SLQ 1265. What is Crime Evaluate the argument that Public Concepts of Crime do not reflect the Real Situation.
What is Crime? Evaluate the argument that Public Concepts of Crime do not reflect the Real Situation.
Name of Student
Institution
Name of Tutor
Date
Many explanations have been developed to explain the concepts of crime and deviance. Both sociologists and criminologists have developed theoretical concepts that explain deviance and crime, and their significant impacts in the society, as well as, how they should be handled. While crime is seen as a behavior that violates the set formal laws of society, deviance is seen as a behavior that moves away, or deviates from the set norms of the society (Hall 2012). Since crime is regarded a bad behavior, the government has a mandate to fight its spread in the society. One way in which the government shows its success in fighting crime is through processing of annual crime statistics. However, the perspective of the government of determining crime does not rhyme with the views of many sociologists. For example, a close examination of the ONS (2012) statistics on crime shows a big discrepancy according to the public perception of crime, and also considering the riots that rocked Croydon and other cities in the UK in the year 2011. It sounds ironical, and against the public spirit of goodwill, for the government to announce a drop in crime rates in such year that experienced riots in almost all parts of the nation. This essay thus argues that the public concepts of crime do not reflect the real situation on the ground. In doing so, the essay evaluates the objectivity of crime statistics in relation to the Office for National Statistics on crime released on September 2012, and the Daily Mail (Smith 2012) article that discussed the statistics. The functionalist perspectives on crime and deviance will also be incorporated in the discussion.
Many quarters have explained the concepts of crime and deviance. According to Krohn, Lizotte and Hall (2009), crime refers to any act or behavior that goes against the set formal laws of society. This is again echoed by Hall (2012), where he explains crime as a failure to abide by the set rules of the society. Deviance, on the other hand, has been explained as a deviation or going away from the set norms of society. However, Hall (2012) argues that not all forms of deviance are perceived as a crime. While the government determines crime from a formal point of view, sociologists look at crime from a social, informal point of view, and they factor the views of the common people in their explanations of crime and deviance. The different views may explain why the difference exists between the public concepts of crime and the real situation.
Sociologists have come up with different theories to explain crime and deviance. The conflict theorists, like the Marxist theorists use alienation and economic inequality to explain crime (Krohn, Lizotte and Hall 2009). They argue that crime emanates from the exploitation of the poor by the rich. They posit that, when the poor are neglected, they tend to result to committing crime to help themselves. However, they are criticized in that not all the poor people engage in poverty. The other sets of conflict theorists with a different concept of crime and deviance are the feminists. They consider the female gender discrimination by the patriarchy to be equivalent to social class discrimination (Krohn, Lizotte and Hall 2009). The feminists first introduced the crimes of domestic violence and rape as the crimes that the Marxists had ignored in their explanation of the concepts of crime and deviance. In addition, the feminists cite the discrimination of women by the juvenile justice system as another factor leading to crime and deviance among women and girls (Akers 1999, P. 197).
The functionalist perspective, coined by the ideas of Emily Durkheim, posit that crime in society is inevitable and that a certain amount of crime is essential for effective functioning of the said society (Padhy 2006, P. 249).The functionalists also argue that crime varies with different societies, and, although it can be reduced, it cannot be eliminated fully. According to Durkheim, the norms of what is acceptable or not is a collective consciousness. In this case, criminals exist even in a ‘society of saints’. The functionalists also observe that crime functions by contributing to the change of norms, and reinforcing others. This occurs through enforcing punishments and sympathizing with the criminals. Some other functionalists argued that crime may function to prevent the occurrence of a more serious crime. For example, Ned Polsky argued that prostitution may serve to prevent adultery while Albert Cohen argued that deviance may serve to point out that the police are not doing their work well (Padhy 2006).
The realist theorists, on the other hand, have different perceptions of crime and deviance, as argued out by the right and the left realists. The right realists argue that crime cannot be reduced by getting rid of poverty since not all poor people engage in poverty (Clinard & Meier 2010, P. 84). The right realists thus recommend social control as a measure of dealing with crime and deviance, and emphasize zero tolerance policing. The left realists claim that crime is brought about by subcultures and marginalization. They recommend job opportunities and youth club activities as ways of curbing the vice. The labelling theory, an interpretivist perspective views crime and deviance as an interpretation of the society upon a mustered behavior by a member of the society (Becker 1963). According to Becker, the people who are labeled are treated as aliens; thus they perpetuate their behavior even more.
The public perceptions and concepts of crime do not reflect the real situation of crime in the ground. The public machinery used to compile and relay information to the public about crime does not reflect the real situation in the ground. In the year 2006, an independent review carried out by professor Adrian Smith on behalf of the Home Department showed varying opinions of distinguished scholars on the credibility of crime statistics. This is an indication, or a pointer to the variance of crime statistics, compared to the real situation in the ground. In the report, Smith (2006, P.1) indicates that crime statistics have raised concern since 1805, when the Home Office started collecting crime data in the England and the Wales. According to Smith, the crime statistics became even more sensitive when the government initiated measures to reduce crime. From then, crime statistics are a key metric used for judging the performance the government, especially the Home Office, and thus a source of debate between the government and the opposition. There is suspicion among the opposition that the crime statistics released by the government do not reflect the true situation on the ground. The fear is that the government may cook the figures to send a message that it is under control.
