Chapter 08 - Deviance and Crime

What’s the Big Deal about Deviance?

As was mentioned in the culture chapter a Norm is a set of expected behaviors for a given role and social status. In most societies, the majority of people conform to the most important norms most of the time. For example, wearing casual clothes to class is normal on many campuses. Attending class in your European Bikini might not be normal for some. Yet, I witnessed this back in 1982 as a student in the newly accredited West Georgia University. Many of the female students wore Bikinis to classes. It was a striking departure from what I had experienced while in high school. But, I wondered back then if swimsuits were in fact deviant given that so many students at WGU wore them to class. Deviance is not as easily defined and established as some might think (especially if you are sensitive to cultural relativism and ethnocentrism). Deviance is a violation of norms or rules of behavior that are typically outside of the norms (see figure below).

In an effort to provide context for you to more clearly understand Sociology as a discipline, let me point out a simple truth. Sociologists tend to ask questions about both controversial and non-controversial topics. Most Sociologists will tell you they study topics of academic and professional interest to them as well as topics they find to be most interesting. A Sociologist can ask survey questions about issues, among people, and in a variety of scientific ways that do not specifically represent their own support of options to the social issue, people interviewed, or scientific method. Let me provide a brief example of how students sometimes misunderstand this.

When I was interviewing for a full time professor job back in 1992, I travelled to a rural and relatively small college. I had been asked to teach on the social problems topic abortion. Since I had already been teaching a Social Problems course part-time at another institution, I felt ready and well-prepared. I believed I could impress both the students and faculty considering me for this job. My teaching demonstration was amazing! I was able to have active classroom discussion participation, created an environment where students could ask me open questions, and replied to every question they asked during my lesson.

I even finished early, so I asked if any students had any other questions for me. One asked me about my education, one asked me about why I chose to become a Sociologists, and then another asked why I was so “liberal.” I was a bit surprised because I had felt that I was more conservative at that time (still to this day most of my colleagues consider me to be very conservative in comparison to the “norm” of university Sociologists). When I asked this student why he thought I was liberal he said, “well you talk about abortion like you talk about the weather report.” That was a revelation to me. I explained that Sociologists study society and are typically willing to study controversial topics even if most people don’t feel comfortable even talking about them in private conversations. I explained then and do again here, that when you read a Sociology course, read a Sociology study, or hear a Sociology online Ted Talk, that Sociologists may or may not be “liberal,” “conservative,” or even “neutral” about the issue. Talking about a specific issue does not mean a Sociologist endorses or opposes it. In this chapter more than the others it is important to read the content of the information and judge its value to you based on the merits of the information. There are many in academics who are politically motivated and even some who try to promote their points of view and changed you.

But, Sociologists in general know that our value is in the objectiveness of our information. The burden of what you do with Sociological information is up to you. Never let any professor dictate or decide for you what you will think or how you will form the opinions you form. Conversely, don’t discredit information even if it is difficult for you to consider and don’t assume that a Sociologist agrees with a social issue just because they address it.

Figure 1. Model of Deviant Versus Normal Behavior

© 2009 Ron J. Hammond, Ph.D.

A typical dictionary definition of deviance sounds something like this: "one that does not conform to the norm;" "one who behaves in sharply different ways from customs;" or "one who ignores the common and behaves in unique ways." A thesaurus might also list: "abnormal; aberration, anomaly, weird, irregular, and even unnatural" as similarly related words. Most references attest to the nature of deviance as being something that violates normal behaviors, thoughts, or actions. But, is deviance weird/cool, positive/negative, desirable/undesirable, or good/bad?

For Sociologists the answer is found by considering exactly who has the power and authority to define the behavior as being normal or deviant. Throughout the history of the United States governments, religions, education, media, and family types have influenced and shaped what is considered "normal" or "deviant" on subjects as insignificant as swimsuits on beaches and as significant as women having the same rights that men have. You see, deviance is considered at both of C. Wright Mills’ larger social and personal levels.

