1) 2 reasons why labelling creates crime (4 marks)

• Edwin lemert said once someone is caught doing a crime, the labelling process begins, Frank Tannenbaum called this process the dramatisation of evil, its not just the act that is labelled, it is the person. Lemert would say this causes them to internalise the label and therefore commit secondary deviance due to the self fulfilled prophecy of the label.

• Becker’s ideas of moral entrepreneurs that labelling groups that break the rules create by the powerful creating we groups and they groups or folk devils. A media amplification spiral can lead to the police creating typifications which demonise some groups, eg- in Youngs “the drug takers” the labelling of groups as hippes created subculturs of resistance which used drug taking as a sign o their resistance.

2) 2 responses to strain that cause crime (4 marks)

• Merton would say that the Innovation response to strain creates crime typically from the lower classes who have blocked opportunities to achieve the mainstream goals, and therefore cannot use the culturally accepted means of achieving such goals and may turn to illegal means, such as robbery and drug dealing.

• The rebellion respnse to Mertons strain theory means that a person rejects both the cultural goals and the means of achieving them and replaces them with new ones typically to bring about revolutionary change, eg- terrorist organisations who want to advance their religious goals, typically through violence

4) Why do men commit more crime? (6 marks)

• Parsons functionalist sex role theory suggests that the primary socialisation within a nuclear family given by an ‘expressive housewife’ female teaches boys feminine behaviors like gentleness and tenderness, which they would reject with compensatory compulsory masculinity which presents itself as aggression and anti-social behaviors therefore creating crime and deviance

• Heidenson would argue women commit far less more crime due to society having a much tighter mechanism of controlfor women which whill make them less likely to offend eg- control at home, control in public and control at work.

• Carlen would argue that cost working class women conform within society through he promise of two types of rewards or deals. The class deal is the reward of material goods, good standard of living and leisure opportunities for working . The gender deal is the reward of stability and respectability for acting in the conventional domestic way.

5) 3 reasons for deviant subcultures (6 markers)

• Functionalist Cohen would argue working class youths join together in deviant subcultures through their common status frustration caused by their social class, and therefore strive to gain status from their peers which is awarded based on an alternate status hierarchy, whereby deviant activities give a higher status.

• Cloward and Ohlin idea of blocked opporunities for working class people gives and option to fall into one of three subcultres; crime, conflict and retreatism. Crime subculures focus on obtaining monet and commiting crimes, conflict subcultures can be considered hooligans who have a large focs on fights and violence, retreatist subcultures, like mertons strain response, is a group of people who give up and turn to drugs as a way of coping.

• Marxists would say deviant subcultures are a conscious resistance to capitalism, where they fight the injustice of the capitalist system, through crimes such as bank robbery in a direct message of stealing money from he power that took it from them.

6) 3 criticisms of labelling theory (6 marks)

• Fullers study of black working class girls who were negtively labelled in school directly opposes labelling theory and calls it deterministic as the girls who were negatively labelled and told they were not going to succeed in school, took that label and used it as a motive to defy expectations and achieve amazing grades a school.

• Lemerts idea of primary and secondary deviance only explain the existance of secondary deviance, but fails to provide an explanation for why primary deviance happens to begin with.

• By using a label as an explanation for someones actions, it creates a victim status for the offender, letting them off from the responsibility of committing their crime and completely disreagrds he impact he crime has on the real victims.

7) Left realism ways of reducing crime (10 marks)

• TOUGH ON CRIME- policing control- democratic and community policing where the police have good relationships with local communities and are responsible for them. they spend more time investigating crime, changing their priorities (over police minor drug offences and under police racist and domestic attacks) and involve he public in policy making. Multi agency approach where crime control includes local councils, social services, housing department, schools and leisure services as well as the public. Anti racist legislation’s, ASBO’S, more policing on hate crimes, domestic violence.

• TOUGH ON CAUSES- Addressing the deep structural causes of crime. Left realists see the real causes of crime hidden in the unequal structure of society. Society needs major structural changes if it is to reduce the levels of offenders. Government policy has been influenced by left realism’s mantra and therefore created new deals for unemployed youths, sure start centres for disadvantaged fmilies and anti truanting policies to prevent a deviant attitude of students to counteract the cases of crime hidden in societies structure.

