Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Realist theories of crime - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Wilson and Herrnstein (1985) put forward a biosocial theory of criminal behaviour. In their view, crime is caused by a combination of biological and social factors.
      - Herrnstein and Murray (1994) argue that the main cause of crime is low intelligence, which they also see as biologically determined.
      - Biological differences between individuals make some people innately more strongly predisposed to commit crime than others. Ex: personality traits such as aggressiveness, extroversion, risk taking and low impulse control put some people at greater risk of offending.
    - - Effective socialisation decreases the risk of people committing crime, since it involves learning self-control and internalising moral values of right and wrong. For realists, the best agency of socialisation is the nuclear family.
      - Charles Murray (1990) claims that the crime rate is increasing because of a growing underclass who fail to socialise their children properly. The underclass is growing as a result of welfare dependency.
        
        Murray identifies 'generous revolution' since the 1960s allows increasing numbers of people to become dependent on the state. It has led to the decline of marriage and the growth of lone parent families, because women and children can live off benefits. This also means that men no longer have to take responsibility for supporting their families, so they no longer need to work.
        
        Murray claims, lone mothers are ineffective socialisation agents, especially for boys. Absent fathers mean that boys lack paternal discipline and appropriate male role models.Resulting in young males turn to delinquent role models on the street and gain status through crime rather than supporting their families through a steady job.
        