A personal level example might be considered with the swimsuit on campus issue. Students back then did not need to look at university, governmental, or media for approval on how they dressed for class. They typically considered a source much more valuable to teenagers and young adults—their peers. Friends who also wear swimsuits to class may have defined the swim suit issue as being normal among students who were their friends, yet deviant among students who run in different crowds. Since they value their own peer evaluations the most they defer to peer-based norms.

But, would it be acceptable to wear nothing at all to class? On Wikipedia there is an interesting article about Andrew Martinez who attended naked at Berkley for a few years. Berkley is considered to be a very liberal campus in comparison to most US campuses. A controversy developed and eventually his nakedness came before the university leaders and the City of Berkley leaders (he often walked about town naked). He was eventually asked to leave Berkley and both the City and University of Berkley passed anti-nudity laws and policies to prevent nudity (taken from Internet SOURCE 1 July 2014). Martinez would often find himself being labeled "deviant" throughout the remainder of his life (he died in jail May 18 2006 from an apparent suicide).

Can Deviance Be Functional?

Let’s pause here to consider Emile Durkheim’s observations about deviance (original text from "The Division of Labour in Society" 1893). Durkheim argued that deviance, especially extreme forms are functional in that they challenge and offend the established norms in the larger collective conscience. In other words extreme deviance pushes things enough to make members of society reconsider why they even consider some behaviors as being deviant. Building on this idea, Functionalists often argue that: deviance reaffirms norms when the deviants are punished; deviance promotes solidarity among those who support and those who oppose the deviance; deviance provides a clear contrasting point of comparison for society’s members; and deviance often stimulates social change.

In Martinez’s naked guy case, both the City and University had to take a serious look at why and how they defined public nudity and which formal norms they would develop to support their position. Similar formal evaluations of deviance occurred after Dr. "Death" Kevorkian assisted severely ill persons in taking their own lives; after September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the US (Twin Towers, Pentagon, and flight crash in Pennsylvania) killed about 3,000 people; and more recently after major US corporations which have been mismanaged and have deeply shaken markets, investments, and economic stability. Extreme deviance does make us consider "normal" behavior on the personal and larger social level.

As a sociologist, you should strive for an objective stance when studying deviance. It takes practice but is truly rewarding because of the clarity it brings to your evaluation. It’s like you try to see society and people the same way statisticians see things. Look at the diagram below. Here you see a distribution of numbers. From a statistical point of view you can see that the mean lowest score is 0, the mean is 80, and the highest score is 100. Is a mean of 80 good or desirable? That depends on what these scores represent. If these are test scores from your first sociology test then a mean of 80 indicates that most students did well on the test. The grey area of the diagram indicates the First Standard Deviation is the area in the distribution where about two-thirds of the scores fall (1/3 above and 1/3 below the mean).

Figure 2. Example of Distribution of Test Scores: Standard Deviations

SOURCE

A mean of 80 indicates that about two-thirds of the other scores where between 70 and 90 in this distribution. By the way, even though they are not indicated in the diagram, the Second Standard Deviation has the next 28 percent of the scores (13.6% above and 13.6% below); the Third Standard Deviation has the next 4 percent (2.1% above and below); and the Fourth Standard Deviation has the last 0.2 percent (0.1% above and below). You’ll learn more about deviations when you take your statistics classes.

Back to the test scores, a higher score way above the mean is good and desirable to most students. If the highest student score was 99 and the lowest was 3, both would statistically be considered deviant scores. In a sense, you’d want to deviate as high above the mean as possible, right?

But, what if this distribution was not an indication of test scores, but rather the frequency of times potential roommates stole food from the private stashes of previous roommates? You’d clearly want a score closer to 0 than 80. Likewise, what if this distribution was an indication of how many times your boyfriend or girlfriend flirted with others while they were dating you? Again 0 would be good and desirable. Finally, what if this distribution indicated the number of times during a student’s college career that they performed a "random act of senseless kindness" for others? I hope the point makes sense—the value placed upon the deviance depends greatly on how the deviance conforms to or violates the norms of the community and society you live in.

