Copyright © 2004 by Nelson, a division of Thomson Canada Limited. 1 Chapter19Deviance and Crime by...

Copyright © 2004 by Nelson, a division of Thomson Canada Limited.

1

ChapterChapter 1919 Deviance and CrimeDeviance and Crimeby Rosemary Gartnerby Rosemary Gartner

and Myrna Dawsonand Myrna Dawson

Copyright © 2004 by Nelson, a division of Thomson Canada Limited. 2

• Although deviance involves breaking rules, rules often change and people often disagree with the rules.

• Definitions of deviance are the outcome of political processes and power relations in which different groups compete to define right and wrong.

• Thus, to understand deviance we must examine the people and organizations that define and react to deviance.

DEVIANCEDEVIANCE


SOCIAL CONTROL ISOCIAL CONTROL I• Deviance is defined by social control, the public

effort to change nonconformist behaviour or punish deviance.

• Nonconformity only becomes deviance when it produces a negative social reaction and members of society try to impose social control.

• Social control may be informal (expressions of disapproval and avoidance from peers) or formal (controls exerted by the state through the criminal justice system and by social workers and psychiatrists).


SOCIAL CONTROL IISOCIAL CONTROL IIAccording to Durkheim, deviance can have

positive social consequences, including:• increasing social solidarity;• defining a group’s moral boundaries; and• keeping societies flexible

Yet deviance and crime also have costs or dysfunctions:

• undermining social stability; and• social control efforts with worse

consequences than the original deviant or criminal acts.


• Crime is deviance that is defined by norms that are formalized in law.

• Because criminal acts are defined by law, they are considered more serious than other deviant acts.

• Nonetheless, conflicting opinions surround even the most serious crimes.

• For example, while all Canadians agree that the intentional killing of a person is wrong, they disagree about euthanasia and the death penalty.

CRIMECRIME


• Efforts to define deviance are often called moral crusades. They are initiated by individuals and groups that act as moral crusaders (e.g., Mothers Against Drunk Driving).

• Sociologists use the status-conflict perspective to understand the conflict involved in defining deviance.

THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF DEVIANCE AND ITS OF DEVIANCE AND ITS CONSEQUENCESCONSEQUENCES


• This perspective holds that society consists of many groups that compete against one another for status and influence.

• Groups that control definitions of deviance can:

• legitimate their moral standards and claims to moral authority, and

• determine the types of social controls applied to deviance.

THE STATUS–CONFLICT THE STATUS–CONFLICT PERSPECTIVEPERSPECTIVE


• The labeling perspective holds that social reactions to deviance are an important cause of deviance.

• Agents of social control (police, psychiatrists, etc.) label some behaviour as deviant and thereby reinforce deviant identities.

• Labeling can also result in collective deviant responses such as the formation of deviant subcultures (e.g., biker gangs).

CONSEQUENCES OF CONSEQUENCES OF DEFINING DEVIANCE DEFINING DEVIANCE


EXPLANATIONS OF DEVIANCE EXPLANATIONS OF DEVIANCE There are two main types of explanations for deviance:

• Motivational theories identify the social factors that push people to engage in deviance. Two variants of motivational theories are strain theories and learning theories.

• Control and opportunity theories identify the social factors that control or prevent people from engaging in criminal activity.


STRAIN THEORIES ISTRAIN THEORIES I

• Strain theory argues that the motivation to deviate lies in society, not the individual.

• According to Merton, some people who lack opportunities to achieve the success and status valued by their culture withdraw from conventional society and find deviant (including criminal) means of achieving goals.


Criticisms of strain theories:

• They focus on, and overstate the extent of, lower-class, “street” crime by ignoring the effects of discriminatory practices and greater police surveillance in lower-class communities.

• They fail to explain why so many people who face strain do not become deviants.

STRAIN THEORIES IISTRAIN THEORIES II


• Learning theories argue that one learns to be deviant in much the same way one learns to play sports or enjoy music.

• Sutherland’s theory of differential association holds that when positive evaluations of deviance in one’s social environment outweigh negative evaluations, one is prone to accept deviance.

• Sutherland’s theory explains deviance at all levels of society.

LEARNING THEORIES ILEARNING THEORIES I


• Sykes and Matza claim that deviants must learn techniques of neutralization to reconcile the conventional and deviant worlds in which they live.

