Criminological Theory the Relationship Between

Criminological Theory The relationship between unemployment and crime is complex and can be discussed at length. Let us instead explore how unemployment might cause or inhibit a criminal behavior; how crime might lead to unemployment; and what third variables might affect both unemployment and crime, thus making their apparent relationship spurious. What theory or theories can help explain this relationship? On one hand, the link between unemployment and crime may seem obvious -- people who are unemployed are more desperate for money.

They lack legitimate means to make a living, thus they seek a life of crime. According to classical criminological theory, the benefits of being a criminal outweigh the benefits of being law-abiding. Additionally, being 'let go' from a job can increase an individual's sense of anger and resentment at society -- consummate with anomie theory, the gap between the promised American dream and their lifestyle drives them to crime.

They may feel as if they have a right to engage in criminal activity, since their legitimate contribution to society was not acknowledged. Also, individuals who are poor with less vocational skills tend to be the first individuals let go during an economic downturn, and poorer areas are thus more apt to have many individuals who are unemployed in the same area, creating a culture of acceptance of crime and a situation of social disorganization.

The statistics on crime are more complex: anecdotally, of course, there are always examples of individuals who go on violent crime sprees, like the man who lost his job in Binghamton, New York, and turned his rage upon a community center designed to help immigrants. "By and large, the studies show that lousy job markets -- particularly for young or unskilled men -- are linked to more thefts. But the connection isn't so plain with violent crimes like murder and rape.

That bolsters the theory of a more rational criminal: When the economy flags, people inclined to crime opt for dishonest income; they don't start shooting people" (Forelle 2009). "Binghamton, a city of 45,000, has been hollowed out by factory closings and buffeted by a flight to the suburbs. There was just one murder in 2008…tough economic times had brought with them a big jump in larcenies. When gas prices soared last year, more people drove off from the pump without paying" (Forelle 2009).

Burglary and theft is linked to unemployment, and some violent crimes, like drug crimes, as more people may resort to dealing drugs during an economic downturn, but the correlation between violent crime and unemployment in general is much weaker. In fact, in the case of Binghamton, because so many people left the city during the economic crisis, overall violent crime rates had gone down, despite the one, highly publicized shooting.

Many criminals fled to the city, and along the lines of social differentiation theory, the culture of the city changed, making it less accepting of crime. Some crime rates, it could be added, may actually go down during an economic crisis. For example, white collar crimes such as pilfering from an employer might go down, because people are anxious to keep their jobs. High-level white collar crimes like insider trading are also likely to go down, as there is less profit to be made from such crimes.

Crime itself can create unemployment, too, as high crime rates can cause businesses to leave the area, depriving the public of jobs.

Finally, other aspects of crime may be unrelated to crime and unemployment but may still be correlated -- racial or ethnic discrimination may result individuals being shunned from good jobs (as in the case of Irish and Italian immigrants and African-Americans) resulting in high unemployment and possible cultures of criminality in socially segregated neighborhoods -- people may prefer to become members of the Mafia than to seek legitimate jobs, and thus be technically unemployed. Question 2: Serial killer Ted Bundy attributed his crimes to influence of pornography.

Does pornography causes or contribute to crime. Do you think that slasher films, which are not usually considered pornography, increase crime and delinquency? What would be the effect on crime by eliminating all restrictions on the public's access to pornography? There are some studies that indicate that exposure to violent pornography does increase the individual's acceptance of violent crime. An individual with the profile of Ted Bundy may be more likely to watch pornography and slasher films, but the films do not cause the criminal behavior.

They might shape some of the more lurid details of the crime, such as the ritualistic aspects of his behavior, but eliminating pornography will not eliminate rapes and murders. Laboratory research indicates a slight tendency that pornography can "predispose some males to desire rape or intensify this desire and undermine some males' internal and social inhibitions against acting out rape desires" although it is very difficult to measures such affects in artificial laboratory settings (Jensen 2004, p.4).

Eliminating all restrictions on pornography would not just be controversial, but also problematic, given that some legal oversight of the industry is necessary to prevent the exploitation of children in child pornography. Additionally, pornography is not allowed near schools, to limit children's exposure. However, other than limiting the venue, because of the Internet, the public has unfettered access to pornography as never before, at younger and younger ages.

It clearly has a shaping role in how we view the body and sexuality in general, even if may not be the primary cause of violence against women. Pornography and other violent media like slasher films (especially highly sexualized slasher films) can reinforce if not cause a male-dominant view of sexuality; be used to intimidate violent male's victims and break down their resistance to unwanted sexual activity by normalizing violent sexuality, and "provide a training manual for abusers" (Jensen 2004, p.4).

Question 3: Examine and explain Sutherlands and Cressey's theory of differential association. Think of situations in which you or those you know have been influenced but other people to break the law. This could involve learning to copy computer software or use illegal drugs. Can differential association explain these actions? Sutherlands and Cressey's theory of differential association postulates that criminal behavior is learned behavior and is rooted in the perception that 'everyone is doing it so it must be okay' (Hamlin 2006).

Teen drinking is a good example of a behavior that is often tacitly tolerated by society, even though it is technically illegal. Teens also 'learn the behavior,' often in ways that make it more.