CJSP 203 Criminology

Part A: Short Answer

Distinguish Between “Deviance” And “Deviants.” What Is The Problem With Causally And Conceptually Linking These According To Box?

In the sociological context, deviance can be defined as behaviors or actions, which lead to the violation of informal along with social norms or even formally implemented rules. Deviance can be two types i.e. the crime and the social norm violation. Contextually, crime refers to the breaching of the enacted laws, which include activities such as murder, robbery, and rape among others. On the other hand, social norms violation refers to a breach of social values (MindTouch, 2019). A deviant is an individual, who diverges from norms and values of social behavior (Bryant, 2012). According to Box (1981), there is no significant difference between deviance (behavior of violating rules and regulations) and deviants (individuals, who are assumed to have deviant identity). Both aspects are considered to be a part of one phenomenon. They were casually associated, as deviants are engaged in committing deviance. On the other hand, they are linked conceptually because people committing unexpected behavior, can be categorized under deviants (Box, 1981).

Contrast Legalistic, Social Constructivist, And Social Harm Definitions Of Crime. Why Is Crime So Tricky To Define According To Muncie?

Crime can legally be defined as an activity, which leads to violating the law. Thus, it includes behavior, which is forbidden under the criminal code. On the other hand, in a social constructivist context, an activity can only be referred to as a crime only when it is socially perceived. A behavior can be considered as a crime, when it is made punishable by society. On the contrary, in relation to the social harm, it mainly focuses on including corporate crimes. For instance, violation of human rights can be cited as an example of social harm crime (Muncie, 2001). Crime is tricky to be defined because the things, which are considered to be a crime, may change over time. In addition, crime can further be defined by different states in varied ways. It also depends on various factors, including cohesion in society. Muncie (2001) stated that people often deviate from the reason behind behaviors being perceived as deviant. Additionally, people lose sight of the activities, which can be considered as crimes. The definition of crime also changes because of moral and political factors (Muncie, 2001).

Part B: Short Essay

How Do The Issues Concerning The Definitions Of Crime And Deviance In Muncie’S And Pfohl’S Articles Give Perspective On The Cases Of Stephen Reid, Karla Homolka, And Conrad Black? 

According to Muncie (2001), crime can be defined as an act, which is often punishable by law. This is because criminal activities are prohibited by the statute related to public welfare. Crime is hence perceived to be illegal. Furthermore, crime can be defined on the basis of three viewpoints. The first context is considered to be the violation of criminal law. On the other hand, the act of crime is regarded as the breach of moral code, and lastly, it is perceived as social harm (Muncie, 2001). On a similar note, Pfohl’s viewed crime and deviance in the context of winners and losers. The winners get to control the area based on their vision. These individuals also have the power to implement their vision in the society (Pfohl, 1994). In order to understand the viewpoints made by the Muncie along with Pfohl, there are some cases, which can help in gaining insights relating to crimes conducted by Stephen Reid, Karla Homolka, and Conrad Black.

With respect to the case of Stephen Reid, he was a member of the Stopwatch Gang, who was known for robbery. The gang robbed 140 banks in the US along with Canada during the 1970s and 1980s. Stephen Reid along with his gang members robbed around $15million worth of cash and further stole gold bullion, amounting to $785,000 (PressFrom, 2018). In relation to this case, the act of robbery can be categorized under the violation of criminal law. In addition, crime can be perceived as a violation of the legal codes relating to the jurisdiction. On the contrary, robbery can also be referred as an attempt to any valuable thing by either threat of force or force (National Academy of Sciences, 2019). Hence, based on the viewpoint of Pfohl (1994), the use of threat to gain control can be considered to be a deviance.

Another case involving Karla Homolka can also be cited as an example for understanding Muncie’s and Pfohl’s perceptions regarding crime. Karla Homolka was imprisoned in the year 1993 along with her husband for killing three women. However, she plea-bargained, due to which her sentence was reduced by charging manslaughter. Murder can be considered as a violation of criminal law. Hence, as per the definition of crime given by Muncie (2001), there are numbers of criteria, which should be met for an act to be perceived as a crime. The first criteria is the one, as per which an individual must possess criminal intention (mens rea), while the other is that he or she needs to act willingly (actus rea). Hence, on this basis, Karla Homolka can be stated to have conducted crime (Muncie, 2001). In addition, based on the assertion made by Pfohl (1994), the act of committing murder can be regarded as a deviant behavior.

