, 2011). Instead, social control theories suggest that neighborhoods are somewhat informally self-regulating (Sampson et al., 2011). This lack of criminal self-regulation may stem from a feeling of being disenfranchised, as if the criminal laws have been created without reference to the needs of that community. In fact, in the United States, there is a definite cultural conflict regarding criminal codes (Sutherland & Cressey, 2011). Perhaps the most famous example of this conflict is the differential sentencing for crack and powder cocaine offenses.
The result of this disenfranchisement is that some communities may actually positively reinforce criminal behavior. Therefore individuals, particularly those individuals predisposed to criminal behavior may engage in criminal behavior "because of an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law" (Sutherland & Cressey, 2011). Moreover, it is important to realize that in violent communities criminality may not be maladaptive; in some disadvantaged communities, the threat of violence is so pervasive, and the hope of institutional help so limited that people develop violent personas as a means of self-protection (Anderson, 2011).
Obviously there are several different, competing theories that seek to explain criminal behavior. Each of the theories seems to be based on sound logic and supported by some degree of evidence. However, the more research that is conducted, the clearer it becomes that the criminality is not a question of nature or nature, but a combination of nature and nurture.
References
Anderson, E. (2011). The code of the...
In F.T. Cullen & R. Agnew (Eds.), Criminological
theory: Past to present fourth edition. (pp.143-154). New York: Oxford University Press.
Caspi, a., Moffitt, T., Silva, P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Krueger, R., & Schmutte, P. (2011).
Personality and crime: Are some people crime prone? In F.T. Cullen & R.
Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present fourth edition. (pp.126-129). New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, L.&Walsh, a. (2011). Gene-based evolutionary theories in criminology. In F.T. Cullen & R. Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present fourth edition. (pp.43-58). New York: Oxford University Press.
Rowe, E. (2011). Does the body tell? Biological characteristics and criminal disposition. In F.T. Cullen & R. Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present fourth edition.
(pp.59-67). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sampson, R., Raudenbush, S., & Earls, F. (2011). Collective efficacy and crime. In F.T. Cullen & R. Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present fourth edition. (pp.112-117). New York: Oxford University Press.
Shaw, C., & McKay, H. (2011). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. In F.T. Cullen & R.
Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present fourth edition. (pp.98-104). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sutherland, E., & Cressey, D. (2011). A theory of differential association. In F.T. Cullen & R.
Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present fourth edition. (pp.126-129). New York: Oxford University Press.
