criminal theories (Social disorganization and stain theory) Various theoretical perspectives have been advanced to explain how individuals end up committing criminal activities. The theoretical aspects fall into two broad themes. First, there is the explanation that social problems push individuals to engage in crime. Precisely, the environment that one participates in, as well as external factors, forces individuals to participate in evil. The other explanation is based on social responsibilities which indicate that individuals know the difference between the wrong and the right decisions and as such, decide to undertake in crime after making a conscious decision.
The results shows very clearly that people belonging to poor economic backgrounds often lose their faith in the structure of the social system, and then they tend to involve in criminal activities for either having a good life in future days (only in the sense of good economic status) or to express their anger on the system by being an outlaw. Studies also show that, in contrast to people living in white communities, people belonging to black communities are often found to be the offenders in cases of homicide or robberies. Thus, race factor also plays a vital role. It has often been suggested that people commit a crime either for family failure or for the failure of the society. Informal social control cannot effectively influence such factors.
4 Criticism and Challenges The first point of criticism against victim participation in restorative justice processes arises from scepticism about an apology to the victim as a way of dealing with criminal matters. The perception sometimes exists as to it simply being a way to get away with the crime.106 Members of the public should thus be educated to understand that restorative justice is more than a mere saying sorry, but in the context of victim offender mediation or family group conferences it rather affords the victim the opportunity to confront the child offender with the real and human cost of his or her criminal actions. Another concern deals with the possible secondary victimisation of the victim in the case where the offender pretends
Social structure theories look at the formal and informal economic and social arrangements of society that cause crime and deviance. The negative aspects of social structure such as disorganization within a family, poverty, and disadvantages because of lack of success in educational areas are looked upon as the producers of criminal behavior (Schmalleger, 2012). The three major types of social structure theories are Social Disorganization, Strain, and Culture Conflict (Schmalleger, 2012). Social disorganization theory is based on the idea that changes, conflict, and the lack of social consensus in society are the reasons for criminal behavior. This theory views society as a living organism and that criminal behavior is compared to a disease.
He also continued to engage in criminal acts even while on parole. These are clear indications of poor self-control. Another aspect of this theory is the effect child rearing can have on self-control. Gottfredson and Hirschi believed that there was a strong correlation between parental control and self-control. They also identified a link between the self-control of the parent and the subsequent self-control of the child (Cullen, 2014).
The due process model is seen to focus on the suspect whereas the crime control model focuses on the society. This paper analyzes these two models and based on the rate of crime in the society, makes recommendations as to which is the best model in criminal justice. The principle in law that one is innocent until proven guilty has created much discourse. There are those who feel that the moment that one is arrested, there is reasonable belief that they committed the crime. However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty.
Introduction: 250 Before finding solutions to a problem, it is essential to begin by asking the right questions. The majority of criminological theories question why people deviate from the norm which is conformity, into individuals who commit crime; control theories however begin to look at society from a complete different angle. Control theorists believe the default position or ‘state of norm’ would be that everyone in society be criminal,
He discovered that victims can be negligent, provocative, and even precipitate victimization. Both criminologist have opposing sides arguing that behavior is inborn with others insisting that it is acquired or learnt through our interaction with the environment we live. For example, a witness domestic crime can be defined as social component to the relationship between two individuals. Hentig is credited as being a founder of the theory of victimology and was the first to suggest that the victim himself is "one of the many causes of crime," reports Stephen Schafer. As a result of Hentig's analysis of victims, he further theorized that there is reciprocality between the criminal and the victim.
The notion that crime and poverty have their roots in the lifestyles and preferences of the poor has a long history in American political culture; the concept of poverty-related issues is severely misled by racial and ethnic stereotypes (Beckett, 1997). The communities who live in poverty largely consist of lower class workers and people of color, and the war on crime, started by Ronald Reagan, only exemplified the stigma of the lower classes being cruel and dangerous. Reagan’s war on crime pressured federal law enforcement agencies to shift their attention to street crime, which had tremendous racial connotations, instead of white-collar offenses (Beckett, 1997). Political institutions are responsible for “protecting members of society from invasions from without, controlling crime and disorder within, and providing channels for resolving conflicts of interest” (Messner and Rosenfeld, 2007). However, criminal laws only
One of the studies conducted in the United States have showed that those parents who are involved in delinquency acts will have more chances that their adolescent will be also involved in the criminal activities (the Effects of Parental Dysfunction on Children, New York, NY: Springer, US.). This is due to observational learning. Parents are like a model for their children and in observational learning a particular behavior is learned by observing a model. It is argued that irritable, ineffective discipline and poor parental monitoring are the most proximal determinants of the early development and maintenance of antisocial