Let’s consider a sensitive and sometimes controversial issue — Homosexuality, or a sexual preference for persons of the same sex. I often ask my student to consider this simple question, "is homosexuality deviant or normal?" I am surprised at how passionate my students argue that it is normal or that it is deviant. Eventually when the discussion runs out of energy a student will ask me what I think. I answer like this. National studies indicate that less than 5 percent of the United States population considers itself to be exclusively homosexual.

"Does that make it more or less common and therefore more or less deviant?" I ask.

"It’s less common," they reply.

"Yet, every society in the history of the world has typically had homosexuality among its members. That includes almost all societies with recorded histories and almost every society in the world today," I continue. "Is it common or uncommon, deviant or normal?"

"Common and normal," they reply. "But, how can something be deviant and normal at the same time?"

The answer is found in the complexity of modern societies. Not all members of society agree on the same issue in the same way. We rarely have total agreement on what’s normal. In the US we have over 320-335 million people, hundreds of religions, thousands of voluntary organizations, thousands of political interest groups, and thousands of personal interest groups, many of which are in striking opposition to other groups (IE: White supremacists vs. Nation of Islam).

Many sociologists have argued that it is normal to have deviance in a healthy society. If you regard homosexuality as being normal or deviant, as a sociologist you can step into a more objective role and understand the larger social level of consideration. It allows you to become more of an analyst and less of an advocate when understanding deviance. To build upon this idea, let’s consider how sociologists strive for objectivity when considering cross-cultural issues of deviance. Remember that ethnocentrism tends to burn cross-cultural bridges while cultural relativism tends to build them. Can we study deviance without becoming ethnocentric? Absolutely!

Deviance tends to vary on three major levels: across time; across cultures, and from group to group. When considering deviance we must realize that collectively people experience social levels of shifting values. In one example, look at the I Love Lucy show which aired in the 1950’s. As a child I wondered how Little Ricky was born given that Lucy and her real-life and TV-life husband, Dezi slept in different beds on the TV show. Their kisses were controversial to some at the time.

Today, full sexually explicit shows are available on demand, in much of the world’s countries, and throughout the cable, satellite, and video on demand media. As values shift and change over time, so eventually do laws. As values shift and change over time, so eventually do laws. More recently a Yahoo online article estimated the annual U.S. revenues from pornography to be about $5 or more billion and explains in detail why this revenue is particularly difficult to track (See 20 June 2018 Article by Benes, R. retrieved 6 July 2020 from SOURCE

How Does Culture Influence Deviance?

Deviance varies between cultures because values vary between cultures. In Washington D.C. there is a non-profit research organization that performs international studies (see Pew Research Center Topics page). On their Website they discuss their mission statement and organizational purpose.

"Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. We conduct public opinion polling, demographic research, content analysis and other data-driven social science research. We do not take policy positions. SOURCE"

One such study is called the "Pew Global Attitudes Project" which is a series of worldwide public opinion surveys that encompasses a broad array of subjects ranging from people's assessments of their own lives to their views about the current state of the world and important issues of the day. "

The Project conducts a series of scientifically sampled surveys in a variety of countries to look at current social issues in comparison and contrasts between the surveyed countries. A recent study considered the diverse views of 38,426 individuals living in 34 countries who were surveyed in 2019 in response to the question “Homosexuality ‘Should’ or ‘Should Not’ be accepted by society?” (see report “The Global Divide on Homosexuality Persists” 25 June, 2020 by Poushter, J. & Kent, N. retrieved 6 July 2020 from https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/ ). Since the original survey collected back in 2002, there has been an increase in most countries of respondents selecting “Should” more often. The 2020 report made it clear that there are somewhat dramatic differences that still exists between these diverse countries. In Figure 3 below a pattern of acceptance among more wealthy nations than less wealthy ones is shown.

