Crime - Sociology Research Project. Please Help :)

sbyrne92

I am in Second Year Sociology and am in the middle of doing a research project. I am required to gather the opinions of others so please comment Anything at all would be helpful!


I am interested in people's views on the following topics

- why people commit crime
- how the background of these people affect them in relation to committing the crime
- how the system in Ireland (or other countries) is dealing with these situations
- preventative measures that are (or can be) taken & their success

Like I said, any opinions or comments are useful!
Thanks

Procrastastudy

Crime - Sociology = Crim - ology = Criminology - pick up a book in the Lib - rary :P

If you really want people's views your qualitative research lecturer needs a slap in the head for not describing boards as a bad source but I digress!

Personally I'm wil Lombroso - people who commit crimes are evolutionary throw backs and you can tell that by they way they look. Women don't commit crime becuase they haven't evolved that far yet.

The system in Ireland doesn't deal with crime very well - but thats a massive question. Do you refer to our laissez faire social walfare system or our broken prision system? The lack of a spent conviction system also doesn't help as a lot of young males at around 25 or so simply grow out of commiting petty crime - or simply stop getting caught!

Preventative measures - again very interesting - have a read of a good Criminology introduction as many of the obvious ones are double edged.

sbyrne92

I realise that forums are not going to be my best resource for this assignment, I just want to get information from as many sources as I can. Hopefully will have some useful knowledgeable/opinionated replies, such as yours

Thanks for taking the time to reply!

Procrastastudy

Oh I will give you one of my half informed half baked opinions for the record...

One of the biggest issues in "Crime" is that traditional classifications have started to go out of the window due to drugs. There are many theories on why people commit crime but they all rely (in gerneral) on some form of choice. When you are looking for your next fix - that tends to go out of the window.

Violent Crimes - Alcohol has always played a part in this but I would argue that today's binge drinking culture coupled with other recreational drugs are having an affect here also.

Cannabis - Seen as too socially acceptable and leading to an increase in road traffic accidents. People seem to get the message in regards to drink driving but not in relations to Cannabis and driving.

My final opinion is the lack of a father figure - the family is a much more transient thing than in the past and this is contributing to a change in attitudes.

One really interesting non sequitur is that there is some suggestion that the lack of a male role model en mass is resulting in a "rebelion" against women in the adolesent years - this is manifesting itself in misogynistic lyris and attitutdes in some sub-cultures.

Procrastastudy

sbyrne92 wrote: »

I realise that forums are not going to be my best resource for this assignment, I just want to get information from as many sources as I can. Hopefully will have some useful knowledgeable/opinionated replies, such as yours

Thanks for taking the time to reply!

I assume there is a qualatative element to this research assingment and you're just to lazy to go and stand out on Grafton Street... for this you have my utmost respect Sir/Madam.

sbyrne92

GCDLawstudent wrote: »

I assume there is a qualatative element to this research assingment and you're just to lazy to go and stand out on Grafton Street... for this you have my utmost respect Sir/Madam.

Haha... It's only a proposal so far. Maybe when I am forced to go into more detail I will venture onto the street :cool:
You have gotten me off to a good start though, so again, many thanks

sfakiaman

Dear Alan Shatter

Your question is so multi faceted that it would require several books to answer but you have to ask yourself 'what is crime'. Crime is what is defined by the state as 'Crime'. Different states have different laws, so what is a crime in one country is not in another. You could ask yourself, who benifits from crime, obviously the criminal hopes to, but the guards, the Judges, the lawyers, solicitors, barristers, news reporters and politicians benefit even more and at no risk to themselves! Good luck with being allowed an honest answer on that one.

MagicSean

sbyrne92 wrote: »

- why people commit crime

Personal gain (property, money, power, women)
Mental disease or defect (crimes of passion included)
Necessity
Then there are some people just want to watch the world burn

sbyrne92 wrote: »

- how the background of these people affect them in relation to committing the crime

Poverty, abuse, neglect and illness can all contibute to any of the above.

sbyrne92 wrote: »

- how the system in Ireland (or other countries) is dealing with these situations

Badly. The punishments are too light and there is pretty much no effort at rehabilitation. These are polar opposites in strategy. Either you give light punishments and help people reform or you give harsh punishments and keep them out of society. There is no middleground.

sbyrne92 wrote: »

- preventative measures that are (or can be) taken & their success

Preventative measures are in the hands of the people. Secure your home properly. Don't be an easy target. Take an interest in your community. If you see a strange car then note the reg and the description of the people inside. Help the Gardaí do their job. Lobby your TD for reform of outdated laws and to provide additional resources to crime prevention schemes such as neighbourhood watch.

benway

- why people commit crime

Various reasons, but personally I find the phenomenological and cultural criminological explanations most persuasive - that crime is a meaningful act of transcendence, that it often involves taking power and control over a situation - "mugging" is as much about making a mug of the victim as about material gain - so it is often very attractive to people who generally live in the margins, an opportunity to assert themselves.