Conrad Black was one of the Canada’s wealthiest men and was a new publisher. However, he was convicted based on the embezzlement from Hollinger Corporation worth $6.1 million. This also included issues of mail fraud along with the obstruction of justice due to which he was imprisoned for a period of 42 months. Herein, moral code violations can be perceived, as it includes the issue of corporate malpractice. In the study findings of Muncie (2001), research conducted by Sutherland stated that crime should not be defined based on criminal law rather it should be defined on the basis of social harm and social injury. The cases related to Stephen Reid, Karla Homolka, and Conrad Black can be considered as a crime. However, all these three acts of robbery, murder, and corporation malpractices fall under different categories of crime, including criminal violations of law and social harm, along with deviant behavior.  

Part C

What Does Stephen Pfohl Mean By “Deviance Is Always The Flip Side Of The Coin Used To Maintain Social Control” And “Deviance And Social Control Is a Battle Story”?\

Stephen Pfohl in his book ‘Images of Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological History’ stated that “deviance is always the flip side of the coin used to maintain social control” (Pfohl, 1994, 6). In this context, it has been observed that the quoted sentence in some way is highly associated with gangs. This is due to the fact that the gangs along with its members are mainly engaged in using the act of deviance for the purpose of maintaining social control in the areas, where they sell or distribute drugs. The fear, which these gangs instill in the community, can lead them towards possessing more control. In this context, in the US, the stealthy acts conducted by the white-collar criminals have cost the public of the nation as much as $500 billion (Pfohl, 1994).

However, it is observed that elite deviance belonging to a higher level of rule breakers are less feared as compared to street crimes executed by robbers and burglars. Thus, as per this example, there are many forms of deviance that are less costly in comparison with the behavior of an individual and are less considered as a labeled deviant. Furthermore, the labeled deviants give threats to control people with power for developing a boundary between the good and the bad. This can be considered as the root of the effort for understanding the battle between social control and deviance (Pfohl, 1994). With respect to cracking cocaine dealings during the 1980s, the gang leaders are found to possess more power of threatening and beating up people. The individuals operating local gangs were perceived as entrepreneurs and have absolute rights in controlling the sale of drugs including cocaine. The gang is also engaged in marketing and in merchandizing drugs thereby earning a profit or incurs loss, based on how effective they are in operating their business (TED Conferences, LLC., 2004).

On the other hand, Pfohl (1994) also stated, “the story of deviance and social control is a battle story” (3). This indicates that it is mainly a story about a battle for controlling the thinking ability of the people along with their feeling and behavior. It is also a story about winners and losers, as well as the strategies, which are used by people while battling each other. Contextually, winners control deviant acts and “are crowned with a halo of goodness, acceptability, and normality (3). On the contrary, losers live beyond the border of social life and are considered to be dangerous, immoral, and plain deviant with negative imagery. Deviants are perceived to be a part of a social control and deviance story. Deviants exist apart from attempting to control them. In addition, deviants prevail in opposition to whom they have threatened or those individuals with the power to control such threats. Hence, the outcome resulting from the battle of social norms and deviance is that the winners get to organize social life, while the losers follow others. Thus, for the controlling wisdom, deviants may be beaten, shamed, imprisoned, or fined among others. These individuals are also prohibited to live in a society and are branded with deviant imagery (Pfohl, 1994).

Hence, in relation to crack cocaine, the gangs worked in a hierarchy with the leader on the top. In a society, it is safer to have a death penalty than selling drugs in the streets, as there is always a fight between deviance and social control. In gangs, there are certain people, who are allocated with varied jobs. Herein, below the leader, there are members, who are engaged in selling drugs in different areas of the region. Hence, there is control with respect to selling drugs through deviance. The bottom members of the gangs are engaged in selling drugs on the street and are highly vulnerable in nature (TED Conferences, LLC., 2004).

References

Box, S. (1981). Conceptions of deviance, official data and deviants. Chapter 1, 1-5.

Bryant, C.D. (2012). Routledge handbook of deviant behaviour. London: Taylor & Francis.

MindTouch. (2019). Deviance. Retrieved November 7, 2019, from https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Sociology/Book%3A_Sociology_(Boundless)/7%3A_Deviance%2C_Social_Control%2C_and_Crime/7.1%3A_Deviance/7.1A%3A_Deviance

Muncie, J. (2001). The construction and deconstruction of crime. The Problem of Crime, 11-16.

National Academy of Sciences. (2019). Definition of offenses used in uniform crime reporting. Retrieved November 7, 2019, from https://www.nap.edu/read/9747/chapter/10

Pfohl, S. (1994). Images of deviance & social control: A sociological history. Illinois: Waveland Press,Inc.

PressFrom. (2018). Stephen Reid, bank robber and author, dead at age 68. Retrieved November 7, 2019, from https://pressfrom.info/ca/news/canada/-78998-stephen-reid-bank-robber-and-author-dead-at-age-68.html

TED Conferences, LLC. (2004). The freakonomics of crack dealing. Retrieved November 7, 2019, from https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_levitt_analyzes_crack_economics/transcript?language=en#t-292551