Lecture 8 Notes 1 PDF

Preview

Summary

module 8- lecture's script...

Description

1

Deviance and Crime

In this lecture I will outline a sociological perspective on deviance and crime. In contrast to biological or psychological explanations for crime and deviance which locate the causes of crime and deviance in people’s biological make- up or in their psychological make- up, sociology provides a different perspective on crime and deviance which identifies social causes as important. A sociological perspective would consider the ways that crime and deviance are socially constructed. Whereas a psychologist might ask: what made an individual commit a particular crime? Sociologists ask different questions. For instance, they ask: - how does it come to be that some behaviours become defined as criminal and become punishable? -why are some groups at higher risk of being victims or offenders? -How is social change related to changes in rates of victimization or offending over time? One example of this is that sociologists and criminologists have tied the increase in property crime in the closing decades of the 20th century to the fact that items like televisions became lighter, smaller, and easier to steal from people’s homes. Moreover, as female labour force participation increased in the closing decades of the 20th c there were more empty homes that could be burglarized during the day. _____________________________________________________________ Sociology would also point out how our understanding of crime and deviance is based on how we measure crime and deviance. Thus, the social construction of deviance and crime is tied to methodological issues. How do we measure crime or deviance? Police statistics provide a limited picture of victimization as compared to self-report victimization surveys.

2

We know that intimate partner violence is vastly underreported. Family violence, including domestic abuse and elder abuse is vastly underreported. It has only been in the past several decades that we have criminalized intimate partner violence. Our knowledge of intimate partner violence, comes not from police statistics, but from victimization surveys. The first national victimization survey in Canada was the Violence Against Women Survey in 1993. Police Statistics are limited in that they tend to focus on certain kinds of crime, while ignoring others. They focus on street-crime---not “suite crimes”, such as corporate crime. The idea of “suite crimes” refers to the illegal actions of corporate executives who make decisions in boardrooms, offices, and office suites---which are harmful to the environment and to large numbers of people. Police statistics capture data on theft that is done by individuals, not theft by financial institutions or corporate executives. Police data is also impacted by the surveillance practices of the police force. If they are more likely to closely monitor certain geographical areas, or certain demographic groups, than police statistics will produced a skewed and biased picture of who is committing crime, and how much crime is happening in certain areas. The clearest example of this is the issue of police surveillance, racial profiling, and carding which were addressed earlier in the term. _______________________________________________________________ In this lecture, a sociological perspective will be outlined in 4 parts: 1.A description of how definitions of crime and deviance and our idea of who a criminal is have changed over time. 2. A description of John Hagan’s typology of crime and deviance. 3. An in-depth analysis of two studies on violence against women.

3

4. An analysis of patterns of victimization and offending, and cross-national comparisons in victimization and incarceration.

1.A description of how definitions of crime and deviance and our idea of who a criminal is have changed over time _________________________________________________________ Let’s being with defining deviance and crime. Deviance involves the violation social norms. Social norms are rules that guide our behavior. Crime involves the violation of law. Whereas a crime involves breaking a law, deviance involves violating a social norm. Formal social control is about formal agencies such as the criminal justice system responding to behaviour, whereas informal social control is non-institutional.

It involves sanctions and responses by family, peers, and other social groups that serve to constrain our behaviour. Most of us want to behave ourselves because we care about what others think of us. We don’t engage in crime or deviance because we don’t want to face negative reactions from the people we care about.

Informal social control exists and is invisible until a norm gets violated. For instance, how many of us have been standing in line and witnessed someone “budding in”? How do people respond to others budding in a line, especially when the line is a long one? Sometimes people get angry and oppose this kind of behavior. This is an example of informal social control.

4

A sociological perspective would consider the ways that crime and deviance are socially constructed. The process by which some activities get defined as deviant or criminal depends on many things including the power of groups. More economically and politically powerful groups are more successful at resisting the label of deviant or criminal. Less powerful groups are less able to resist being labeled deviant or criminal. Sociologists examine how definitions of crime and deviance are created by us and are fluid. Sociologists examine historical and cross-cultural variation: what is considered a crime or deviance will vary across time and place. There are many activities that were once criminalized and are no longer criminalized. Also, there are many activities that have become criminalized. ______________________________________________________________ Examples of activities that have become decriminalized, either in Canada or globally:  In 1969 same-sex sexual activity was decriminalized in Canada.  The sale and distribution of birth control  Abortion  In earlier historical periods and in other countries interracial and interfaith relationships were not permitted.  Drinking alcohol (during Prohibition)  Marijuana use The process by which some activities come to be defined as problematic, deviant, or criminal is a complex one. This is nicely illustrated if we consider alcohol and drug use. Prohibition (against alcohol) was achieved through the advocacy work of social reform groups.

