes after the behavior not before. One of the problems with labeling is not knowing which came first, the behavior or the label.

Journal 7

Reading content

I don't believe you can argue about the increased possibilities of an individual committing crime because their family and/or friends are criminals. A person is greatly influenced by those around them. The theory of differential association is based on the premise that criminal behavior results from the strength of an individual's criminal associations and is a cumulative learning process. It also refers to the individual's free will. But, this begs the question of why did you choose to associate with criminal types in the first place. Not every theory is an influence of nature and nurture. I believe the biological theories can not completely stand alone, but I do believe many of the social theories can stand alone. All you have to do is look at the Palestinians to see a criminal that was created by social processes.

But, these theories seem to affect people who are surrounded by peers who are criminals. It does not take into account individuals who commit crime who are not involved in the social processes that are explained. This theory may work in explaining general crime issues, but can not be applied to everyone. Then again, most theories do not apply to everyone. Bits and pieces of each theory can explain the actions of one person.

Identification is used to describe the role taking process in which a person pursues criminal behavior and identifies with a person whose perspective his criminal behavior seems acceptable. The book uses an example of Hitler and the neo Nazis. The neo Nazis didn't come along until years later, but still looked to Hitler as a leader. Often groups like this are just looking for away to stand out. For a number of reasons, people in groups like this do not fit into what is acceptable and normal in society. Becoming part of a group gives them an identity and a purpose. I often wonder if the belief came first or the group.

Differential reinforcement theory mirrors the idea of deterrence theories. A person will continue to commit crime until the consequence is greater than the reward. Not until they have associated the criminal act with aversive consequences will the individual stop. At that point, they may be stopped only because they were caught or killed.

Containment theory takes a well rounded approach in trying to identify the root of criminal behavior. It couples social pressures such as poor living conditions, family conflicts with social pulls and then biological or psychological pushes such as inner tension, and hostility. This theory covers all the bases.

The social bond theory helps explain why athletes in school are less likely to engage in criminal and delinquent behavior. When you are part of a team, you have a responsibility to not only yourself but also to the other people. You are expected to perform in a certain way, and if that changes, there are consequences. This commitment and attachment keeps the individual from partaking in deviant behaviors, unless of course, the team engages in behaviors that are counter to conventional norms. Then they will embrace those behaviors.

Reading the article the Madam as a Teacher, you could just as well be reading about a training program in any business in America. Obviously not so far as teaching about fellatio and sex, but the time that is spent with the trainee and teaching the tricks of the trade. In this sense, it was hard to look at it as illegal behavior, just simply a business. But, this is a subculture with certain norms that must be adhered to. What they learn here is not only paramount in getting good business, but in keeping themselves from being killed. The process of socialization is where it fits in to our current theories. The idea of making sure the prostitutes associate with only other prostitutes ensures that they will stay in the profession. Any contact with their former life and square friends may influence her to get out of the business, so it is immediately discouraged. The madam says that a square and a racket cannot get together. These types of comments are attempts to solidify and foster the new relationship and profession, and eventually the trainee will not know any other kind of life.

The article about marijuana addresses the social rather than psychological motivations to smoke. Marijuana is not something that you will have a desire to do, unless you are introduced to it socially. There are issues that may lead one person to smoke over another, but, again, like the social theories explain, a lot is going to depend on who you are hanging around with. The article talks about he process of learning to get high, and if the user doesn't get high, he may just give up. But, if he is not feeling it, he may want to keep doing it until he does fell that high. I wonder if getting high really does make you hungry, or if it is something that you assume happens because everyone says it does, so you experience the hunger as a result. Like other subcultures, marijuana use becomes a socialization process where you are learning the terminology and the protocols, and your continuation in the behavior depends on whether you have a positive experience.

In techniques of neutralization, the denial of the victim is a powerful rationalization. To say that the victim deserves what he is getting, completely absolves the criminal of any wrongdoing. The article Techniques of Neutralization mentions crimes against homosexuals. You could also apply this theory to crimes against child molesters and the notion of vigilantes.

