Analysis of Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences - Essay Example

? Theory of Crimes Theory of Crimes Crime entails unlawful omissions or actions that are either omitted or committed in violation of specified laws that either command or forbid them. The laws also prescribe appropriate punishment to those convicted (Thilagaraj, 2008). Scientific studies that examine the causes, extent, prevention or control of crime are covered under the broad field of criminology which is a discipline of behavioral sciences that draws upon the research conducted by sociologists. Such researches often provide theories of crime that may be applied to different circumstances of crime. By discussing some of the theories described in the book Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences, the fifth edition, this paper will identify them with practical situations. That will be achieved by applying them to examples portrayed by the White family from the movie The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia. The paper will discuss Hirschi’s Two Theories and Beyond, the Strain Theory and Biosocial Theory. The simplicity of Travis Hirschi’s way of stating his theories has made the fundamental propositions easily understandable. Then, his combative nature makes the theories seem controversial when he perceives other theories as wrong. His first theory, which is discussed under social bonds and delinquency, is based on the notion that delinquency stems from absent or weak social bonds (Hirschi & Gottfredson, 2005). The second theory discusses self control and crime where it is opined that low levels of self control have a relation with involvement in criminal activity. Hirschi explains how strong social bonds can reduce involvement in crime by his summary of the social bond theory which is addressed through descriptions of attachment, commitment, involvement and belief. From the reasoning of a control theorist, this theory seeks to explain why even when people are equally motivated to seeking instant gratification through the easiest means they still hold back from doing so (Arrigo & Williams, 2006). The assumption taken by this theory is that all potential crimes bear costs, also known as consequences, and benefits. The assumption also extends to believe that all members of society have similar perceived benefits of crime. This is because through the criminal acts, they can all take something that does not belong to them and gains from it what they want or even use drugs to acquire a high feeling. They also have the same potentials to stop what they find unpleasant by harming those who aggrieve them. However, it is worth noting that even with his assumptions, Hirschi did not offer any empirical evidence that all people can benefit equally from crime (Sherman, 2005). Attachment is viewed as the emotional closeness individuals share with others like parents. The closeness impacts indirect control by developing a caring attitude in children towards their parents’ views such as condemning anti social behavior. The youth will stay away from offensive trends because they are keen to avoid disappointing those that they are attached to (Thilagaraj, 2008). Explaining commitment, Hirschi points out that the reason behind commitment to, say, education and goals in careers are viewed as increasing the costs and consequences of involvement in crime. Then, involvement is described as the taking part in conformist activities that include work, recreational or school activities. Having minimum leisure or unstructured time greatly reduces opportunities for participating in crime. Finally, belief entails embracing moral validities of legal requirements and conventional standards. When the beliefs are moral, individuals are restrained from offensive impulses. Through the strain theory, the key assumption is that most rationale people are considered to possess similar aspirations in regards to a successful life. However, what differentiate them are their different levels of abilities and opportunities. Therefore, when they do not achieve what is expected of them by the society via approved means like hard work or necessary delays of satisfaction, they may resort to crime to achieve success (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2011). The cause of this is usually the pressure, or strain, that they experience from the society leading them to respond via crime. However, it is also pointed out that strain that results in crime does not necessary have to be linked to a deprivation of stimuli that individuals value or blocking their goals, but also by the presence of toxic stimuli. According to the theory, crime is likely to occur more in response to strain whose effects are negative, such as frustration or anger (Thilagaraj, 2008). In the book, the United States is described as an unusual society by a theorist named Robert Merton. He explains the perception through the fact that the society does not only emphasis on individuals attaining financial success but also because the goal has been made universal for anyone willing to achieve it. The problem, however, is that the society does not teach the poor amongst it to be contented with their class but rather, insists that all people must pursue what widely came to be known as the American dream. Through this, the empirical status of the strain theory can be seen to be confirmed by the social situation in the United States. This, according to Merton can only work to achieve a structurally induced variant of strain (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2011). From the selected theories, the biosocial theory is a relative contemporary concept that attempts to highlight how environmental and genetic factors are interdependent in the development of antisocial behavior such as crime. Taking on three branches, the biosocial theory examines how neuroscience, evolutionary psychology and genetics relate to crime. These give this theory a deeper aspect than the conventional social theory that only looks at disorganized communities and how they cause crime by the breakdown of control giving rise to criminal cultures. The biological theory takes the assumption that although the society has the potential to induce criminal traits in individuals, there is usually an underlying genetic factor that may either facilitate or work against the possibility of engraining the traits (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2011). According to the biosocial theory, violent crimes such as assault, murder and rape are mainly committed by members of minority or poor groups who display inferior and biologically different traits (Reamer, 2003). From here, the empirical status can be seen to indicate that criminology is more evident in persons belonging to certain family and social backgrounds. Such persons who repeatedly engage in criminal activities possess criminal traits that they inherited, which compel