Sociological Theories on Crime and Deviance

Sociological Theories on Crime and Deviance Sociologists investigate the effects of society on criminal and deviant behaviour and seek to understand individuals and their situations. They do this by gathering and utilizing information on age, gender, social class, race and ethnicity. Crime is specifically associated with behaviors that break the formal written laws of any given society; for example, British law states that seatbelts must be worn whilst driving a car. Deviance describes behaviors which infringe cultural norms and values but do not violate any written law; for instance, lying is considered by most individuals as wrong but is not against the law, unless while under oath in a court of law. As individuals even if we disagree with them we are required to abide by societies norms, values and laws. It is useful to think of deviance as a wide category of which crime is smaller part (sociology in perspective, p583) Individuals construct and learn how to fit into society through socialization within our cultures. Correct behavior, or norms and values, are learned through interaction with our family, peers and institutions, such as the education system. Norms are socially acceptable ways of behaving in any given situation, such as knowing we should be quiet in libraries. Values are the fundamental beliefs which underpin a community or society and provide the general principles for human behavior, such as the belief that stealing is wrong; as in the case of stealing, values often become laws. These norms and values and therefore behaviours considered deviant vary widely throughout history, societies, communities and cultures. For example, while one family may overlook belching at the dinner table another may be disgusted by such behavior. Moreover in Chinese culture belching during dinner is considered good manners and a sign of appreciation of the meal, Kwintessential [online]. Therefore, how behavior is regarded depends on the perspective of the people concerned. According to Becker from the perspective of Labelling Theory, no actions are by nature criminal or deviant but instead depends on the norms created by any given society. Therefore, deviance is only deviance if labelled as such through the process of interaction in which meaning is established (Sociology in perspective, pg 604). An example of this idea of labeling is public nudity; overall it is not wrong to be nude but society imposes strict rules on nudity in public places. If brave enough to go nude in publ ic you can be certain that the reactions of others would support this theory. In contrast some tribal communities such as those found in South America and Africa still dress in very little and would react little to public nudity. The idea that killing is wrong, as a fundamental human value, is a good example of how relative our belief systems are. Throughout history cultures such as the Aztecs carried out human sacrifice for their religious beliefs mnsu.edu [on line] and the religious sacrifice of animals still happens in some tribal communities today. Norms and values can become distorted and individuals may resort to stealing or even killing if there is a breakdown of norms, values or regulations. This breakdown of values shows in such cases as mercy killings and assisted suicides; individuals experience feelings of turmoil over their fundamental values and beliefs. There is much debate on the subject of assisted suicide being made legal in Britain, as is the case in countries such as Switzerland and the Netherlands, ask.com [online]. Also stealing is considered wrong by most individuals but again these values are easily distorted, as in the case of hurricane Katrina, Wikipedia [online]. Individuals, who had never stolen, were doing so because they were not able to attain essentials such as food and water, and it was not clear if the normal rules applied. Emile Durkheim, the Emile Durkheim Archive [online] investigated this breakdown and lack of social and moral norms and defined the term anomie. Individuals can deviate involuntarily as well as deliberately; for instance, those suffering from disorders such as Tourettes syndrome have little control over what might be considered deviant language. Whereas someone that steals a car attains their label of deviant through their own deliberate actions Subcultures are often regarded as deviant, for example, Mormon communities live relatively peacefully within wider society yet are often assigned as deviants. In contrast, subcultures such as criminal gangs are less compatible with wider society and cause social disharmony, therefore they attain their deviant label through deliberate actions. These subcultures have their own sets of norms and values to which they abide, these may not conform to the views of wider society but they are perfectly acceptable within their own cultures. Furthermore, individuals may be considered deviant because of their beliefs or sexuality. It could be argued than most religions consider their own beliefs as right and others as wrong. Homosexuality is considered to be deviant by some religions, cultures and individuals but not by others. Until the early 20th century the Siwans of North America expected all normal males to engage in homosexual intercourse, moreover they considered those that refused to be peculiar. In contrast the Rwalar Bedouins considered homosexuality as so abnormal that they put the participants to death. Functionalists argue that we need deviance to bring about social change; for example, suffragettes of the late 19th Century went to prison for their beliefs and helped to bring about womans right to vote. In some societies today such as Saudi Arabia women still do not have voting rights, wiki answers [online]. The plight of the suffragettes could also be used to emphasize a fundamental issue raised by Marxists which is, crime is the product of inadequate social conditions (Sociology in Perspective pg 608) The study of crime and sociology together seeks to understand why some individuals turn to crime and how society as a whole can prevent it. There are many types of crime which fall under three broad categories. The more physical crimes such as mugging and assault fall under Blue-collar crimes. Evidence shows that these types of crimes are most likely to be carried out by the lower or working classes; whereas white-collar crimes such as fraud and embezzlement are most likely to be carried out by the more affluent. Lastly, victimless crimes are crimes that are against the law, but no victim is seen to exist, such as Prostitution. Sociologist use statistics to obtain evidence that enables them to determine social trends such as those discussed above. Statistics can help to identify high crime areas which in turn may be used to help authorities such as the police service to reduce such crime. Lastly statistics are used to compile information for the public, such as advice on taking precautions against crime. However it is generally agreed that crime statistics are seriously flawed and it has been argued that they reveal more about the process and recording of crime than the extent of crime itself; the way police record incidents sometimes changes and so distorts information. The main difficulty is that statistics are derived from only reported crimes, British Crime Surveys show that only around 30% of crime is reported to the police (Sociology pg 181) therefore most crime goes unreported giving a unrealistic view of crime rates. There are many reasons that these crimes may go unreported, for example, people may not report crimes that they deem private or shameful such as domestic abuse. Sometimes a lack of faith in the police may prevent individuals from reporting crime. Also, some crimes go unnoticed, such as stealing from the workplace or drug dealing. Some crimes are more likely to be reported than others, which further distorts crime figures. Lastly, it has been argued that the poli ces own discretion on where to police, who to arrest and which category a crime fits can distort crime statistics. Consequently, statistics are difficult to interpret and questions should always be asked as to what they tell us and what other information should be considered when trying to extract valid information. Subsequently sociologists use other information to analyse the amount of crime in society. Self report studies involve confidential questionnaires that invite a sample of respondents to voluntarily record whether or not they have committed any of a list of offences in a particular time period. Those in favor of self-report studies would argue that they are a good method of determining the social characteristics of criminals but critics suggest they may be unreliable due to the participants exaggerating their answers or not admitting to committing criminal acts. Also the data may be biased as criminals may be less likely to answer questionnaires which may distort the information. It is argued that Crime Surveys or Victim Surveys provide a more accurate measurement of the level of crime in society, because they include hidden crime such as crimes that have not been reported to, or recorded by the police. Also their method of gathering data is consistent and is unaffected by changes in reporting or recording practices that can often hinder police statistics. Critics argue that Crime surveys still underestimate crime levels do to arbitrarily capping the number of crimes one can be victimized by in a given year; this capping can produce an unrealistic measurement in such cases as repeated domestic abuse. Crime surveys are also criticized for excluding under sixteens and those that live in communal establishments, such as nursing homes and university halls of residence. Lastly crime surveys fail to record crimes against victimless crimes such as drug trafficking, crimes against commercial premises or vehicles and because they are victim surveys murder and manslaug hter. Understanding crime and deviance is important as lower crime rates have positive effects on society; for example property values improve and money saved in the police or prison services could be made available for other social projects such as the education system.