Internet Content

In the article at www.self-esteem-nase.org/research.shtm#crime, studies show that there is a direct correlation between low self esteem and crime and violence. The frustration and hostility that is associated with low self esteem may contribute to acts of aggression and violence. A child who does not have high feelings of sense worth may doubt their abilities to do well in school and lead a productive life. They may turn to crime because they think that is all they are able to do. Or, the child may do poorly in school, have low self esteem as a result, and then fall into delinquent behavior because of the crowd the child may begin associating with.

High self esteem is something that is fostered by the relationship with your family, but I have seen many cases where you would never expect a person to have low self esteem. On the outside, they may be attractive, smart, fun, successful, but for whatever reason, their self worth is very low. At that point, I may blame society and definitions of success. But, parents are the first line in giving the child feelings of self worth. There are a million reasons why a child has low self esteem. While low self esteem may be a factor for criminals, the end result is not always turning to crime.

The book mentions process theories in explaining police corruption and the link between pressures emanating from deviant peers and the need for group solidarity. It says that officers who refuse to play along may be ostracized. The way I see it is that police who are corrupt are the minority. They will reveal their acts only to other officers who they know are not against that type of behavior. The officers that are on the fence may be more likely to become part of this behavior, but there are many cops who don't engage in corruption that the straight shooters may align with. I do agree in that rewarded behavior is repeated behavior. Officers like anyone else are going to do something where the reward is greater than the risk. Adding to the equation is the idea of invincibility and that the officer is above the law. The article at www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/publications/core_factors.pdf addresses core factors of police corruption. It addresses issues around the world that may contribute to corruption such as lack of resources, faulty recruiting and poor training. In many countries, such as Mexico, corruption is just part of the daily culture. To not be corrupt, is to go against the grain, and you are not trusted, so I think in those cultures where corruption is so ingrained in the culture, you will more likely see corruption as a result of social processes.

The idea put forth on www.extend.indiana.edu/courses/soc/socs320b/lesson4/DISC4f.HTM is that of differential theory and how your associations will dictate your behavior. That is the basis for this theory and it mentions the responsibility of the parents to control who their children are associating with. Therein lay the problem, when you have parents who are either absent, or are criminals themselves.

So What

So, how do we learn crime? Who influences us if it is not biological? First and foremost, it is your parents and the family you are born into. You obviously learn certain values and morals from your parents. You mimic their behaviors often and you see how to deal with everyday situations. They lay the groundwork for you, whether it is model behavior or not. The behaviors you learn at home are then either reinforced or challenged by friends, teachers, or television. People need strong ties to an organization, but if their ties are towards people who exhibit criminal behavior, they are going to engage in criminal behavior also. The issue of self esteem is very important in understanding why people may lean towards certain types of groups or exhibit certain behaviors, but having low self esteem is not a catchall reason to crime. Self worth is something that needs to be reinforced by parents and also reinforced at school. Kids can not be left to their own devices to gain self confidence. The societies they live in also must have high values, because a child must be surrounded by legitimate means of success. It is those societies where criminal behavior is a way of life and those types of behaviors are positively reinforced. An individual will want to do what is the accepted behavior, because he too wants to be rewarded. Again, most of these theories seem to address lower income cultures. You need to identify the social learning process of individuals in middle to upper class cultures. You could argue that it is much of the same processes. The other issue that is not considered is the lone criminal who has no known associations with criminal cohorts and was not born into a criminal family or part of a delinquent subculture. Maybe in this case, it is behavioral characteristics and his interpretation of the world around him that influence his behavior, not the actual effects of the world on him. Nevertheless, societal pressures have always and will always be there. Ideas of success are not going to change overnight and there will always be people who don't conform to norms, either alone or as part of a group.

Journal 6
Reading Content

The ecology theory conveys the message that you are a product of your environment. This theory seems circular. It is like a which came first theory. Did people commit crime in a certain area and then a community forms around this? Or is there a community that is not developed well and is inexpensive so it draws a less desirable population? If you have a high delinquency area, then it seems obvious that you will have high delinquency groups and vice versa. But if you were to take people from another area, maybe Zone V where there is economic prosperity and place them in the middle of Zone II, I think there would be a different response than resorting to crime, at least initially. If you put someone in a group other than their own, I believe they will adopt that groups values if nothing else than for survival. If you took someone out of Zone II and put them in Zone V, their behavior will also change to fit in to the new surroundings. But it is the same as saying you are taking a person from a rich, non criminal family and placing him with a poor, criminal family.