Figure 3. Accepting Homosexuality is More Common among Wealthier Nations (2019)*

The United States is classified among these wealthier nations. Pew Research reported (page 6) that there were dramatic differences found in the U.S. in 2019 compared to 1994. For example, those selecting “Should Not” included only 21% in 2019 and over twice that high 49% in 1994. They also reported that those selecting “Should” included 72% in 2019 and only 46% in 1994. They also provided a contrast found in Kenya which had only 1% selecting “Should” in 2002 and in 2019 14% selected “Should” (there is also a free pdf on the link provided above with much more detail provided about these measurable changes in values).

Values also vary between groups (group to group). When I was a research professor at Case Western Reserve University, I arranged for a former Folks gang member to come and speak to my Social Problems class. He was a larger man, 6 foot 3, about 275 pounds, and also a black belt in martial arts. He explained that when he was much younger he had to go through an initiation ritual called a beat down in order to be admitted to the gang.

He eventually converted to Christianity and chose to leave the gang (he qualified his comments by saying "no one ever leaves the gang"). Typically to go on an inactive status with the gang there is another beat down. Because of his stature and fighting skills it was decided to forego his beat down for the overall benefit of everyone involved. The point of this story is that in most social groups a beat down would be considered deviant. In a gang it’s very much normal. Yet, in this situation, not beating him down was deviant within his gang, yet a wise choice.

Not only do values vary over time, between cultures, and between groups, it also varies a great deal between individuals. If you interviewed 11 people you personally know and asked them when abortion should be available to American women, you’d probably find some very strong opinions that change from person to person. In another Pew Research study published in 2020 it was reported that 1 in 3 Republicans and 1 in 3 democrats do not agree with their party’s official position on the issue of abortion. The report stated: “Overall, roughly one-third of Americans who identify as Republican or as Republican-leaning independents do not agree with their party on abortion (35%), including 12% who say they agree with the Democratic Party on abortion and 23% who say they do not agree with either party. Among Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents, three-in-ten do not agree with their party on abortion, including 7% who say they agree with the GOP and 22% who say they don’t agree with either party. (see Pew Research 18 June, 2020 “Three-in-ten or more Democrats and Republicans don’t agree with their party on abortion” by Diamant, J. retrieved 6 July 2020 from SOURCE

But how does one person feel about abortion? It can be best understood by looking at one of three perspectives that typically frame an individual’s perspective on an issue.

The Absolutist Perspective = claims that deviance resides in the very nature of an act and is wrong at all times and in all places.

The Normative Perspective = claims that deviance is only a violation of a specific group's or society's rules at a specific point in time.

The Reactive Perspective = claims that behavior does not become deviant unless it is disapproved of by those in authority (laws).

It helps to use both levels of Mill’s Sociological Imagination. Sociologists uses surveys regularly to assess larger groups and categories and to study communities, states, countries, and organizations. They also conduct extensive interviews called a Qualitative Interview=is an in-depth sometimes lengthy one on one interview of an individual to discover unique experiences and views a particular individual has. Arizona State University has a detailed Webpage (free) about qualitative interviewing and how it works best

Perspectives on Deviance

An absolutist would probably feel that abortion is always wrong, because it is an unacceptable act. A normative individual would consider the circumstances (rape, incest, diagnoses, or health of mother) before concluding that is was deviant or not. While a reactive would consider the legality of abortion. With the recent trend of certain states legalizing some form of Cannabis and with the very slow response by Federal law makers to change or address this in the federal laws, recreation and medicinal Cannabis use was legal as far as certain state crimes were concerned and illegal as far as certain Federal Crimes were concerned. That must have been an awkward challenge for individuals with a reactive perspective about using Cannabis! The Wikipedia page cited above suggested that in 2018 many Federal laws were changed, but indicated more changes are needed.

