Critically Evaluate the Claim That People Commit Crime as a Result of Socio-Economic Inequality.
Critically evaluate the claim that people commit crime as a result of socio-economic inequality.Critically evaluate the claim that people commit crime as a result of socio-economic inequality.
Word Count – 2,849
It is a global fact that crime is most rife in areas of extreme poverty and lower-working class, and has been for many centuries. This essay will delve into many theories to assess whether the varying rates of crime in different societies and groups of social status are a result of economic classes in society. As it is also a fact that crime is committed in all areas of society this essay first begin by looking at different models that have been constructed to explain how crime and social status is related. The first model is known as the predestined actor model and other that also helps explain is the victimised actor model. These models and the theories explaining them will be critically assessed throughout the whole essay. First the essay looks at sociological positivism and the theories within that. These include Durkheim and Merton’s ideas about crime. Psychological Positivism will also be analysed, in particular Banduras theory and studies on social-learning as a result of behavioural and cognitive influences. Then labelling theories will be examined and discussed before a conclusion will be drawn from all theories considered.
Although criminal behaviour and activity is found most commonly in poorer economic societies it is also, although less common, found in middle and upper class societies too. This statement is supported by sociologist Emile Durkheim who said ‘there is no society that is not confronted with the problem of criminality’ (1938, 65-66). This is the view of a social positivist and relates to the first model of crime, the predestined actor model which looks at internal and external determinism. His book The Division of Labour in Society described how in periods of social change, in this case industrial development, consequences
Word Count – 2,849
It is a global fact that crime is most rife in areas of extreme poverty and lower-working class, and has been for many centuries. This essay will delve into many theories to assess whether the varying rates of crime in different societies and groups of social status are a result of economic classes in society. As it is also a fact that crime is committed in all areas of society this essay first begin by looking at different models that have been constructed to explain how crime and social status is related. The first model is known as the predestined actor model and other that also helps explain is the victimised actor model. These models and the theories explaining them will be critically assessed throughout the whole essay. First the essay looks at sociological positivism and the theories within that. These include Durkheim and Merton’s ideas about crime. Psychological Positivism will also be analysed, in particular Banduras theory and studies on social-learning as a result of behavioural and cognitive influences. Then labelling theories will be examined and discussed before a conclusion will be drawn from all theories considered.
Although criminal behaviour and activity is found most commonly in poorer economic societies it is also, although less common, found in middle and upper class societies too. This statement is supported by sociologist Emile Durkheim who said ‘there is no society that is not confronted with the problem of criminality’ (1938, 65-66). This is the view of a social positivist and relates to the first model of crime, the predestined actor model which looks at internal and external determinism. His book The Division of Labour in Society described how in periods of social change, in this case industrial development, consequences
Bibliography: Cohen, S. (2002) Folk Devils and Moral Panics, 30th anniversary edition, London:Routledge Durkheim, E Durkheim, E (1938) The Rules of Sociological Method, New York: The Free Press Gadd, D Goddard, H.H. (1914) Feeble-Mindedness: Its causes and consequences. New York: Macmillan Kohlberg, Lawrence; T Merton, R.K. (1969)’Social Structure and Anomie’, reprinted in Cressey, D. and Ward, D. (eds) Delinquency, Crime and Social Process, New York: Harper and Row Piaget, J Newburn, T. (2007) Criminology, London: Willan Publishing Shaw, C.R Tannenbaum, F. (1938) Crime and the Community, New York: Columbia University Press