I don’t necessarily think these communities are full of conflicting messages like Shaw and McKay state. I believe its more of a watch and learn. It is not a matter of teaching right from wrong and teaching that crime is bad sometimes, I think values are values and they eventually become accepted behavior.

If you replaced every person in Zone II with the people from Zone V, would there still be crime and poverty. I don’t believe there will. If you took everyone from Zone II and put them in Zone V, I believe that in no time, it will become full of crime and poverty. The message still comes back to the group and the values that they have embraced as a whole.

The idea of defensive space seems closely related to the rational choice/opportunities theory. In the opportunities theory, criminals are looking for what is easy. It contends that if presented with criminal opportunity, the person will take it. Defensive space says that the more secure the area, the less chance of having crime. This just seems like a solution to opportunities theory. The criminal may not exist in the secure area, but will move somewhere he can be successful.

The strain theory and the ideas it purports seem extremely valid in understanding why an individual may resort to crime. The expectations in society are very high as far as what determines success. All you have to do is turn on the television to see all the advertisements for cars and clothes and jewelry, and the television shows that depict the wealthy as happy and better off. Youths who do not picture themselves as achieving these goals find crime much more desirable. It seems like it is an outlet for their frustration. They may take on the attitude of, I’ll show you. If they can’t attain these things in a legitimate manner, they will achieve them any way they can. Coupled with this frustration may be the lack of role models and good values that keep them from making the right choices. The three adaptations of anomie seem to be more of a blending rather than three distinct groups.

I see the effects of strain as the removal of a positively valued stimuli from the individual at my job. Agents who work really hard and have a very good attitude at work may see themselves get mediocre ratings or receive disciplinary action for something petty. They will see agents who don’t work nearly as hard get higher ratings and do bad things with little or no repercussion. This causes a strain where the person doesn’t realize his value anymore and sees that it doesn’t matter if he does well or not. He then becomes a retreatist and becomes part of a group that has experienced the same phenomena. Together they take on a new philosophy that alienate themselves from the mainstream.

Delinquent subcultures exist as a place for people to go and fit in. In talking about these subcultures in lower class societies, you often have single parent homes with little contact between the kids and the parents. Entry into subcultures is a way for a child to become part of a family and have identification for a cause. Entry into gangs seem more about feeling self worth and less of a reaction to the norms of society. A gang’s ideology reflects what is evident in their own culture and what they have experienced personally, not so much a grand plan of rejection of norms.

The subculture of violence theory doesn’t seem so much a conflict with the dominant culture but a conflict within the individual. Once a group creates their own subculture, it is more about keeping that culture alive. This means creating and enforcing the rules of the group. In groups that commit homicide, the must stay true to their value system, and when the situation arises, they can’t back down. So the struggle seems to come from within because they create the group and must do everything to keep the group true to its values.




Internet Content

Studies within the sport of hockey have been conducted with regards to the violence in culture theory. With the violent culture theory, rewards and encouragement for violent acts may be much greater than other areas of society. The book states that when someone in this subculture is verbally or physically challenged by another person, the conduct norms often require action. http://www.betterhockey.com/level.itml/icOid/309 This is often the case with hockey where one push turns into a bench clearing brawl.
The structure of the Canadian hockey league showed that it was designed so that players who were unable or unwilling to deal with ongoing violent tactics were progressively weeded out or dropped out. By age 14, the players realize that recklessness and toughness are essential to their progress. The article goes on to talk about cultural spillover theory and how social factors affect violence. The key component of this theory is that violent behavior is indirectly legitimated by the implicit or explicit cultural approval of violence in the media, sports, and elsewhere. Cultural spillover theory holds that the more a society tends to legitimate the use of violence to attain ends for which there is widespread social approval, such as crime control and military dominance, the greater the likelihood of illegitimate violence, such as sexual assault and wife beating.
Sellin observed that white-collar criminals espoused values with strong connections to the dominant culture, yet engage in criminal conduct and express little remorse when caught. They justify their actions in many ways. One way is through denial of a victim. They feel that white-collar crime is a victimless crime. When they think of crime, they think of more violent acts such as murder or rape. White-collar criminals may be taking society’s values to the next level. They are embracing what the dominant culture teaches, in this case, money is power, and using that also to justify their means. The allure of this type of crime is also in the lack of punishment. When sentenced, white-collar criminals often end up in minimum-security prisons or halfway houses. They just recently have been transferring these inmates to higher-security facilities and are sentencing them to tougher sentences. It will be interesting to see if there is a decline in white collar crime, or if there is a surge in a different type of crime committed by white-collared individuals.