Evaluative Essay on fast food restaurants Essay

Walking into some fast food restaurants can be exciting. As soon as you walk in you start to smell their prize winning food, you can feel the heat that is coming from the grills that they use to make your favorite fast foods. You can see the whole restaurant just with one look, there is always people ready to help you order your meal and fast service. That’s the quality’s every fast food restaurant should have and Burger King has all those. Burger King has many competitions from McDonalds to any other small business fast food restaurants, but I can’t seem to like any other fast food restaurant than Burger King. Other fast food restaurants might taste good but still not as good as Burger King grilled whoppers. Many fast food restaurants have their own phrase of words that they like to use like Burger King has â€Å"Have it your way† and McDonalds has â€Å"i’m lovin’ it† first McDonalds phrase word is already spelled incorrectly and doesn’t make sense. Burger Kings â€Å"Have it your way† is true because you can have it your way when you order a whopper you can pick what you want on it. Not many fast food restaurants grill their hamburgers, but Burger King does. Each Whopper you buy has the grill marks on the meet you can’t find that in any other fast food restaurants, nothing in Burger Kings is micro waved everything is grilled and cooked. In McDonalds they microwave their food so you get a saggy hamburger that breaks up when you bite on it so instead of having food in your mouth you have it all over the table. When you order something from Burger Kings menu and you look at the picture on the menu you actually do get what you see on the menu and the size of the whopper that you see is really the way it does look when you get it. Not like McDonalds has a picture of a big hamburger but you actually get a small hamburger that doesn’t fill you up at all. If you like grilled whoppers Burger King is the choice for you, because you can â€Å"Have it your way†. From grilled whoppers to good tasting french fries and onion rings that have their own special sauce, that’s Burger king for you. If you decide to go with â€Å"i’m lovin’ it† that’s your choice because  there is really nothing to love.