In every society when deviance is considered it is most often controlled. Social Control is formal and informal attempts at enforcing norms. There are a few basic concepts that help to understand social control. The Pluralistic Theory of Social Control claims that society is made up of many competing groups whose diverse interests are continuously balanced. Social Order is the customary and typical social arrangements which society's members use to base their daily lives on. Control is easier if attachments, commitment, involvement, and beliefs are stronger. Studies have shown the following to influence social control: attachments which are strong social mutual bonds that encourage society's members to conform; commitments which mean the stronger our loyalty to legitimate opportunity, the greater the advantages of conforming; involvement or the more a person participates in legitimate activities, the greater the inhibition towards deviance; and or beliefs which are strong understanding in values of conventional morality promote conformity. Society’s members use informal and formal sanctions to reinforce control efforts. Negative Sanctions are punishments or negative reactions toward deviance. Positive Sanctions are rewards for conforming behavior. (see Table 1).

Table 1. Types of Groups and Their Sanctions

Group	Sanction-Negative	Sanction-Positive
Family	Spanking	Praise
Religious	Excommunication	Recognition
Work	Fired	PayRaise
School	Expulsed	Awarded

Finally one of the harshest forms of controls comes when intense labels are given to a person because of their actions. A Stigma = is an attribute which is deeply discrediting and that reduces the person from a whole and usual person to a tainted or discredited one. The very accusation of a man having sexually misbehaved, molested a child or elderly person, or assaulted/raped someone else can be personally devastating to the individual, his family and friends. A false allegation of any severe act of deviance is defined as an accusation where the accused did not commit the act and or the act never transpired. The accused is changed by the stigma associated with the accusation (true or false). The Salem Witch trials included countless false accusations that devastated families, congregations and entire communities. Sometimes these things happen when a society is experiencing a moral panic. A moral panic is a collective fear of the social order being under threat and society’s members use radical means to maintain social order. In sum, deviance is a violation of a norm, simply not behaving in expected ways given the social circumstances. But what is the difference in conformity, crime, deviance, and both deviance and crime combined?

Robert Merton On Deviance

Look at Table 2 below to see Robert Merton’s typology of deviance matrix. When an actor complies with group norms and the law it’s called Conformity or an adherence to the normative and legal standards of a group in society. An example might be the clothes you wore to class today—legal and normal. When an actor violates group norms but complies with the law, it is deviance. An example might be if you wore your Halloween costume to class…in July. If an actor complies with group norms yet breaks the law, it’s called crime. Crime is behavior which violates laws and to which governments can apply negative sanctions. An example of this might be when you drove 10 miles over the speed limit just to avoid being rear-ended on the freeway today. If everybody speeds and you do too, it’s still "normal crime." Over–reporting deductions and under-reporting income is also "normal crime." Finally, if the actor violates norms and breaks the law, then it’s Deviant and Criminal behavior. An example might be when a man or woman was accused of the molestation of a child and was guilty of the charge.

Table 2. Robert Merton’s Deviant and Criminal Behaviors

	Actor complies with legal code	Actor violates legal code
Actor complies with group norms	Conforming behaviors	Criminal behaviors
Actor violates group norms	Deviant behaviors	Deviant and criminal behaviors

Like deviance, crime is often found in every society. Why? Functionalists point out that: crime exists because members of society find it very difficult to reach total agreement on rules of behavior; no society can force total conformity to its rules or laws; people are normative, we continuously categorize behaviors into "right" or "wrong"; crime/deviance function as a warning light indicating an area that needs attention or consideration; crime/deviance often brings about solidarity or togetherness in society ; and there is a vital relationship between crime/deviance and societal progress. As mentioned, deviants and criminals make us reassess our values and make new rules and laws (Google search Emile Durkheim or Robert K. Merton with functionality of deviance).