7) Left realism causes of crime (10 marks)

• relative deprivation- for Lea and Young, crime roots in deprivation, but not that it is the main cause of crime. Poverty was at it’s highest in the 1930’s but crime rates were low but crime rate also rose with living conditions into the 1950’s. Crime is generated from two sources, the bitterness of peoples resentment for those who have far more than them and the need to obtain what they feel they deserve but are deprived of the legal means to gain them. Lea and young use the media to explain this paradox and how it makes people aware of their relative deprivation. However relative deprivation does not lead to crime alone, young states “the lethal combination is relative deprivation and individualism” individualism refers to ones self interest being prioritised over everyone else, which breeds selflessness and causes the disintegration of families and communities and hence everyone loses the moral glue that holds society together, therefore causes an influx in crime and deviance. EVALUATIONS relative deprivation cannot be used to full explain crime because not everyone who is deprives commits crime, it is therefore deterministic and over predicts crime between deprives subcultures.

• joining ideas with Merton, Cohen and Cloward & Ohlin and their shared view of blocked opportunities and subcultures, left realists say a subculture is a group collective solution to the problem of relative deprivation. Different group have different subcultural solutions to the problem, some may tur to crime to close the deprivation gap while others may find that religion offers the spiritual comfort and encourge conformity. These subcultures still abide by mainsream values and goals like materialism and consumerism . Young investigated ghettos in america where there is a full immersion in he america dream of owning material goods like gucci, bmw cars and nike shoes, but the opportunities to reach these dreams legitamtely are blocked so they turn to street crime instead. EVALUATIONS left realists assume a presence of value consesnus, the idea that everyone shares the same goals and values and that crime only exists when this breaks down.

8) EVALUATION OF DURKHEIM

• SOCIAL COHESION EVAL- crime doesnt always promote solidarity, for example crimes against women have been known to cause rules and regulations that keep women inside and restrict their freedom leading to their isolation.

• BOUNDARY MAINTENANCE EVAL- durkheim does not set an optimum leve of crime to establish these boundries, and for a perfect society.

• GENERAL EVAL- there are crimes that have no good for society like murder and rape

9) Marxism causes of crime (30 marks)

• criminogenic capitalism- Chambliss said crime creates poverty and exploits the working class, essentially saying capitalism is a criminal enterprise (SEATTLE STUDY ON BRIBERY IS OUTDATED). Chambliss, Gordon and Neocleous say that the criminal justice system is flawed in allowing the ruling class to commit crime and exploit the working class. Bonger would say that the combination of poverty and capitalism cause crime together. from seeing consumerism and materials but being unable to partake and reach capitalist goals, crime is born in the upset of their given and inevitable deprivation (NOT EVERYONE WORKING CLASS COMMITS CRIME). EVALUATION- not all crime is working class crime, it ignores the white collar crimes which are hidden in official statistics and not acknowledge.

• idealogical state apparatus- Althussar says crime is used to control societies views on the ruling class and the law. They create laws that appear to be in benefit of the working class but are really fr the benefit on the ruling class. it acts as a diversionary tactic to blame crime and deviance on the criminal rather than the capitalist system, portraying criminals as disturbed individuals therefore concealing the fact that it is the nature of capitalism that makes people criminals. EVALUATION- the cjs does not always act in favour of the ruling class, some are still prosecuted. COUNTER EVAL- ruling class use this as a way of keeping the working class thinking the cjs is fair and does not ignore the ruling class, and uses it as a smokescreen for long term exploitation. occasional ruling class prosecutions perform an ideological function making the system seem impartial.

• EVALUATIONS- ignores relationship between other non class inequalities like gender and ethnicity but Marxists argue these are a product of capitalism as well. Deterministic, not all poor people commit crime. NOT ALL CAPITALIST SOCIETIES HAVE HIGH CRIME. eg- japan has a minuscule homicide rate, but marxists argue that the us homicide rate is five times higher and therefore they point out societies with little to no welfare provision like the US have much higher crime rates.