Of course, there are crimes of pure greed also, crimes of passion, crimes etc., that don't fit in that rubric. Broadly speaking, I would say that social exclusion is the single biggest cause of crime. Poverty is an issue, only to the extent that it contributes to social exclusion.

- how the background of these people affect them in relation to committing the crime

Which people? People who commit crime?

As above, I think crime is often a way of asserting control and power in a world where a great many people are subjugated and powerless.

There's also the issue of white collar crime, which tends more towards pure greed, and the affirmation of pulling a fast one and getting away with it.

- how the system in Ireland (or other countries) is dealing with these situations

Which situations? The causes of crime? Or dealing with the aftermath?

The causes - very little. Seems that throughout the western world, we're happy to contain our underclass in ghettoes / sink estates and to blame them for lashing out, or descending into addiction.

The aftermath is the work of the criminal justice system, and punishment, which will inevitably have limited effectiveness in reducing crime, where social conditions on the outside remain poor.

- preventative measures that are (or can be) taken & their success

There's obviously situational crime prevention measures - locks, gates, cctv, etc. - but, given the foregoing, the key for me is to prevent socially excluded areas and populations from sliding into ghettoisation. Harsher punishment, or indeed any tinkering with the system of punishment, won't have a massive effect.

Encourage young people to believe in themselves, and their ability to succeed in legitimate employment, to believe that they belong to the society and that they're respected and valued as a member of society. All pretty wooly, but you get the idea.

OP, if this is empirical research that's happening here, you'd need to tighten up your questionnaire, maybe put it on surveymonkey. I'll happily fill it in for you if you do, doing things like this seems a bit loose, depending on what you're looking for. If you have specific issues you're looking to address I'd be happy to give you some pointers - my Masters is in criminology.

sbyrne92

Thanks for all the replies guys! Appreciate it

Finnbar01

You may be interested in this discussion.

Why do progressives love criminals.

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/03/09/symposium-why-do-progressives-love-criminals/

benway

Finnbar01 wrote: »

You may be interested in this looney right circle jerk.

Fixed that, etc.

Finnbar01

benway wrote: »

Fixed that, etc.

You probably didn't even read the article.

benway

Our guests today are:

Christian Adams, an election lawyer who served in the Voting Rights Section at the U.S. Department of Justice. His bestselling book is Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department Visit his website at ElectionLawCenter.com.

Theodore Dalrymple, a retired doctor and psychiatrist, and the author of several books, among them the Life at the Bottom and Anything Goes.

and

Dr. Paul Hollander, the author or editor of fourteen books in political sociology and cultural-intellectual history. His books include Political Pilgrims, Anti-Americanism: Critiques at Home and Abroad, 1965-1990, and The End of Commitment.

None of whom have any notable experience or qualifications working in criminal justice. Also, seeing as it's so-called "progressive" ideas that are being discussed, it would have been helpful to have had a proponent of these ideas on the panel. If it was a meaningful discussion that the publication wanted, rather than a looney right circle jerk.

And maybe there would be more reasoned discussion than the likes of this:

Reasonable people would find Alexander’s thesis laughable, but her audience isn’t comprised of reasonable people. Reasonable Americans in middle America will never hear of The New Jim Crow. Instead, her audience is comprised of the academic crackpots eager to teach her theories to the children of the reasonable people a decade from now. Her audience also includes the grade-A race hustlers anxious for the next generation of poisonous grievance.

Nice to see that this guy is qualified to speak for all "reasonable people"

That leftists regard the criminal justice system as criminal and therefore regard criminals as “primitive rebels” against an unjust system is, I suppose, right, though few of them would openly admit it.

O rly?

A mixture of sentimentality and intellectual pride distinguishes the attitude of many liberal intellectuals towards crime, which almost never affects them personally. On the one hand there is a reluctance to believe that ordinary people can behave very badly; on the other they believe that it is the function of the intellectual to uncover the underlying ‘reality’ of phenomena (if he is not for that, what is he for?), so that it represents a loss of caste to express the ordinary man in the street’s horror at or revulsion against crime.

Any examples? Or is that just a crude caricature of the "out of touch ivory tower liberal academic", without any evidential basis?

Utter drivel.

Finnbar01

benway wrote: »

None of whom have any notable experience or qualifications working in criminal justice.

Incorrect. Theodore Dalrymple has extensive experience working as a prison doctor.

benway

3 years as a part time prison psychologist, in a career spent primarily in private practice and the NHS? Wouldn't call that notable, there are plenty of people out there who spend their lives taking in criminal justice...but these people don't gererally hold such virulently right-wing views. I'd say he gives away his main qualification for that panel here:

Regarding his pseudonym Theodore Dalrymple, Daniels says he "chose a name that sounded suitably dyspeptic, that of a gouty old man looking out of the window of his London club, port in hand, lamenting the degenerating state of the world".[6]

Come on, you can do better than that.