Robert Merton was a Functionalist who studied why people conform or deviate (see Merton, Robert K. (1938). "Social Structure and Anomie", American Sociological Review, Vol. 3 No 5, October 1938). Using Durkheim’s concept of anomie (remember that Anomie is a state of social normlessness which occurs when our lives or society has vague norms). Merton devised a theory of deviance that brings in the concept of materialism. The average American sees the "American Dream" as a goal of monetary success. They typically desire to have the dream but realize that they often lack the means to attain it. How do they respond to this goal---means gap? Merton claimed in 1 of 5 ways (see Table 3).

Table 3: Merton’s “Goals-Means Gap” Categories

1. Conformity-

People live with what they have and get by (they accept and pursue their goals with socially accepted means—Average US Citizen)

2. Innovation-

People commit crime to attain their goals (they accept and pursue their goals by replacing legitimate with deviant/criminal means to attain them—Criminals)

3. Ritualism-

People try but fail and lower their goals (they appear to pursue goals but confuse means and goal—someone who focuses on following rules, fitting in, or conforming instead of attaining the dream)

4. Retreatism-

People withdraw and reject most of the goals (they reject and don’t pursue their goals—Street people, bag ladies, and hoboes)

5. Rebellion-

People reject both the goals and the means to attain them (They reject socially approved goals and replace with deviant goals—Terrorists and freedom fighters)

Theories of Deviance and Crime

Conflict theories of deviance and criminality of course focus on issues of power and powerlessness. It’s about who has the power and how they attempt to force their values and rules upon those who don’t have it. The wealthier, more educated, and elite of society typically have the most power. The Power Elite are the political, corporate, and military leaders of a society that are uniquely positioned to commit White-Collar or Elite Crimes, or crimes of insider nature that typically are difficult to punish and have broad social consequences upon the masses. These types of crime are rampant and increasing, and they are the underlying cause of the economic crises of the years 1998-present. In white-collar crime, crimes are committed in the elite suites of corporate offices. These could include insider trading, safety violations where employees are injured or killed, environmental destruction, deception and fraud, and inappropriate use of corporate funds.

To commit a white-collar offense one would have to be very well educated, wealthy, and somewhat powerful—a position most in society cannot claim for themselves. Wikipedia has a Webpage on white-collar crime that gets updated quite frequently. When caught and convicted, white-collar criminals rarely go to maximum security “dangerous” prisons. Remember that most laws are made by the wealthy elite and tend to go easy on those more like themselves who commit and are convicted of crimes. In spite of the fact that thousands of people are victimized by these crimes, and millions and sometimes billions of dollars are stolen, few ever see the inside of a harsh or dangerous prison where they might be around vioilent “street crime” convicts.”

Another key conflict issue in studying crime is the disproportionately high level of non-whites in 2018 who ended up among the 738,400 incarcerated in city or county jails according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 2020. ( https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p18.pdf "Prisoners in 2018" retrieved 6 July 2020). Of these vast majority were males (84%), non-white (50%), convicted (34%), and awaiting trial (66%). As far as the entire state and federal prison system, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, between 2008-2018 the number of state and federal prisoners in the US decreased 12% because admissions exceeded releases. In 2018 jails reported 1.7 million admissions (down 21% from 2008) and only 83% bed capacity. Figure 4 below shows the decreasing rate of incarcerated individuals per 100,000 population for Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, and Total.

Figure 4. 2005-2018 Mid-year Incarcerated Rates Inmates/100,000 for Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, and Total.*

One of the critical issues in this dramatically increasing trend in the US prison population was the extremely difficult terms of parole and/or probation that often contributed to a released inmates return to prison on parole violation warrants.

One of the critical issues in this dramatically increasing trend in the US prison population was the extremely difficult terms of parole and/or probation that often contributed to a released inmates return to prison on parole violation warrants. Recidivism=being arrested again after having served a sentence for another crime. Recidivism rates indicate that the majority of US prisoners have been in prison before. The Bureau of Justice Statistics released a 2018 report on a study which tracked released inmates for 9 years after they were released (see BJS-Alper, M., Durose, M. R., & Markman, J. (May, 2018) “2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A 9-Year Follow-up Period (2005-2014); NCJ 250975 retrieved 7 July 2020 from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/18upr9yfup0514.pdf ). The study reported that about 44 percent within the first year and 83 percent were rearrested within 9 years of being released (between 2005 and 2014). Figure 5 shows that most don’t get arrested in the first year after they get out, but cumulatively after 9 years, 83 percent have been arrested at least 1 time.