So What

Is society to blame for the ills of the world? One thing that may help with what these theorists believe is to change society’s views on what success is. But, success and high aspirations aren’t always the cause of strain. For middle class youths, strain results from short-term aspirations such as sex, popularity, good grades and athletic achievement. The failure to achieve these goals may result in frustration and anger, which may lead to criminal behavior. Kids who suffer from the pressures of this may also turn to suicide to express their distaste with society. The criminal response would be something like what the kids in Columbine did. Their adaptation to anomie was to be retreatists and abandon all conventional social goals in favor of a deviant adaptation.

In cases like this, we must pay attention to our children and heed the warning signs. It will not be so easy to change society’s views on right and wrong or on success and failure.

Journal Entry 5

Psychoanalytical theories offer an extremely deep insight into the makings of a criminal. The theory points to the mechanisms of reaction and sublimation and the severe sense of guilt associated with them. The book points out that the criminals who experience this guilt have a compulsive need for punishment. The assumption seems to be made that these offenders desire capture, but there are criminals who simply are not good criminals, and maybe this is why they got caught. Also, what isn’t addressed is the frequency of arrest for this type of criminal. The theory claims they want to get caught. Maybe they get caught because they have committed so many crimes and get sloppy, not because of any underlying feelings. The principle Occams Razor should apply to a lot of these situations, in that the simplest theory should be selected based on the facts of a problem.

I definitely agree there are things that happen in childhood that may manifest into criminal behavior later on. Like everything else, this is not an absolute. Some children may have an unhealthy superego that supports their criminality, but there must be many children who may have had an unhealthy superego that did not manifest into criminal behavior. When talking about this theory, it is important to consider the tautological trap and the subjective nature of the diagnosis.

While the possibility of retrieving repressed memories is feasible, I think there are too many questions surrounding the validity of recovered memory for it to be taken seriously in court. This is something else that is not testable and extremely subjective. Not only do you have to worry about the planting of ideas by the therapist, but the ideas that may have been planted in the patient’s head over the years through socialization

I liked Eysenk’s suggestion that criminal behavior is not an inherited trait, certain inherited characteristics make social expectations more difficult to achieve. When you incorporate biological influences with the socialization process, you have a much more solid, well rounded theory, which is not as easy to dispute as something that is deterministic in nature. His explanation of why people don’t commit crime is based on the deterrence theory and the ability of most people to make rational decisions based on their conditioning.

Some of the psychological theories could also fall under the umbrella of biological theory. Ones such as the arousal and personality theory look to effects in the body to help explain behavioral characteristics. I guess that is why they are biopsychological explanantions. But, like the book points out, the incorporation of these biological elements are based on little understood neural processes. Again, this is another reason why we must look at the whole picture.

In chapter 5, the book asks whether intelligence tests provide reasonably accurate measures, and whether they should be widely used. I think they are reasonably accurate, but should also be used in conjunction with other types of tests. Factors that need to be considered when giving the test are the person’s ability to take tests, nervousness, trying to beat the test, etc.

It also asks whether inmates should be denied access to certain programs based on their IQ scores, and I don’t think they should be denied access. I don’t think you can accurately say a person is not going to do well in a program because of a number. It goes back to possible factors surrounding the test, and why he might have scored low. A score under 850 on the SAT, does not predict how hard the person may work when they go to college, and their ability to succeed. That is not to say that the lower numbers shouldn’t be cause for concern when determining success in a program. I just believe you have to look at the totality of the circumstances.

Concerning intelligence and crime, just because someone has a low IQ does not take away their ability to know right and wrong. Their low IQ may have prevented them from doing well in school or kept them from getting a decent job that pays good money, but regardless of the strain society may put on them, they have still made a choice. You can blame society and the stigma that is attached to “stupid” people, but ultimately they are in charge of their destiny. Again, just because you have below average intelligence, it does not mean your life is doomed.

