Skip to main content

SOCIAL DISTRIBUTION OF CRIME: EXPLANATIONS

Background

There is a growing and widespread perception among the population that, over time, crime has grown more prevalent and serious. During the last half century it has been reported that people are now much more fearful of crime than in earlier times. They are experiencing heightened anxiety about going out after dark, about their homes being burgled, and about becoming the victims of violence.

Statistics about crime and delinquency are probably the least reliable of all officially published figures on social issues. We cannot take official statistics at face value, but must pay attention to the way in which those statistics were generated.
 
The most basic limitation of official crime statistics isthat they only include crimes actually recorded by the police. There is a long chain of problematic decisions between possible crime and its registration by the police. The majority of crimes, especially petty thefts, are never reported to the police at all. Even in the case of violent crimes, more than one third of the victims choose not to contact the police, claiming that it is a private affair or something they have dealt with themselves. As a result of partial reporting and partial recording of crimes, the official crime statistics reflect only a portion of overall offences.
 
Police forces have been expanded in response to growing crime. When crime rates are on the rise, there is almost inevitably public clamor for putting more police ‘on the street’. But the greater number of police has not translated into lower crime rates. Preventing crime, and reducing fear of crime, are both closely related to rebuilding strong communities. Police should work closely with citizens to improve local community standards and civil behavior, using education, persuasion, and counseling instead of incarceration. ‘Community policing’ implies not only drawing in citizens themselves, but also changing the characteristic outlook of police forces.

Social Distribution of Crime
There is a variation in the distribution of crime by social characteristics i.e. gender, age, social class, ethnicity, locality. Does it mean that some individuals or groups more likely to commit crimes, or to become the victims of crime. Research and statistics show that crime and victimization are not randomly distributed among the population. For example men are more likely than women to commit crimes; the young are more often involved in crime than older people; poor areas generally have higher crime rates than better off areas; the ethnic minorities experience higher rates of victimization; individuals living in inner city run a greater risk of becoming victims than those living in suburban areas.

Gender and Crime
National and international data show that:
•  Crimes are highly concentrated among men.
•  There is an imbalance in the ratio of men to women in prison.
•  There are contrasts between the types of crimes men and women commit. (Women are rarely involved in violence. Petty thefts, prostitutions are typical female offenses).
In reality gender differences in crime rates may be less pronounced. Reasons may be:
•  Certain crimes perpetrated by women go unreported. Domestic role provide them the opportunity to commit crimes at home and in private sphere and these go unreported.
•  Women regarded as naturally deceitful and highly skilled at covering up their crimes. Supposedly grounded in their biology that they can hide their pain and discomfort.
•  Women offenders are treated more leniently because male police officers tend to adopt a ‘chivalrous’ attitude towards them. Questionable. Since women appear to be less dangerous, therefore officers may let them go. Also they are less likely to be imprisoned than male offenders.
•  Leniency toward women shown by criminal justice system is also questioned because women are treated more harshly than men in cases where they allegedly deviated from the norms of female sexuality. They may be considered as ‘doubly deviant’ i.e. broken the law plus flouted appropriate female behavior. For sexually promiscuous girls are more often taken onto custody than boys. Here one could refer to double standards where male aggression and violence is seen as natural phenomenon, explanations for female offences are sought in psychological imbalance.
•  Female lawbreakers often escape because they are able to persuade the police and other authorities. They try to get special treatment under “gender contract’ – an implicit contract between men and women whereby (1) to be a woman is to be erratic and impulsive, and (2) women need protection by men.
 
Women victims don’t report crime due to the humiliating process of medical examination, police interrogations and courtroom cross-examinations. Some studies have shown some correlation between an increase in female criminality and the movement for women’s liberation.

Age and Crime
Official crime rates rise sharply during adolescence and peak during the late teens, and thereafter fall. In the USA young people are becoming responsible for serious crimes. Between 1987 and 1996, arrests of juveniles for violent crimes shot up to 60 percent. The offenses like theft, burglary, assault, and rape (called street crimes) are all associated with young working class males. Is it due to moral breakdown? Is it due to increasing permissiveness? May be both.
In UK there are high rates of offence among youth. In 1997, 40 percent of all offenders cautioned or convicted were under 21 years. The peak age for offending boys and girls was 18. There could also be the matters of definition of crime. Youth revolts may be erroneously considered as crimes.