Figure 5. Percent of prisoners released in 30 states in 2005 who were arrested since release, by year after release

Figure 6 also shows that being arrested after being released happens more often among the younger released prisoners. Clearly, it is not easy nor common to be released from jail and never be arrested again for committing a new crime. Some have argued that it may be impossible to make it once the label of “Ex-con” or “Convict” has to be placed on a job application by a former inmate. This Wikipedia article on Recidivism identifies some recent issues pertaining to the United States and other countries in the world (retrieved 7 July 2020 from SOURCE). A simple but sad truth about the U.S. is quoted from this page:

“With regard to the United States incarceration rate, African Americans represent only about 13 percent of the United States population, yet account for approximately half the prison population as well as ex-offenders once released from prison.[21] As compared to whites, African Americans are incarcerated 6.4 times higher for violent offenses, 4.4 times higher for property offenses and 9.4 times higher for drug offenses (Under African Americans and Recidivism (US).”

Figure 6. Annual arrest percentage of prisoners released in 30 states in 2005, by age of prisoner at release

One might ask, “why are so many arrested and why so high a recidivism rate?” Among Symbolic Interactionists who study crime and deviance a few core theoretical approaches are used. The Labeling Theory claims that the labels people are given affect their perceptions and channel their behaviors into deviance or conformity. Perhaps people grow up and self-fulfill the expectations others have for them…they grow down to low expectations. Edward Lemert studied deviant identity formation and identified Primary Deviance (when an individual violates a norm), becomes identified by others as being deviant while maintaining a self-definition of being a conformist; and Secondary Deviance - when the individual internalizes the deviant identity others have placed upon him/her. In the Movie, Boyz n the Hood (1991 film directed by John Singleton), Cuba Gooding Jr.’s character, Tre is faced with a tremendous amount of pressure when his best friend is gunned down by street gang members and he has a profound urge to retaliate. Tre is deeply supported by his father who helps him to reject both the opportunity and label of street thug and to remember his own potential. This film was nominated for an Academy Award and was listed on the National Film Registry.

One final consideration is when someone is given a Master Status, or a social position that is so intense it becomes the primary characteristic of the individual (ex-con, gang banger, etc.). Understanding how powerful a master status can be as a labeling influence helps to understand why so many criminals reoffend and end up incarcerated again.

Social Learning is an approach that studies how people learn behaviors through interactions with others. In studying crime Edwin Sutherland taught the concept of Differential Association, or the process of learning deviance from others in your close relationships who provide role models of and opportunities for deviance. There’s a useful formula to remember:

Definitions favorable to breaking the law

---

Definitions unfavorable to breaking the law

I used this theory to understand the neighbors who started the Meth lab. They were young, high school drop outs who had: a sports boat, Sea-Doos, jet skis, new truck and car, all new furniture. The only catch is that his brother’s best friend had them employed in the Meth business. Both men served time in prison, but the wife who was expecting their next child was not charged. It was a group of family and friends who saw criminal behavior as being worth the risks and acceptable given the tough economy.

During the 1800’s various scientists attempted to explain deviant and criminal behavior by searching for common patterns of shapes and bumps on the skull. Phrenology is an outdated scientific approach of studying the shape and characteristics of the skull. Of course the scientific data did not support the assumptions of phrenology. Other biological attempts have included body shape and size, racial-group membership, and most recently genetic factors. To date no branch of science has been able to identify universal biological predictors of unwanted behavior.