Finnbar01

benway wrote: »

3 years as a part time prison psychologist, in a career spent primarily in private practice and the NHS? Wouldn't call that notable, there are plenty of people out there who spend their lives taking in criminal justice...but these people don't gererally hold such virulently right-wing views. I'd say he gives away his main qualification for that panel here:

He wasn't a psychologist he was a psychiatrist. He has 15 years experience working in both a hospital and prison in that role.

Regarding his pseudonym Theodore Dalrymple, Daniels says he "chose a name that sounded suitably dyspeptic, that of a gouty old man looking out of the window of his London club, port in hand, lamenting the degenerating state of the world".[6]

Come on, you can do better than that.

Better than what?

benway

I don't think his prison experience is that extensive, in fact I'm pretty much certain it's negligible - maybe I'm wrong. Unless I'm very much mistaken, though, he's never been published in a reputable, peer reviewed on the topic of criminal justice. And he's easily the best-qualified panel member.

Finnbar01 wrote:

Better than what?

That article. It's a wafer-thin polemic, not a serious discussion of ideas.

Finnbar01

benway wrote: »

I don't think his prison experience is that extensive, in fact I'm pretty much certain it's negligible - maybe I'm wrong. Unless I'm very much mistaken, though, he's never been published in a reputable, peer reviewed on the topic of criminal justice. And he's easily the best-qualified panel member.

You are wrong.

I think we've both taking up too much time on this.

I'm dropping out now.

benway

Fair enough.

Although ... can't let this go without saying ... Theodore Dalrymple is no more an authority on criminal justice than my cat is ... and I like that you'll just toss an article called "why do progressives love criminals" into a thread, then cut and run when you're pulled up on it.

I'd imagine it's for similar reasons as that publication's rationale on not having anyone on that panel making countervailing arguments against their ideologically driven viewpoint. But that's your right.

Finnbar01

benway wrote: »

Fair enough.

Although ... can't let this go without saying ... Theodore Dalrymple is no more an authority on criminal justice than my cat is ... and I like that you'll just toss an article called "why do progressives love criminals" into a thread, then cut and run when you're pulled up on it.

I'd imagine it's for similar reasons as that publication's rationale on not having anyone on that panel making countervailing arguments against their ideologically driven viewpoint. But that's your right.

Well I'm going to have to respond to this but that's a low blow there.

The OP wanted some input into a research project he is undertaking. I posted a link to give him an alternative view.

Incidentally what are your credentials when it comes to criminality?

benway

Finnbar01 wrote: »

Incidentally what are your credentials when it comes to criminality?

None when it comes to criminality ... that I wanna tell you about.

Masters in Criminology, have worked on quite a few Central Criminal Court trials, and related stuff, not so much in the lower courts. Mainly work on the civil side right at the moment, though.

Sorry if I was being overly harsh earlier, but that link was pure ideological fluff. For one thing, none of the works they were "reviewing" would be any way useful, for another, there's the fact that they obviously set out with an ideological conclusion in mind, for a third, they were building up and knocking down a strawman "liberal elite" - even a hatchet job would have had some kind of worth if there was even a token dissenting voice.

If you want serious right-wing criminology, Wilson and Kelling's broken windows theory is a good place to start:

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/_atlantic_monthly-broken_windows.pdf

And Wilson's expanded version.

Ronald Clarke's rational-choice based situational prevention model:

http://www.popcenter.org/library/reading/PDFs/scp2_intro.pdf

At the extremes, you've got Murray and Hernstein's massively controversial, some (including me) might say racist bell curve theory.

On the borderline, but right-leaning imho, there's William Julius Wilson's writings about the underclass.

Robert King Merton's centrist, but not certainly not looney right like some of the others, theory of anomie is massive, one of the biggest concepts in criminology.

As for left-leaning sources, I could be here all day.

Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish is a must, heavy going, but powerful ... I'd nearly say life-changing

In fact, pretty much anything by Foucault.

There's any amount of Marxist stuff, my own favourites are from the New Left British theorists coming out of the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, centred around Stuart Hall.

Jock Young is the best of them, for me, but people like Stan Cohen, Mike Presdee and Jeff Ferrell are all worth a look.

There's also a guy called Shadd Maruna up in Queens who works in a similar vein, also great.

Oh, on the phenomenology side, I'd recommend Jack Katz' "Seductions of Crime - the moral and sensual attractions of doing evil" - masterful.

Plenty more where that came from, if people are interested...

johnnyskeleton

Look, it's perfectly simple. People commit crimes so that they can turn unproductive rape and murder into highly efficient books of evidence, which in turn fuels the eateries and claret shops of Dublin 7. If anything, they're patriots.

benway

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Look, it's perfectly simple. People commit crimes so that they can turn unproductive rape and murder into highly efficient books of evidence, which in turn fuels the eateries and claret shops of Dublin 7. If anything, they're patriots.

You're Nils Christie, aren't you?

http://www.amazon.com/Crime-Control-Industry-Nils-Christie/dp/0415234875

Procrastastudy

Are there ever any smart murders in Ireland - they all seem to be rather low hanging fruit when I find my self hanging around the CCJ.