• Deviants use these techniques to nullify their own guilt and blame others by:• denying personal responsibility for their actions;• condemning people who pass judgement on

them;• claiming their victims deserve what they got;

and• denying that they cause any real harm.

LEARNING THEORIES IILEARNING THEORIES II


• Control and opportunity theories claim that deviance and crime occur because they are rewarding – that is, fun and profitable.

• Opportunity theories, like control theories, assume that in the absence of inner or external controls, most of us would engage in crime.

• These theories argue that the type of crimes people commit depend on the opportunities available to them.

CONTROL AND CONTROL AND OPPORTUNITY THEORIES IOPPORTUNITY THEORIES I


• Control theories try to answer the question, “Why do people not commit crime?”

• Control theories argue that people who don’t commit crime have strong social controls.

• One version of the theory argues that juvenile delinquency results from the lack of strong bonds to conventional institutions (family, teachers, school).

• A second version identifies self-control as the basis of conformity.

CONTROL AND CONTROL AND OPPORTUNITY THEORIES IIOPPORTUNITY THEORIES II


SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CRIME AND DEVIANCEOF CRIME AND DEVIANCE


• Crime can be measured by official crime statistics, but these are affected by control agents’ decisions as to which acts to report and which to ignore.

• Surveys can ask people to report on their involvement in deviance, or their experiences as victims of crime, but they depend on people’s willingness and ability to discuss openly their own and others’ deviance.

MEASURING DEVIANCE MEASURING DEVIANCE AND CRIME IAND CRIME I


• Indirect measures may also be used to measure deviance (e.g., statistics on cirrhosis of the liver as an indicator of serious alcoholism).

• A good policy is to use a combination of measures to increase confidence in one’s depiction of deviance and crime.

MEASURING DEVIANCE MEASURING DEVIANCE AND CRIME IIAND CRIME II


CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR IN CANADA I IN CANADA I

• Many Canadians feel that the crime rate has been increasing in recent years. However, official crime statistics show that the crime rate has been decreasing.

• Canadians are more likely to be criminally victimized than people in most European countries, but much less likely than Americans to be victims of serious violent crime.


CRIME RATES IN CANADACRIME RATES IN CANADA


• A substantial minority of Canadians thinks crime is increasing because the mass media makes it seem so.

• Actually, crime decreased in the 90s, not because of tough policing or an improved economy but partly because the most crime-prone group – people between the ages of 15 and 24 – shrunk.

CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR IN CANADA II IN CANADA II


• Canadian crime rates have historically been lower in the east than in the west, and highest in the territories.

• Aboriginals and Blacks are overrepresented as victims, offenders, and prison inmates, due to: • higher rates of criminal activity that result from

high rates of poverty , unemployment, and family disruption; and

• discrimination in the system of criminal justice.

CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR IN CANADA III IN CANADA III


HOMICIDE RATES, SELECTED HOMICIDE RATES, SELECTED COUNTRIES, 2001COUNTRIES, 2001


CRIME RATES, CANADA AND CRIME RATES, CANADA AND THE USA, 2001THE USA, 2001


CRIME RATES BY PROVINCE CRIME RATES BY PROVINCE AND TERRITORYAND TERRITORY

Insert Figure 19.2, p. 507


CRIME AND GLOBALIZATIONCRIME AND GLOBALIZATION• As the world economy has become globalized

and linked by electronic technology, motivations and opportunities for economic crime on a global scale have increased.

• Much global crime is being committed by legitimate businesses in the form of violations of antitrust and environmental laws.

• Because corporate misconduct is defined differently from nation to nation, controlling global corporate crime is difficult.


CRIME AND CHANGING CRIME AND CHANGING GENDER STRATIFICATIONGENDER STRATIFICATION• The reduction of gender inequality in the

Western industrialized nations has not led to an increase in women as offenders.

• However, as women spend more time in the labour force and outside of traditional domestic roles they are more likely to become victims of crime.


YOUTHS ACCUSED OF YOUTHS ACCUSED OF HOMICIDE, 1991-2001HOMICIDE, 1991-2001


PATTERNS OF PATTERNS OF SOCIAL CONTROL ISOCIAL CONTROL I• Before the 17th century, centralized states were

too weak to sponsor institutions of formal control, so serious rule-breaking was dealt with by physical punishment imposed by families, communities, and the church.

