Deviance is considered a vagrant form of human activity, moving outside the more orderly currents of social life” (Erikson, 2013). Labeling theory is a major factor in criminal behavior. This theory gives insight on what can make an individual attracted to criminal behavior, opposed to wise decisions and acceptable behaviors. Kurbin shares with his readers that “ In contrast, labeling theory adopts a “ relativist” definition, assuming that nothing about a given behavior automatically makes it deviant. In other words, deviance is not a property of behavior, but rather that result of how others regard that behavior” (Chris E. Kubrin,
What makes some acts and some people deviant or criminal? Theorists attempted to shift the focus of criminology and answer the questions above. Shifting towards the effects of individuals in power responding to behavior in society in a negative way. These theorists became known as “labeling theorists”. The theorists argue that policies are implemented to address social conditions, and in turn, are collectively defined by society.
Once a person enters adulthood, self-control expresses itself as delinquency (Hirschi and Gottfredson, 1995140, through self-control theory isn't clear about the nature and of such opportunities). Crime levels change with age so self-control cannot predict them... The relative rates of crime over the life course, however, can be predicted by self-control or the inability to exhibit it. Expecting the negative or positive behavior remains steady over time (Hirschi and Gottfredson, 1995). Self-control hypothesis is hence a hypothesis of social causation in childhood, but one of social determination from there on (Sampson and Laub, 1995:147).
Its limits in political science are by oversimplifying of the political landscape to an idealised version where all agents are rational whilst also ignoring political culture. The theory, in practice, also fails to recognize non-economic and/or non-egoistic motives, someone donating to charity mas be seen as altruistic or selfish, this cannot be falsified. Furthermore, the notion that all decisions must be considered rational, regardless of whether the decision seems irrational, the decision must be rational otherwise it would not have been made. The theory is only able to provide useful models in particular situations where the idealised assumptions are limited and can be accurately measured to a point they can be proven correct. It focuses on generality but fails to consider certain socio-economic features and therefore is significantly limited in explaining real world behaviour of decision makers.
Contrast to Subculture Theory, which had an affected action towards a group of people with the same set of common norms. I could also compare Strain Theory to Labeling Theory, which an individual is labeled as an odd-ball and because they weren’t playing by the rules of those in power. In the book Outsiders The studies of in the sociology of deviance by Howard Becker, the author wrote about how society tends to place labels on individuals and that person can’t remove the title. “Majority of social groups in power will make the rules and attempt to enforce them. These social rules will be defined situations as right and any other rules not established by the power group will be considered as forbidden or wrong” (Beckeif, 1963).
Police brutality must be stopped so that police do not forget who they are serving – not themselves, but the public. This means that even the criminals, who are a part of the public, have certain rights, particularly, civil rights. Police brutality causes a major concern in today’s society in America and a resolution is imminent. These racial prejudices are rooted in America’s deep psyche to grasp its power, we must move American original sin, slavery, and its corollary the terrible fear transmitted from generation to generation of a revolt. Police misconduct can be described as any inappropriate behavior on the part of any law enforcement officer that is either illegal or immoral or both.
This is because the consequences of the utilitarian mentality can’t be applied in all situations due to the dangerous outcomes it can lead to. Kantian ethics is concerned about practical reason and motives rather than the consequences of the action. In most cases, the utilitarian will base their actions on what the best result is for the greatest number of people, while Kant argues that a goodwill “is good only through its willing” (Kant, 2008, p. 106). In fact, Kant argues that even “with the greatest effort it should yet achieve nothing, and only the good will should remain…yet would it, like a jewel, still shine by its own light as something which has its full value in itself. Its usefulness or fruitlessness can neither augment nor diminish this value” (Kant, 2008, p. 106).
Police are supposed to possess a moral code that is righteous in nature and maintains only good intentions. They are not supposed to take small gifts from the populace as it increases the chances that small forms of corruption will take root and bloom into something that’s beyond their control. Leadership within the policing environment plays a crucial role in keeping the subordinates on the straight and narrow as they should lead by example (Martin 2017). However, the officers, themselves, must truly represent the ideals that the agency believes in to keep corruption at a minimum. Martin established how letting one’s guard down to corrupting influences can turn a good cop into a bad one after a prolonged period of
Something happens – injustice, a threat to a nation or a criminal act. Why is it that some people take actions against the so-called “wrongdoers” while some others remain silent? Who or what determines whether something is an “ethical” decision/action? I believe these questions eventually boil down to ethical dilemmas, which are a conflict between moral imperatives. According to me, no party can be judged to be absolutely right or wrong in any given situation; it is a lot more subjective.
Utilitarianism is an effort to provide an answer to the practical question. Velasquez (2006) posited “Utilitarianism is a general term for any view that holds that actions and policies should be evaluated on the basis of the benefits and costs they will impose on society”. This belief goes all the way back to Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill who we consider to be the founders of the philosophical concept of traditional utilitarianism. These two were of the belief that once our actions were right we tend to project happiness whereas if the action is wrong the outcome is unhappiness. Happiness was just not felt by the doer but also by everyone affected by the action and vice versa for the wrong action.