The incidence of incredible crime statistics are evident from the statistics released by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) (2012). According to the ONS (2012) bulletin, there was an 8% decrease in crime rates, in the England and Wales in the year that ended in September 2012, as compared to a year later. The bulletin further emphasizes a significant decreasing trend of the criminal activities in the England and Wales, which can be traced to a few years back, even going down to 1995. The ONS statistics also show a 7% decrease in the crime level in the previous year, as produced by the police. The report further indicates that such figures have continued to decrease, and by 2012, were only a third of the 2002/2003 figures. Another figure of the ONS statistics shows a decrease of the anti-social behavior incidents by the year 2010, amounting to 2.4 million. The report emphasizes that this is a downward trend of anti-social behavior incidences from 2008/09 year. According to the bulletin, the recorded robberies fell by 11%, as compared to the preceding year. Among the other types of crime that the report indicates a decrease are vehicle-related theft, household crime, vandalism and burglary. The Home Office, the source of this information supports it and emphasizes that data was obtained from all the 44 forces of the England and Wales.
The information presented by the Office for National Statistics (2012) varies widely with the real situation on the ground, and thus verifies the statement that, the public concepts of crime do not reflect the real situation. According to the Daily Mail article on the ONS statistics (Smith, 2012), the statistics cannot be credible, having been collected at a time when England experienced riots and violence, which are not factored in the statistics. Smith (2012) wonders whether the looting that took place in the England and Wales, and the riots that left all neighborhoods in a state of ruin do not qualify to be crime. According to the Daily Mail article, the riots resulted to violence, looting, and demolition of buildings. Smith (2012), in the Daily Mail article, wonders how almost all the areas that were hardly hit by the riots recorded a fall in crime, as per the ONS (2012) statistics. This is a clear indication of the disparity between the public pronouncement of crime statistics by the government, and the real situation on the ground.
In the Daily Mail article, Smith (2012) points to a disparity between the real situation and the statistics, owing to the way in which the officers record the avalanche of the offences that are committed during such a riot. This view is supported by Smith (2006, P. 19). Smith observes that, in some instances, the statistics are highly exaggerated, while they are wrongly reported in other instances. According to Smith, the statistics will always raise credibility concerns, especially if they do not rhyme with individual’s observations. In the case of the ONS (2012) statistics, there is a concern over how crime reduced significantly, even with the summer riots that rocked most parts of the country, and were characterized with incidences of looting and destruction. Daily Mail reports that some of the forces classified the hundreds of feral thugs as a single incidence of crime. In such a case, the public perception about crime is very different from these statistics. A person, for example, who witnessed the mass looting during the riots, has a real picture of the actual situation and cannot come to terms with the statistics portrayed in the information.
According to the Daily Mail (Smith 2012), the acts of mass looting where one person broke into a shop and others looted was captured by the statistics as a single offence. With such kind of recording, it is arguably correct that the statistics do not reflect the real crime situation on the ground. In the article, the Daily Mail also captures that no single force recorded the crime of rioting. Smith (2012) connotes that the crime of rioting is officially defined as a group of 12 or more persons, who may threaten unlawful violence or may be together for a common purpose. However, the Home Office emphasizes the understanding of crime recording in order to appreciate the trends in its statistics. While this may be agreeable, it is evidently clear that these statistics are far much beyond the real situation on the ground. The buildings that were demolished by arsonists, and the items that were stolen during the violence are not captured in the statistics. The statistics thus ignored many incidences of crime, and cannot thus be trusted as a reflection of crime in the England and Wales.
In sum, the real situation of crime on the ground id not reflected in the statistics released to the public by the government. The many theories that explain crime and deviance, and the varying interpretations of crime by individuals, theories and the government forces contribute to the wide disparity of data on crime. The essay has reviewed the Office of National Statistics 2012, and the Daily Mail article on the same issue, and has established that; the public concepts of crime and deviance do not reflect the real situation on the ground. There is thus a great need to review the interpretations of the various forms of crime, in order to practice credible reporting.
REFERENCES
Akers, R. L. 1999. Criminological theories. London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
Becker, H. S. 1963. Outsiders; studies in the sociology of deviance. London, Free Press of Glencoe.
Clinard, M., & Meier, R. 2010. Sociology of deviant behavior. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Hall, S. 2012. Theorizing crime and deviance: A new perspective. London, UK: SAGE.
Krohn, D. M., Lizotte, A. J., & Hall, P. G. 2010. Handbook on crime and deviance. London, UK: Springer.
Padhy, P. 2006. Crime and criminology. New Delhi: Gyan Publishing House.
Office for National Statistics (ONS). 2012. Statistical bulletin: Crime in England and Wales, year ending September 2012. London, UK: Author.
Smith, A. 2006. Crime statistics: An independent review. London, UK: Home Office. Available at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http:/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/crime-statistics-independent-review-06.pdf
Smith, G, 2012, ‘Official crime statistics record drop despite riots’. Mail Online, 1st August 2012.
