How does Socioeconomic status influence on the likelyhood of getting arrested in Chicago ) - Research Proposal Example

How Does Socioeconomic Status Influence the Likelihood of Getting Arrested In Chicago? affiliation Socioeconomic Status and Likelihood of Arrest in ChicagoChicago has a widest gap between the rich and the poor people among all the states in USA (Reardon, 2011). This has created social classes that are now influencing the likelihood of getting arrested in Chicago (Smith, Visher & Davidson, 1994). There is vast information available that helps researchers understand the relationship between social class and how one is treated by the authorities (Crutchfield, Geerken, & Gove, 2002).

This research will be aimed at understanding how the social class of a person living in Chicago will influence how he/she relates will the police officers and how it determines whether or not he/she will be arrested.The levels of drug abuse in Chicago have continually increased over the last decade. Drug trafficking is controlled by police officers and hence they are the people who are failing in their responsibility (Punch, 2000). Drug traffickers are associated with richness, and this raises questions of whether police officers would be failing to arrest them due to the money gifts they may be receiving.

According to research by the Chicago police department, the rate of crime occurrence has increased by 12% in the last one year (Seidman & Couzens, 2004). Most crime offenders are rich people, and they don’t get arrested or if arrested, their cases vanish (Lizotte, 1998). Government officials are rarely charged in a court of law if found with corruption or criminal cases. This prods one to think that it is their social and economic class that protects them from being arrested.Such acts by police officers affect everybody in the society either directly or indirectly.

Increased criminal activities scare away investors which have a destructive effect on the economic bargain of the nation. Drug trafficking leads to immoral behaviors that affect the victims and those around the victims (Sampson, 2008). Drug trafficking eventually leads to poverty since the people who take the drugs have a low work-rate, and they spend most of their income on drugs. Education levels will also be affected eventually since students who take drugs may drop out. Embezzlement of funds by government official will lead to low development rate of the country which affects every citizen (Block, 1999).

All this effects come as a result police officers arresting people discriminatively based on their social-economic statuses.A previous research done on various governments departments showed that the most corrupt department was the police department. A similar research done in New York City concluded that the reason as to why gurus of crime and drug abuse escaped un-arrested was because of the bribes that the police received (Roebuck, & Barker, 1994). The research also noted that people of the lower social class were immediately arrested upon committing a crime since they were not in a position to offer bribes (Banfield, 2005).

There is enough academic literature that will facilitate carrying out of the research.ReferencesBanfield, E. C. (2005). Corruption as a feature of governmental organization. Springer US.Block, R. (1999). Community, environment, and violent crime. Criminology, 17(1), 46-57.Crutchfield, R. D., Geerken, M. R., & Gove, W. R. (2002). Crime Rate and Social Integration The Impact of Metropolitan Mobility. Criminology, 6(3) 467-478.Lizotte, A. J. (1998). Extra-legal factors in Chicagos criminal courts: Testing the conflict model of criminal justice.

Social Problems, 564-580.Punch, M. (2000). Police corruption and its prevention. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 8(3), 301-324.Reardon, S. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. Whither opportunity, 91-116.Roebuck, J. B., & Barker, T. (1994). A typology of police corruption. Social Problems, 423-437.Sampson, R. J. (2008). Rethinking crime and immigration. Contexts, 7(1), 28-33.Seidman, D., & Couzens, M. (2004). Getting the crime rate down: Political pressure and crime reporting.

Law and society review, 5(1)457-493.Smith, D. A., Visher, C. A., & Davidson, L. A. (1994). Equity and discretionary justice: The influence of race on police arrest decisions. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 234-249.