Why Are Some Neighborhoods More Conducive to Crime?

¶ … self-fulfilling prophecy? What role does this play in continued deviance? How does labeling theory influence this prophecy? Self-fulfilling prophesies are when it is so socially expected that an individual from a particular group (such as a race, ethnicity, or social class) will deviate in his or her behavior from the norm, attributing that label to the individual becomes an important, internalized component of the labeled individual's sense of self.

Once this is accomplished, the individual is more resistant to pressures to change, given that letting go of criminality means, in effect, letting go of his identity. "When a negative label gets applied so publicly and so powerfully that it becomes part of that individual's identity, this is what Lemert calls secondary deviance," versus primary deviance when someone who regards him or herself as an upstanding citizen still transgresses the law (Labeling theory, UMN).

"These dramatic negative labelings become turning points in that individual's identity…Having been processed by the juvenile justice system and labeled a delinquent, or harassed by the police as a gang member, the individual takes on that label as a key aspect of his/her identity" (Labeling theory, UMN).

Labeling theory suggests that certain subcategories are labeled as intrinsically deviant and are treated by the justice system differently -- for example, a white teenager caught using drugs might be assumed to have a psychological problem and given rehabilitative treatment, versus an African-American from the inner city who is assumed to be a criminal because of his appearance and social class and the labeling of young black males as inherently 'criminal' in many eyes of the dominant, ruling white hegemonic group in America.

Why are some neighborhoods more conducive to crime? How does anomie play a role in the increased crime rates? Certain neighborhoods appear to be 'hot spots' in terms of crime. This has long been noticeable and given rise to specific 'geographic' theories of crime. According to criminological theorist Ernest Burgess, cities could be divided into different 'zones' from the center outward.

Of all the residential zones, the zone farthest away from the city center was known as "Zone II, the Zone in Transition…the least desirable area to live in the city…the melting pot of poor, immigrant, destitute, and criminal…distinct in their dilapidated housing and infrastructure" (Concentric zones, Crime and Place). Residents in Zone II lack the economic clout to have something done about these conditions and the zone is far enough away from the hubs of commerce that there is little urgency about addressing its needs.

Disaffection and a belief that law-abiding paths to success are unlikely to benefit residents create a culture of crime. This disaffection is often called 'anomie' or the sense of social disenchantment that is often found in cities where people have few social ties to encourage conformity to positive social norms. In criminology, anomie can "refer to a situation in which there is an apparent lack of fit between the culture's norms about what constitutes success in life (goals) and the culture's norms about the appropriate ways to achieve those goals".