Although the book mentions many law enforcement officers have been denied careers based on low scores, conversely, there are just as many who scored high on tests and have no business being a cop. These tests are not 100% and you can not treat them as such.

As for behavioral theories, hopefully the positive reinforcement is actually positive. In other words, if you are giving stickers to someone in school for not talking out of turn, you have to be sure that the individual will see that as good. Maybe getting erasers as a reward is something he would rather have and the sacrifice of not talking becomes worth it.

In the article, The Moral Career of the Mental Patient, I felt like I was reading the author’s personal story. It was an insightful article into the process though, and one interesting dynamic was between the next of relation and the patient and the role the hospital plays in maintaining that relationship. The feelings that are perpetuated in the mental hospital and feeling of not being able to fit in socially anymore may help contribute to an engagement in criminal behavior on his release. Feelings of betrayal and loss of confidence may take over any sense of previous rational thought.

From Witchcraft to Drugcraft reflects the powerful ideas of Szasz and the creation of mental illness to explain behaviors that may be normal but have been socially constructed to be thought of as crazy and insane. This debate has strong arguments on both sides, but I tend to favor the beliefs of this article. As a society, we define things in such a way to benefit ourselves. A therapist will label a person as crazy and in need of help to keep money coming in. With their little diagnostic book, they will look until they can find a disease fitting to the person’s symptoms. At that point, the patient believes they have some kind of disorder and may hide behind it and act out accordingly to justify the doctor’s diagnosis. It becomes a catch 22.

The last article reiterates the point that being insane is the brainchild of the medical professionals and of society. Saying that a person is automatically crazy because they entered a psychiatric hospital is the same as saying, if you are arrested, you are guilty.

Internet Content

The concept of mpultra and mind control really intrigued me, I found a website: http://mindcontrolforums.com/ which is the unofficial networking site of the survivors of government psychiatric and psychological torture. Reading these people’s accounts is like reading something out a science fiction book. Some of the accounts are so bizarre and so disturbing. Reading about mpultra has opened my eyes to this type of reality. But some of these stories just seem so far out. Some of these accounts sound like the ramblings of someone who has symptoms of schizophrenia. But, if you are a believer in Szasz’s school of thought, you can only go by what the person is saying he is experiencing and make a judgment call on these signs within their social context. Considering this, the physician must be an investigator and know what questions to ask in order to gauge a realistic, value free response. The typical reaction with these kinds of stories would most likely be a long hospitalization.

In Szasz’s article, he says it is impossible for a psychiatrist to make an impartial judgment of a person’s thought processes and behaviors without the psychiatrists own beliefs affecting how the patient is perceived. Unfortunately, a psychiatrist is operating under the automatic assumption that if someone is coming to see them, there must be something wrong with that person. I feel the psychiatrist feels compelled to make some kind of diagnosis. The professional expectations of a psychiatrist and maybe even the fear of legal implications helps him reach his conclusion. It is safer to diagnose something and propose some kind of treatment, then to have that person walk out of the office and do something harmful, and then come back on the psychiatrist.

If it is indeed true that the mentally ill who have been arrested have a greater chance of success if they are placed into treatment programs than placed in jail, then more steps should be taken to try and facilitate this process. One problem I see with this is the correct evaluation of who should be placed in these types of programs. At which point in the process should they be evaluated and diverted. The best time would be as soon as they are brought into the system, but with manpower issues and money constraints, this has obviously not been realistic.


So What

In their rawest form, theories such as biological and psychological become very easy to explain as deterministic theories. You could make a very good argument explaining why an individual killed someone based on the voices he was hearing or because of his MAO levels. Looking into it further, you would need to look into how these types of disorders are handled by society. People with mental illness are often tossed aside and left to their own devices. On the other hand, you need to be careful when classifying people. Do certain behaviors automatically mean that someone is mentally ill, or are there answers for why a person may be showing symptoms of craziness? In our readings, they claimed that people who exhibit behaviors such as hearing voices, are okay when you are a child, but as an adult, these same behaviors classify you as schizophrenic. As a society, we have helped decide what is normal and what is not normal.