• Excessive confinement was criticized in the twentieth century as repressive and inefficient for rehabilitation.

• The 1960s saw a move away from institutionalization and a shift of control to local governments and community agencies.


• Many forms of deviance and crime have been redefined as medical problems, in some ways widening the net of social control.

• Current trends:

• operating jails and prisons by private companies, and

• engineering away deviance and crime by controlling the physical environment rather than people.

PATTERNS OF PATTERNS OF SOCIAL CONTROL IISOCIAL CONTROL II


RECENT CANADIAN TRENDS RECENT CANADIAN TRENDS IN CRIMINAL JUSTICEIN CRIMINAL JUSTICE• With the introduction of the Charter of Rights

and Freedoms in 1982, there has been a shift away from the crime control model to the due process model.

• Nonetheless, incarceration rates continued to rise until the mid-1990s and then began to decline to:

• decreasing crime rates, and

• the use of alternatives to incarceration, such as restorative justice.

INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL INCARCERATION INCARCERATION

RATESRATES



SUPPLEMENTARY SLIDESSUPPLEMENTARY SLIDES


VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME, VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME, CANADA, BY PROVINCE AND CANADA, BY PROVINCE AND TERRITORY, 2002TERRITORY, 2002

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

NFLD PEI

NS NBQUE

ONTM

AN

SASKALT

A BCYUK

NWT

NUN

Violent

Property

Crimesper 100,000population

PERCENT OF POPULATION VICTIMIZED PERCENT OF POPULATION VICTIMIZED ONCE OR MORE IN THE PAST YEAR, BY ONCE OR MORE IN THE PAST YEAR, BY TYPE OF CRIME, 1996TYPE OF CRIME, 1996

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Violent Offenses HouseholdBurglary

Theft of PersonalProperty

Northern Ireland

Austria

France

Scotland

Switzerland

Canada

Finland

Netherlands

Sweden

USA

England and Wales

Percent of Population

Type of Crime

Note: Horizontal lines indicateinternational average for eachtype of crime.


POPULATION PER POLICE OFFICER, POPULATION PER POLICE OFFICER, CANADA, 1991–2002CANADA, 1991–2002

460

480

500

520

540

560

91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 0 1 2

Year

Population/officer


CRIMINAL CODE INCIDENTS PER POLICE CRIMINAL CODE INCIDENTS PER POLICE OFFICER, CANADA, 1991–2001OFFICER, CANADA, 1991–2001

40

45

50

91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 0 1Year

Incidents/officer


INMATES IN FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL INMATES IN FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL CUSTODY, 1991–1997CUSTODY, 1991–1997

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

91 92 93 94 95 96 97

Federal

Provincial

Year

Inmates

7.3% increase


RATE OF ASSAULT REPORTED TO RATE OF ASSAULT REPORTED TO POLICE, CANADA, 1978–1998POLICE, CANADA, 1978–1998

0

50

100

78 83 88 93 97 98

sexual/100,000non-sexual/million

Rate

Year


CRIME IN SELECTED CANADIAN CITIES, CRIME IN SELECTED CANADIAN CITIES, 1998 (PER 100,000 POPULATION)1998 (PER 100,000 POPULATION)

CITY Regina 14,785 (2.0) 1,649 (0.8)Vancouver 12,142 (-4.9) 1,170 (-5.2)Saskatoon 11,777 (-1.3) 1,407 (2.4)Winnipeg 9,952 (-3.2) 1,299 (-10.8)Halifax 9,628 (0.0) 996 (-12.5)Edmonton 8,736 (-4.4) 996 (2.0)Windsor 7,892 (-5.5) 918 (7.2)Calgary 7,813 (-1.8) 849 (0.4)Montreal 7,779 (-4.8) 827 (-11.4)St John’s 7,385 (5.8) 968 (-3.6)Toronto 5,838 (-11.0) 836 (-2.2)Quebec 5,348 (-8.7) 456 (-11.4)

CRIME RATE VIOLENT CRIME RATE(% change since ’97) (% change since ’97)


Copyright © 2004 by Nelson, a division of Thomson Canada Limited. 1 Chapter19Deviance and Crime by...

Documents

Transcript of Copyright © 2004 by Nelson, a division of Thomson Canada Limited. 1 Chapter19Deviance and Crime by...