Social Class and Crime
There is an impression that criminality is more widespread among people of lower social class. It is a mistake to assume that being socially disadvantaged means being criminal. Many wealthy and powerful people carry out crimes whose consequences can be much more far-reaching than the often petty crimes of the poor. If we extend our definition of crime beyond street offences to include white-collar crime, then the ‘common criminal’ looks affluent.

White-Collar Crime
The concept of white-collar crime was first introduced by Sutherland in his book White-Collar Crime in 1949.It refers to the crimes carried by those in the more affluent sectors of the society. ‘Crimes committed by persons of high social status and respectability in the course of their occupation’ (Sutherland). The term covers many types of criminal activity, including tax frauds, illegal salepractices, securities and land frauds, embezzlement, the manufacture and sale of dangerous products as well as straight theft. The distribution of white-collar crimes is even harder to measure than that of other types of crime. White-collar crimes can be divided into two categories by power of the affluent. Firstly those crimes that mainly involves the use of middle class or professional position to engage in illegal activities. Secondly Crimes of the powerfulare those in which the authority conferred bya position is used in criminal ways – as when an official accepts a bribe to favor a particular policy. The cost of the white-collar crimes is much higher than the crimes by the lower class. In the USA in 1986, it has been calculated the amount of money involved in white-collar crime (defined as tax fraud, insurance frauds, home improvement frauds and car repair frauds) isforty times as great as that in ordinary crimes against property (robberies, burglaries, latency, forgeries, and car thefts)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Benefits of Sociological Perspective

Applying the sociological perspectives to our daily lives benefits us in four ways: 1.  The sociological perspective helps us to assess the truth of community held assumptions (call it “common sense”). We all take many things for granted, but that does not make them true. A sociological approach encourages us to ask whether commonly held beliefs are actually true and, to the extent they are not, why they are so widely held. Consider for yourself: gender differences; ethnic differences; racial differences; and social class differences. Where do these differences come from? 2.  The sociological perspective prompts us to assess both the opportunities and the constraints that characterize our lives. What we are likely and unlikely to accomplish for ourselves and how can we pursue our our goals effectively? 3.  The sociological perspective empowers us to participate actively in our society. If we do not know how the society operates, we are likely to accept th...

AGENTS OF SOCIALIZATION

Socialization agents are the sources from which we learn about society and ourselves. People and groups that influence our self-concept, emotions, attitudes, and behavior are called agents of socialization. They are our socializes. People who serve as socializing agents include family members, friends, neighbors, the police, the employers, teachers, political leaders, business leaders, religious leaders, sports stars, and entertainers. Socialization agents also can be fictional characters that we read about or see on television or in the movies. Every social experience we have affects us in at least a small way. However, several familiar settings have special importance in the socialization process. Some of the important agents of socialization are as below. The Family The family has the greatest impact on socialization. Infants are totally dependent on others, and the responsibility to look after the young ones typically falls on parents and other family members. It is a matter o...

CULTURE (continued)

Values: Culturally defined standards of desirability, goodness, and beauty that serve as broad guidelines for social living. What ought to be. Examples of values: Equal opportunity, Achievement or success, Material comfort, Activity and work. Science, Freedom, Physical fitness, Health, Punctuality. Wealth, Education, Competition and Merit. Honesty, Dignity of labor, Patriotism. Justice and Democracy. Environmental protection, Charity and Development. Sometimes there could be inconsistency in the values which can lead to conflict. Beliefs: Specific statements that people hold to be true. Values are broad principles that underlie beliefs. Values are abstract standard of goodness, while beliefs are particular matters that individuals consider to be true or false. Norms: Rules and expectations by which a society guides the behavior of its members. These are the shared expectations of the people that govern their behavior. Proscriptive norms: Mandating what we should not do. Fo...