The social construction of mental illness has determined the way “crazy” people are treated in law enforcement. As immigration enforcers, our hands are tied with concern to people who “appear” crazy. Because they are in this state, it is not very easy to determine if they are legally here or not. If we decide their citizenship can’t be established, alternative protocols are put into place. What is scary about that is that we are deciding the mental capacity of the subject. What kind of training gives us the ability to decide this? What are the behaviors we are looking at that make us come to that conclusion? What about the people who pretend they are crazy just to avoid being arrested? I am sure they know what will happen if they act in such a way. There is a fine line between being crazy and just simply acting crazy. At this point, the process begins of figuring out what to do with someone who is mentally ill and finding a place for them to go where they can be evaluated and treated.

Journal Entry 4

Reading Content

There might not be an exact science to it, but people today look at someone’s physical features all the time as a way to gauge whether or not they may be bad or good. For example, someone who has freckles is typically thought of as sweet and innocent. The example the book uses about shifty eyes or with a funny shaped head like what the followers of phrenology look at would indicate mistrust or bad intentions. There may not be any scientific facts to prove this, criminologists today reject the ideas, but people form opinions based on looks alone and determine in their minds who is acceptable or not.

Lombroso describes an atavistic man as having peculiar characteristics such as an enormous jaw, large ears, fleshy lips, etc. He concludes that these signs of arrested development result in criminal behavior. If these people had such a strange look to them, could it be possible that society caused them to be criminals because they were ostracized based on their strange looks? The other possibility is that because they looked different than most people, they were angry and as a result were more likely to lash out and commit crime. Maybe some sort of cry for help or just the consequence of years of not fitting in and being made fun of.

I agree that there is no such thing as a criminal physical type. Take someone who is overweight as a child and habitually gets made fun of. It is not because he is overweight that he becomes possibly a bitter, angry man, but it is because of the way he has been treated as a result of being overweight. In these cases, you can not look at physical type as the sole factor for someone’s behavior, like Goring observed. He argued there was no statistical correlation between the objective measures of physical and mental anomalies and crimes. Consider a child who is hyperactive. It may be linked to criminal behavior, but identifying it and treating it will most likely prevent antisocial and criminal behavior. You can not say as an absolute, that child is hyperactive, therefore he/she will be a criminal.

The other side of all this is maybe the hereditary factors that cause these physical features and body shapes like the mesomorphic and ectomorphic are the reasons for aggression and criminal behavior. You have to look at why someone has one body type over another. Does one body type have higher testosterone levels than the other? If you have higher levels, are you more likely to be aggressive? I have seen the result of increased testosterone levels. Just look at the people who are on steroids and the changes that affect them, including the quick temper and aggressive behavior. There have been links between increased testosterone levels and criminal behavior, but is that the sole cause? The aggression that often goes along with higher levels of testosterone doesn’t necessarily correlate to criminal behavior.

People’s bodies also are shaped over time. If you work out, you will alter your form or if you gain weight from eating, your body is obviously changing form. So, if you develop a certain body type, will you then become a criminal?

I agree with the statement by Ellis and Walsh that says, “adoption studies indicate that genetic and environmental factors interact to affect criminal/antisocial behavior.” I believe there are hereditary elements that contribute to someone’s criminality. I also believe those criminal tendencies may be squashed or brought out based on your environment.

The genetic abnormality creating an XYY male affects the physicality of a man. The links between the XYY pattern and crime goes back to what I believe in that it may be the reaction to seeing someone who looks like this and the stigmatization that goes along with a lower IQ and unattractiveness. You also need to look at the link between XYY males and lower class living conditions.

The interplay of social, environmental, biochemical and psychological lead to drug abuse, but genetics play a role in an individual’s vulnerability. That is what research by the National Institute on Drug Abuse revealed. I have always heard that your chances of becoming addicted rely heavily on your chemical makeup. I have seen where two people do the same amount of drugs and one gets addicted but the other does not. While doing drugs and drinking alcohol definitely alter your body’s chemistry, I am not sure that you can blame genetics completely for the way you handle those changes. Your reaction to the drugs is greatly influenced by your personality. Regardless of whether genes or environment shapes your personality, you will handle the situation according to your all of the preceding factors. Like Fishbein states in her article, “alcohol would stimulate an existing psychiatric condition or psychological predisposition to aggress or misbehave.”