5

______________________________________________________________ Collective action and political activism can also be seen in the criminalization and decriminalization of various drugs. Historians, anthropologists, and other social scientists have suggested that nearly all human societies have indulged in some form of mind-altering substance use with plants. Given the near-universality of drug use, it’s intriguing that only some drugs, in certain times, and in certain places are criminalized. It’s not the case that criminalization is related to the harmfulness of the drug. We know that criminalization is not related to health risks because the drugs that carry the most health risks—tobacco and alcohol, are in fact legal. The criminalization of certain drugs was a social and political process. For instance, while heroin, morphine, and cocaine are against the law today, they were once sold as health products. _____________________________________________________ Here we see cocaine tooth drops—to be given to children, _______________________________________________________ morphine syrup—to be given to children, _____________________________________________________ and heroin cough syrup. In Canada, historically some drugs became criminalized because their users were marginalized. ___________________________________________________________ For example, opium was associated with Asian people, and the Chinese in particular. They faced social discrimination and became easy targets. Opium use became criminalized because of discrimination against Asian people.

6

But in thinking about why some activities are criminalized we also have to consider various stakeholders. In the case of drugs, we know that social control agents, such as the police and prosecutors are well organized and have a vested interest in keeping certain drugs illegal. Why? Because their jobs depend on it. Drug users tend to be less well organized politically. Even though we’ve known for a long time that marijuana had medicinal properties, it was only recently that the medical profession was able to mobilize politically in order to advocate for the decriminalization of medical marijuana use. The decriminalization of recreational marijuana use involved decades of political activism. What sociologists and others refer to as moral panics, or social fears and concerns also play an important role in how deviance and crime are socially constructed. For instance, during the 1980s the Prime Minister at the time (Brian Mulroney) stated that there was a cocaine (crack) crisis in Canada. This created a stronger criminal justice response, despite the fact that actual drug use was low in Canada. A final example of something that has become decriminalized is medically assisted death. In 2015 the Supreme Court decided in favour of medically assisted death. According to the new law, physicians and nurse practitioners can provide medically assisted death; however, it does not force anyone to provide this medical assistance if they feel it is against their beliefs and values (Government of Canada, 2019). Canadians who wish to have a medically assisted death must first provide informed consent for this. This means that the individual must give their permission for medically assisted death both at the time of their request and “immediately before medical assistance in dying is provided” (Government of Canada, 2019). Canadians can either have a physician or nurse practitioner directly administer a substance to cause death or can have the doctor prescribe a drug that the person takes themselves to bring about their own death.

7

This is referred to as “self-administered medical assistance in dying” (Government of Canada, 2019), however “it was previously known as medically assisted suicide or assisted suicide” (Government of Canada, 2019). Canadians must be at least 18 years or older and be eligible for health services funded by the Canadian government. The individual must have a “grievous and irremediable medical condition” (Government of Canada, 2019) and must not be subject to pressure from anyone else to pursue medically assisted death. ______________________________________________________________ The criteria for having a “grievous and irremediable medical condition” are the following: [start extract]  have a serious illness, disease, or disability  be in an advanced state of decline that cannot be reversed  experience unbearable physical or mental suffering from your illness, disease, disability or state of decline that cannot be relieved under conditions that you consider acceptable  be at a point where your natural death has become reasonably foreseeable o this takes into account all of your medical circumstances and does not require a specific prognosis as to how long you have left to live You do not need to have a fatal or terminal condition to be eligible for medical assistance in dying. (Government of Canada, 2019) ____________________________________________________ The debate about medically assisted death began decades ago. It gained a lot of media attention in the 1990s due to the activism of Sue Rodrigues. Here is a picture of Sue Rodrigues. Sue Rodrigues was diagnosed with the terminal illness amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease), which would lead to increasing disability and pain followed eventually by her death.

8

Her situation was the subject of widespread media coverage because she applied to the courts—right up to the Supreme Court of Canada—for permission to have assistance in committing suicide. In 1993 she asked legislators to strike down the law that bans assisted suicide. She testified before legislators to try to change the law. In her testimony she said this: "If I cannot give consent to my own death, whose body is this? Who owns my life?" (words of Sue Rodriguez) The Supreme Court of Canada ultimately ruled against Rodriguez. But her struggle made this debate more public and garnered support for assisted suicide. Less than a year later, in February 1994, Rodrigues arranged for assisted suicide with her friend, a Canadian member of Parliament, Svend Robinson, at her side. Robinson had supported her through her court appeals and made it clear that he would be with her when she ended her life. The nature of the assistance Rodrigues required was never revealed, and Robinson was not charged with a crime. __________________________________________________________ The decriminalization of medically assisted death reveals how social activism, political lobbying, media coverage, and political leadership can bring about social change—not just social change in terms of legal reform, but social change in how people understand medically assisted death. An act that was once considered criminal and individuals could be prosecuted for assisting a loved one in dying, is now considered a legal right and protected by the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. _____________________________________________________________ Not only have activities become decriminalized, we have also seen some activities become criminalized over time. Examples include:

9

Hate Crimes (against particular groups such as religious groups, racialized groups, the LGBTQ+ community) The civil rights movement and the activism of groups such as the LGBTQ+ community have helped to criminalize hate crimes. Other examples include: Environmental crimes by corporations (such as the dumping of toxic waste) The social and political activism of environmental groups was critical in holding corporations to account for polluting land, air, and water. Another example are financial crimes such as Anti-trust legislation which tries to sanction companies that engage in practices that limit fair competition with other companies. Anti-trust legislation in the United States has actually been around since the end of the 1800s. The most famous example of this in recent history was an anti-trust law suit brought about against Bill Gates and Microsoft in the late 1990s—who their competitors argued prevented fair competition. Anti-trust law suits are becoming more common, particularly in Europe which has stronger legal protections and more active legal investigations into anti-trust or unfair business practices. They are also becoming more common as the size and influence of companies have grown. We have seen this with companies that we all know such as Google and Amazon. Companies are being investigated and charged with unfair business practices in European countries. Other examples of activities that have become criminalized over time include: Family violence --child abuse, elder abuse, domestic abuse, and marital rape.— Social welfare groups helped to create advocacy around child abuse in particular to ensure that offenders would be prosecuted even when offenders were parents. The activism of feminist groups has helped to criminalize and provide criminal justice responses to the crimes of domestic abuse and marital rape.

10

The criminalization of marital rape didn’t happen until 1983 in Canada. Before this time, consent was not needed for sexual activity within marriage. Due to social activism, particularly by feminist groups, marital rape has become a crime. Animal cruelty—social reform groups helped to criminalize animal cruelty in 1892 in Canada. Second hand smoke exposure to children in confined spaces such as vehicles. The law to protect children from adults smoking in vehicles was passed in 2009; years after the medical community and wider community knew about the dangers of second hand smoke exposure in confined spaces. Why it took so long to protect children from second hand smoke exposure reflects the power of various groups who argued against government intrusion into private property—homes and vehicles. Before the legislation was passed many groups opposed the legislation. Some political leaders also opposed the legislation initially because they argued that it was an infringement of people’s rights. The rights of smokers were seen to be important and in need of protection. The idea was that the government should not be telling people that they can’t smoke in their own private property. Clearly, over time the rights of children to be protected from second hand smoke was seen to take priority over the rights of smokers to smoke in their vehicles. _______________________________________________________________ Drunk Driving—many people know that the advocacy and fundraising of Mothers Against Drunk Driving was instrumental in criminalizing drunk driving. Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) is a nonprofit organization throughout North America which is devoted to eliminating the problem of drunk driving. Candace Lightner founded the organization in 1980 after her 13-year-old daughter Cari was killed by a drunk driver. From its very modest beginning, MADD has grown in size and influence.

11

Today, there is a MADD office in every province. MADD has expanded to include support for victims, advocacy against drugged driving, and efforts to reduce underage drunk driving. These examples show how political advocacy and social activism shape how society defines and responds to crime and deviance. The MADD example shows how one person can effect widespread social change in how an activity is viewed and responded to by our criminal justice system. Other examples include: Cell phone ban while driving The ban on using a cell phone and texting while driving reveal not only that laws are fluid, but also that changing technology creates new opportunities for deviance and crime. The internet has provided new forms of sexual victimization, including the luring and sexual exploitation of children over the internet by sexual predators and revenge porn. The laws about the luring of children over the internet have been modified in ways that provide greater protections to children. As the result of a 2009 Supreme Court decision, an offender does not necessarily have to meet the child in person before the police can lay charges. The police can lay charges if the offender is having sexually explicit online exchanges with someone the offender knows is a child with the hope of eventually luring the child to a face-to-face meeting where the child can be sexually assaulted. The Supreme Court sided towards protecting children. They decided that an offender does not necessarily have to try to meet the child in person before the police can lay charges. The police can lay charges if the offender is having sexually explicit online exchanges with what they know is a child—with the hopes of eventually luring them to a face to face meeting.

12

In essence, this Supreme Court decision sides with protecting children in recognizing that online predators first try to win over the confidence of the children they are preying on. Child pornography is an important social problem. Child pornography existed before the internet, however the internet has exacerbated the problem. However online technology is now being used to help identify individuals who are involved in child sex exploitation and child pornography. Back in 2003, Paul Gillespie, a Toronto police officer, was working in a small police department and it was their responsibility to investigate child pornography on the internet. At the time, Gillespie and his colleagues felt ill-equipped to deal with the technological challenges of identifying and locating perpetrators. Gillespie and his colleagues recognized that they did not have the technological resources to solve cases and felt that the perpetrators had better technolo...