        However, critics point out that there is no evidence that young people raised in lone parent families are more likely to commit crime.
    - - -Assumes that individuals have free will and the power of reason.
      - Rational choice theorists such as Ron Clarke (1980) argue that the decision to commit crime is a choice based on a rational calculation of the likely consequences. If the perceived rewards of crime outweigh the perceived costs, or if the rewards of crime appear to be greater than those of non-criminal behaviour, then people will be likely to offend.
        Right realists argue that the perceived costs of crime are low and this is why the crime rate has increased.
      - As Wilson (1975) puts it:
        'If the supply and value of legitimate opportunities (i.e. jobs) was declining at the very time that the cost of illegitimate opportunities (i.e. fines and jail terms) was also declining, a rational teenager might well conclude that it made more sense to steal cars than to wash them.'
      - Felson's (2002) routine activity theory. He argues that for a crime to occur, there must be a motivated offender, a suitable target (a victim or property) and the absence of a 'capable guardian' (e.g. a police officer). Offenders are assumed to act rationally, so that the presence of a guardian is likely to deter them.
  - - - It is preoccupied with petty street crime and ignores corporate crime, which is more costly and harmful
        It gives the police free rein to discriminate against minorities, youth, the homeless and others.
        It over-emphasises control of disorder, rather than tackling the causes of neighbourhood decline
        Zero tolerance and target hardening just lead to displacement of crime to other areas.
- - - - Marxists have concentrated on crimes of the powerful, such as corporate crime. Left realists agree that this is important, but they argue that it neglects working-class crime and its effects.
      - Neo-Marxists romanticise working -class criminals Left realists point out that in fact working-class criminals mostly victimise other working-class people, not the rich.
      - Labelling theorists see working-class criminals as the victims of discriminatory labelling by social control agents. Left realists argue that this approach neglects the real victims- working-class people who suffer at the hands of criminals.
  - - - For Lea and young, crime has its roots in deprivation. However deprivation in itself is not directly responsible for crime. Ex: poverty was rife in the 1930s, yet crime rates were low . by contrast since the 1950s living standards have risen but so too has the crime rate
        Left realists draw on Runciman's (1966) concept of relative deprivation to explain crime. This refers to how deprived someone feels in relation to others, or compared with their own expectations. This can lead to crime when people resent others for unfairly having more than them and resort to crime to obtain what they feel they are entitled to.
      - Lea and Young explain the paradox that today's society is both more prosperous and more crime-ridden. Although people are better off, they are now more aware of relative deprivation due to the media and advertising, which raise everyone's expectations for material possessions. Those who cannot afford them may resort to crime instead.
      - However, relative deprivation alone does not necessarily lead to crime. For Young (1999), 'the lethal combination is relative deprivation and individualism'. Individualism is a concern with the self and one's own individual rights, rather than those of the group. It causes crime by encouraging the pursuit of self-interest at the expense of others.
      - For left realists, increasing individualism is causing the disintegration of families and communities by undermining the values of mutual support and selflessness on which they are based. This weakens the informal controls that such groups exercise over individuals, creating a spiral of increasing anti-social behaviour, aggression and crime.
    - - The left realist view of criminal subcultures owes much to Merton, A.K. Cohen and Cloward and Ohlin, especially their concepts of blocked opportunity and subcultures as a group's reaction to the failure to achieve mainstream goals. Thus for left realists, a subculture is a group's collective solution to the problem of relative deprivation.
        However, different groups may produce different subcultural solutions to this problem. Some may turn to crime to close the 'deprivation gap', while others may find that religion offers them spiritual comfort and what Weber calls a 'theodicy of disprivilege - an explanation for their disadvantage.
      - Religious subcultures may encourage conformity. Ken Pryce (1979) identified several subcultures within Bristol's Black community. These included the 'saints' or Pentecostal churchgoers, a hard-working, law-abiding group whose collective self-help aided them in coping with life in a racist society.
      - For left realists, criminal subcultures still subscribe to the values and goals of mainstream society, such as materialism and consumerism.
    - - Marginalised groups lack both clear goals and organisations to represent their interests. Groups such as workers have clear goals (such as better pay and conditions) and often have organisations (such as trade unions) to put pressure on employers and politicians. As such, they have no need to resort to violence to achieve their goals.
        By contrast, Young argues, unemployed youth are marginalised. They have no organisation to represent them and no clear goals, just a sense of resentment and frustration. Being powerless to use political means to improve their position, they express their frustration through criminal means such as violence and rioting.
  - - - • the poor have access to the media's materialistic, consumerist cultural messages.
        • There is a greater emphasis on leisure, personal consumption and immediate gratification, leading to higher expectations for the 'good life'.
        • At the same time, despite the ideology of meritocracy, the poor are denied opportunities to gain the 'glittering prizes of a wealthy society'.
    - - Since the mid 1990s the crime rate has fallen substantially. This a problem for realist explanations, because it suggests that crime is no longer a major threat. Young notes because crime is socially constructed it may continue to be seen as a problem.
    - - Blurring the boundaries of crime, so 'incivilities' become crimes. Breaching an ASBO is itself a crime, thus 'manufacturing' more crime.
      - Subjective definition Antisocial behaviour has no objective definition; it is in the eye of the beholder.
      - Flexibility ASBOs have been used against people wearing hoodies, making a noise, letting off fireworks, flyposting or begging, and others besides.
  - - - Lea and Young (1986) argue that police clear-up rates are too low to act as a deterrent to crime and that police spend too little time actually investigating crime. They argue that the public must become more involved in determining the police's priorities and style of policing.
      - The police depend on the public to provide them with information about crimes (90% of crimes known to the police are reported to them by the public).
      - However, the police are losing public support, especially in the inner cities and among minority ethnic groups and the young. As a result, the flow of information dries up and police come to rely instead on military policing, such as 'swamping' an area and using random stop and search tactics. This alienates communities and results in a vicious circle: locals no longer trust the police and don't provide. with information, so the police resort to military policing, and so on.
      - Left realists argue that policing must be made accountable to local communities and deal with local concerns. Police need to improve their relationship with local communities by spending more time investigating crime, changing their priorities (they over-police minor drug crime, but under-police racist attacks and domestic violence) and involving the public in making policing policy.
      - Left realists also argue that crime control cannot be left to the police alone, this would involve agencies such as local councils' social services, housing departments, schools and leisure services. As well as voluntary organisations and victim support and the public.