I know that hormones can affect your behavior, because otherwise why would you act certain ways at the same time every month. I don’t know how valid the PMS defense really is, but I guess it is possible for your mind to react in such a way as a result of a change in levels of hormones. The book brings up a good point as a challenge to this idea about the cause and effect relationship, and which came first- the stresses or the irregular menstruation.


Internet Content

Reading more about Lombroso, and his beliefs on the development of the science of eugenics to prevent crime, leads me to question the intentions of his theory. When you have such Darwinistic ideas, you wonder if the theory was presented as a way to support his belief in eugenics. Reading on, I see that this is one of the challenges to these types of ideas. It is one thing to blame criminal behavior on your biology, but it is quite another to solve this problem by such drastic measures such as sterilization, life sentences or death. On the web site www.africa2000.com/ENDX/endx.htm, it states that “genetics supplies a biological or genetic interpretation to its means and aims, and that if it is a particular race that is targeted, the eugenicist will first offer a scientific basis for such a plan -- usually consisting of statistical evidence that the disfavored group is less capable of achievement, more prone to anti-social behavior, or otherwise disproportionately responsible for a prevalent social problem.” Reading this, you could say atavism is the scientific basis explaining the anti-social behavior, and also the justification for turning to eugenics.

I began reading an article on race and crime, and there were some very interesting statistics showing the racial variation in testosterone levels and the predisposition to crime. The author is Rushton Philippe and the article is featured on David Duke’s (the white supremacist) website, and the big old stormfront emblem is right on top. I am going to explain his thoughts on the subject. The article is at www.duke.org/library/race/rushton-crime.html.
In the article, Philippe addresses the breakdown of the black family in America, and says this is a possible result of the African marriage system, and the influence of testosterone, which may lead to multiple relationships and the tendency to commit crime. He then goes on to quote studies showing a testosterone-crime link, and that there are higher testosterone levels in black college students and military veterans, than in their white counterparts. Medical research shows that testosterone is one determinant of prostate cancer, and black men have higher rates than white men do. He is basically trying to explain the reasons why there is an overrepresentation of blacks in U.S. crime statistics and around the world, using testosterone as one of the reasons. He also looks at brain size and cognitive ability as reasons for higher crime rates among blacks. He looks at the smaller size of the brain and the lower IQs. He references adoption studies where black, Korean and Vietnamese children were taken in by white families, where the black children performed at a lower level than the white siblings, in contrast with the Korean and Vietnamese who excelled. There could be many factors for this. Again, you would need to look at the type of environment, and how mixed families are looked upon and treated by others. Do Asians in white families tend to draw less criticism than blacks in white families? If they do, then that could be a reason why the blacks performed at a lower level. Again, what is the stigma attached to this type of family, and how does the child handle it?

A great website to check out is http://www.crime-times.org/. It is all about linking brain dysfunction to disordered/criminal/ psychopathic behavior. Just under the heading of aggression, they list such causes as cardiac abnormalities, castration, diet, food allergies, sleep walking and many more. I know where aggression and food allergies would come in. If I was allergic to chocolate, you can bet I would be angry and aggressive!!


So What

There are many debates on whether biological theories actually hold water. Some, like Dr. Carlie in Can Genetics Cause Crime, think that the contribution of genetics is most likely indirect, and any aspect of genetic disorders or biological factors will be contributed to other things such as alcoholism and addictions, rather than genes being blamed for the violent behavior.

The more I am researching this topic, the more I am finding things that people have tied to aggression and criminal behavior. Again, you can justify anything someone does by just looking hard enough. The perfect example of that is the twinkie defense. I can just picture the lawyer and the murderer sitting around trying to figure out a reason for why he just snapped. The sad thing is, the jury bought it. This also brings us back to the question of, who cares why you did it? You did it and you are going to pay. Unless science has proven 100 percent that you had absolutely no control over your criminal act and your genetic makeup made you do it, then maybe your punishment would have to be under different standards- maybe. Otherwise, consider your genetic makeup just a factor. Certainty again is the key.

So, in conclusion, like most other theories, you really need to look at the whole picture, and in this case, take into consideration, the environment. Fishbein talks about the integration of biological research into criminological theory, and how “a consensus has emerged that the “truth” lies somewhere between “nature plus nurture” and that outcomes depend upon the interaction between the two. She also calls for more research into behavioral disorders and other temperamental traits that might turn up results in the fight against crime.