them towards frequent crime. Such persons are also portrayed as having anomalies, which means that physically, they are similar to primitive savages from early societies. Members of such families with criminological traits also inherently possess family genes that are described as degenerate. It is the genes that are the cause of recurrent incidents of drug abuse or alcoholism, epilepsy and insanity as well as crime that arises from the direct link of such families. The theories of crime can be used to explain the criminality of the White family from Boone County, West Virginia in the movie The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia. Being a family that even as far as the county authorities are concerned is only trouble, it means they are even a nuisance to the social thread. Their notoriety is seen in every aspect of society ranging from robbery, attempted murder and abuse of drugs. Starting from the family’s patriarch, D. Ray, who was also killed in a criminal act, the first link a viewer can identify with the theories of crime is through the strain theory of crime. The exploitation that took place in the coal mining industry of Boone drove D. Ray to strike back to the corruption. This was in a bid to work his way towards forcing benefits out of the system. Since he could not achieve success because of the rampant corruption, he perceived himself as a failure, which was the cause of his strain. The attitude through which the movie portrays him is also largely evident in the rest of the White family. The coal industry is seen to be a dangerous career platform, encouraging workers to adopt an attitude aligned with living for the moment. Clearly, this is not in conformity with achieving the earlier mentioned American dream and offers a ready incentive for engaging in alternative methods (crime) to succeed in life. Such concepts are easily passed on to successive generations that create families that do not have any hope in the future like the Whites. The movie also features six of D. Ray’s children that he bore with his widow Bertie Mae. In total, Bertie had 13 children. What strikes a viewer as strange is that among all the grandchildren that Bertie’s children gave her, including her own and their cousins, none has not taken part in criminal activities. This is a manifestation of the biosocial theory of crime. From the movie, both the patriarch, D. Ray and his wife have not been depicted as having criminology in a genetic sense. However, the biosocial theory is the only comprehensive way to explain why it was such a rampant characteristic of the generations that they gave rise to. Although the social bonds theory in Hirschi’s theories may also offer an explanation, is not explicit enough to show how the entirety of two generations can have not just simple criminal traits, but are involved in hardcore crime. For instance, one grandson received a 50 year prison sentence for attempting to murder the boyfriend to the first born daughter of his grandparents. A granddaughter gave birth to a child who was immediately taken away by child protective authorities because of her record of violence and drug and alcohol abuse. Further, the film also shows one leaving prison after serving a jail term although viewers are not told why. The reason why Hirschi’s theories cannot apply to the consequent generations is that it may be difficult to justify how out of the 13 children, not even a single one could find an attachment with a positive role model. It is also difficult to justify why none had a commitment to education or career aspiration. The only way to explain such characteristics in three generations is by some form of inheritance from the first one, then enhanced by the social aspects that help nurture them. Further, the theory of social bonds distanced itself from suggesting such a possibility by stating that sources and strengths of bonds reside exclusively in the individuals that display them rather that their parents. Attachment, therefore, finds its basis in the quality of the shared relationship between parents and children (Wolframm, 2009). In that sense, the social bond theory and the self control theory will be easily applicable to the first generation of D. Ray and his wife Bertie together with one unique member called Bill Hastings. Hastings was the outsider member who was the boyfriend to the first born daughter of the second generation and was part of the circumstances that led to the killing of D. Ray, and was himself killed by the grandson. For D. Ray, in a similar way to his case in relation to the strain theory, even before he retaliated to the corruption in the manner that he did, he was fully aware that there were both costs and benefits. However, he was not strongly attached to a positive role model with whom he could develop emotional closeness and take advice. His wife is not depicted at any one time as offering him moral support not to join the corruption bandwagon. He loses all occupational aspirations which immediately reduce the cost of not conforming to immorality and participating in crime. Since the mining industry itself does not enforce a belief in morality or attempt to restrain impulsive offenses, the social fabric deteriorates and provides a favorable breeding ground for crime. Under the same umbrella, the stability of control concept in self control theory stipulates that control has the potential of changing in accordance to changes in social bonds (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2011). Still, the concept of the relationship between bonds and crime has a spurious ability to cause crime when self control is absent or weak. The most affected is the internalized type of control. These two concepts are the ones that best identify with the way Hastings was absorbed in the criminal world of the Whites as a boyfriend to the eldest daughter. References Arrigo, B., & Williams, R. (2006). Philosophy, crime and criminology. Illinois: University of Illinois Press. Chaskin, R. (2010). Youth gangs and community intervention. Research, practice and evidence. New York: Columbia University Press. Hirschi, T., & Gottfredson, M. (2005). Punishment of children from the perspective of control theory. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lilly, J. R., Cullen, F. T., & Ball, R. A. (2011). Criminological theory: Context and consequences. New York: Sage. Reamer, F. (2003). Criminal lessons: Case studies and commentary on crime and justice. New York: Columbia University Press. Sherman, L. (2005). The use and usefulness of the social sciences: Achievements, disappointments, and promise. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 600(9), 115-135. Thilagaraj, R. (2008). Issues and Problems in Reintegrating Young Offenders into Society. New Delhi: Universities Grant Commission. Wolframm, H. (2009). Crime, clairvoyance and the Weimar police. Journal of Contemporary History, 44(4), 581-601. Read More