Summary of The Merchant of Venice Act 1, Scene 3

Act 1, Scene 3 of William Shakespeares  The Merchant of Venice opens with Bassanio and Shylock, a Jewish moneylender. Bassanio confirms his request of 3,000 ducats for three months, asserting that Antonio will guarantee this. He asks Shylock if he will give him the loan. Wanting to hear about the possible guarantor, Shylock asks if Antonio is an honest man. Bassanio takes umbrage at this and asks if he has heard otherwise. Shylock immediately says that no, he has not, but he also knows that Antonio currently has a lot of his wealth and goods at sea, making them vulnerable. Ultimately, Shylock decides that Antonio is still wealthy enough to guarantee the loan: Yet his means are in supposition: he hath an argosy bound to Tripolis, another to the Indies; I understand moreover upon the Rialto, he hath a third at Mexico, a fourth for England, and other ventures he hath, squandered abroad. But ships are but boards, sailors but men: there be land-rats and water-rats, water-thieves and land-thieves, I mean pirates, and then there is the peril of waters, winds and rocks. The man is, notwithstanding, sufficient.(Shylock; Act 1, Scene 3; Lines 17–26) Shylock resolves to take Antonio’s bond but wants to speak to him first, so Bassanio invites Shylock to dine with them. However, the Jewish Shylock, citing pork consummation, says that while he will walk with them, talk with them, and do business with them, he will not eat or pray with them. Antonio then enters and Bassanio introduces him to Shylock. In an aside, Shylock describes his great disdain for Antonio, in part for being a Christian but especially for lending out his money for free: How like a fawning publican he looks!I hate him for he is a Christian,But more, for in that low simplicityHe lends out money gratis and brings downThe rate of usance here with us in Venice.(Shylock; Act 1, Scene 3; Lines 41–45) Shylock tells Bassanio that he doesn’t think he has 3,000 ducats to give him straight away. Entering the conversation, Antonio tells Shylock that he never lends or borrows when interest is involved—he has even publicly derided Shylock in the past for doing so—but that he is willing to make an exception in this case to help a friend: Signor Antonio, many a time and oftIn the Rialto you have rated meAbout my moneys and my usances.Still have I borne it with a patent shrug(For suffrance is the badge of all our tribe).You call me misbeliever, cutthroat dog,And spet upon my Jewish gaberdine†¦...Well then, it now appears you need my help.(Shylock; Act 1, Scene 3; Lines 116–122, 124) Shylock defends his business of money lending, but Antonio tells him that he will continue to disapprove of his methods. To make the arrangement work, Antonio tells Shylock to lend the money as if they are enemies, and as such, he can punish him heavily if the money is not paid back. Shylock pretends to forgive Antonio and tells him that he will treat him as a friend and charge no interest on the loan. He adds, though, that if Antonio does forfeit, he will demand a pound of his flesh from whatever part of his body pleases him. Shylock says this seemingly in jest, but Antonio is confident that he can easily repay the loan and agrees anyway. Bassanio urges Antonio to rethink and says that he would rather not get the money than conduct a loan under such conditions. Antonio assures Bassanio that he will have the money in time. Meanwhile, Shylock reassures him as well, saying that he will gain nothing from a pound of human flesh. Still, Bassanio remains suspicious. Antonio, however, believes that Shylock has become kinder and therefore could be becoming more Christian: Hie thee, gentle Jew.The Hebrew will turn Christian; he grows kind.(Antonio; Act 1, Scene 3; Lines 190–191)

Iagos Motives in William Shakespeares The Merchant of...

Iagos Motives in William Shakespeares The Merchant of Venice Iago, having the typical attributes of a Machiavelli character; seems to be inherently evil. He revels in his ability to dissemble and destroy. Defending himself through constant reassurances- Iago claims to disgrace Cassio because of his `daily beauty and the fact that a `Florentine who knows nothing about battles `more than a spinster becomes lieutenant. This seems to outrage him- a spark that sets of the fire raging in his heart. As a result, he fabricates an ingenious plan- one by one he would make everyone pay. He only needed the right moment; he gains his chance as they set sail to Cyprus- an island free from the orderly social and political scene of Venice.†¦show more content†¦The plan was simple: he would get Cassio into a fight with Roderigo ad get the governor of Cyprus injured. Chaos needed to be created: after Cassio was drunk, Iago tells Roderigo to `after the lieutenant go. The effect was obvious Roderigo would wind up Cassio- and in the state that he was in- hed forget his usual gallantry. I cant believe how stupid Roderigo is in this play- I mean he follows Iago like a blind sheep- but thats another matter. Iago is built as a typical Machiavelli character- he would do anything just to get what he wants- here he acts as the puppeteer to force Cassio into a fight. During this scene, we also get to view Iagos manipulative skills first hand. He is easily able to easily manipulate Montano; crafted in the way he misrepresents Cassio making Montano conclude: `I fear the trust Othello puts him in. Throughout the whole scene it seems to me that Iago somehow knew that he would go for Othello next- perhaps he uses Roderigo, Montano and Cassio just as practice to sharpen his weapons. Little does Othello know that hes already being manipulated. Hes power to rule has been threatened- Cassio was lieutenant for Othello- his reputation meant the generals reputation. Its amazing how effortlessly; Iago weaved together the strings of disaster to create chaos and `mutiny. In addition to this, the audience become alarmed with Iagos double dealing. When questioned he pretends he doesnt know anything:Show MoreRelated Shakespeares Merchant of Venice and Othello: Shylock vs Iago2024 Words   |  9 PagesThe Merchant of Venice and Othello: Shylock vs Iago      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Shakespeares use of timeless themes make his works relevant to the modern reader.   His two plays The Merchant of Venice and Othello deal with the seeking of revenge and forbidden love.   In The Merchant of Venice, Shylock, the main character, is a Jew who loans money and charges interest.   Shylock has an enemy named Antonio who also loans money to people, but without interest.   Iago is a character in Othello who has been passed