Contemporary Theories of Crime

Contemporary Theories of Crime Name Institution Due Date Contemporary Theories of Crime Introduction There are many theories that attempt to explain the root of juvenile delinquency. One of the theories is Differential association theory by Sutherland which he presented as processual. Sutherland argued that people commit a crime when they define the crime as acceptable and there is an explicit connection between people and their ideas CITATION Edg92 \l 1033 (Borgatta & Borgatta, 1992). The process of defining some ideas as acceptable is mainly through interacting with others learning their ideas, attitudes, techniques, motives and criminal behavior. For someone to learn a particular behavior, he/she must define it favorably and in isolation with those who define it unfavorably. When the favorability of the behavior outweighs the unfavorable definition of it, the person learns and normalizes the behavior. Sutherland’s theory of differential association theory attempts to explain conformity and deviation. Additionally, CITATION Ron11 \l 1033 (Akers, 2011) points out that Sutherland theorized that the underlying causes of crimes are conflict and social disorganization and they determine the patterns of differential association which he used to come up with the nine propositions of his theory. Summary of the Differential Association Theory Sutherland as authored in CITATION Wal05 \l 1033 (DeKeseredy, Ellis, & Alvi, 2005) fronted nine propositions to explain differential association theory * Criminal behavior is learned * Criminal behavior is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication * The principal part of learning of criminal behavior occurs in intimate personal groups * When criminal behavior is learned, the learning includes (1) techniques of committing the crime, which are sometimes very complicated and other times very simple, and (2) the specific direction of motives, drives, rationalization and attitudes * The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal codes as favorable or unfavorable * A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favorable to the violation of law over definitions unfavorable to the violation of law * Differential association may vary in frequency, duration, priority and intensity * The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anticriminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning * Although criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values, because noncriminal behavior is an expression of the same needs and values From the above propositions, Sutherland’s theory is pegged on several assumptions; first, a theory is learned from other people through interactions with them. Thus, a juvenile learns his or her delinquent behavior from the people he/she interacts with. It asserts the commonly held assumption that if a child continually interacts with criminals, he/she will eventually become a criminal. Secondly, the process of learning to commit a certain crime entails the techniques, motives and attitudes of committing it. Mostly, the criminals have justifications for their behavior and therefore they pass their rationalizations to the juvenile. The tipping point where the individual turns to become delinquent is when the definitions of favorable violation of law outweighs the definitions of unfavorable violation of the law. There are many things which trigger this transition but the individual must have been learning the definitions for violating the law. Criminality of an individual is dictated by frequency, duration, priority and intensity of the association with the criminal element. Frequency Frequency as used in the differential association theory is the number of associations a person has with a criminal group. Frequency refers to the rate at which a person can be exposed to a particular crime. In some families and neighborhoods, children daily are confounded by different crimes and over time they start normalizing the behavior and start doing the same crimes. Juveniles they tend to drawn to their peers and hence if their peers are frequent criminals then the child eventually picks their mannerisms. In a case where the child is exposed to a certain crime just once or very few times then it is unlikely that he/she might consider it. For example, if a girl who is born of a prostitute mother is more likely to become a prostitute than a girl born of a mother in a different career. As she grows up and frequently witnesses her mother sex working, she would normalize the behavior and eventually she might be tempted to try it. If the mother goes sex working once in her lifetime, the girl is unlikely to pick up the behavior from her. Moreover, if a person frequently witnesses people doing a certain crime i.e mugging...