Other than white-collar crimes, there are two other classifications that need to be mentioned: Street Crimes are crimes committed by average persons against members, groups, and organizations; and Hate Crimes are acts of racial, religious, anti-immigration, sexual orientation, gender, and disability motivated violence. Street crimes typically fall into a few sub-categories—misdemeanors tend to be less severe and have less-severe punishments associated with them; felonies tend to be very serious and often change the standing of a citizen, permanently denying rights such as voting, owning a gun, and having social interactions with other felons.

The Federal Bureau of Investigations uses two categories of crimes: Violent and Property. Violent crimes include: forcible rape, murder, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. In 2018 there were 1.2 million violent crimes reported to police or 369 crimes/100,000 population. Property Crimes include: burglary, larceny, theft, motor vehicle theft, shoplifting, and vandalism. Since 2017 all of the 2018 violent crimes decreased, except rape which increased 2.7 percent. In 2018 there were 7,196,045 property crimes in the U.S. or 2,200 crimes/100,000 population. All of the property crimes decreased 6.9 percent in the same years (See FBI News Release (30 Sep. 2019) “ FBI Releases 2018 Crime Statistics” retrieved 7 July 2020 from SOURCE

Hate crimes have become much more concerning in the US over the last decade. These numbers give the impression that not many occur each year, but the FBI emphasizes that not all hate crimes are reported to police agencies and therefore are excluded from any federal Data and graphs. The U.S. Department of Justice reported graphical depictions of the 2018 FBI Hate Crime data (see USDOJ 2019 “FBI Releases 2018 Hate Crime Statistics” retrieved 7 July 2020 from https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/hate-crime-statistics ). In Figure 7 below one can see the ongoing (slight) decrease in hate motivated crimes between 2017-2018.

In 2017 there were 7,106 and in 2018 7,036 reported hate crimes in the U.S. Race, Ethnicity and Ancestry bias (59.6%), Religion (18.7%), and Sexual Orientation (16.7%) continue to dominate the reported hate crime categories. Gender Identity, Gender and Disability accounted 281 (4% of total) in 2017 and 374 (6% of total) in 2018. These crimes most often targeted a lone individual, but sometimes more than one individual was target leading to 8,646 victims suffering 7,036 crimes. There were also 84 crimes where 173 victims suffered because of more than 1 bias by the criminals.

Figure 7. Bias Motivation Categories for Victims of Single-bias Incidents in 2018

In Figure 8, you can see the U.S. Crime Clock. The FBI also reports a data graphic year by year called the “Crime Clock Statistics.” This of course is only based on reported crimes and many crime victims refuse to report being a crime victim to police. It is somewhat concerning that if a person could hold their breath for about half a minute, a rape, an aggravated assault, and a burglary will have taken place somewhere in the U.S. (retrieved 7 July 2020 from SOURCE)! And those are just the reported crimes.

Figure 8. 2018 U.S. Crime Clock Statistics

The Bureau of Justice Statistics also conducts an amazing Sociological survey of U.S. households called the “National crime Victimization Survey.” It collects data on how many people suffered a crime in the last decade and if that individual reported the crime to the police or not. This survey has been conducted sine 2003 and continues to indicate that most crime data based on crimes reported to the police are lower than the actual crimes occurring from year to year (see UDOJ Morgan, R. E., Ouderkerk, B. A. (Sep. 2019). “Criminal Victimization, 2018;” NCJ 253043 retrieved 7 July 2020 from SOURCE). This report stated that :

“The rate of violent victimizations not reported to police rose from 9.5 per 1,000 persons age 12 or older in 2015 to 12.9 per 1,000 in 2018, while the rate of violent victimizations reported to police showed no statistically significant change”(page 1).

Finally a word about Organized Crime, = crime perpetrated by covert organizations which are extremely secretive and organized, devoted to criminal activity. The core principle behind organized crime venture is the pursuit of wealth using socially approved and disapproved of means, that allow murder, rape, extortion, assault, street, White-collar, and even hate crime activities if profitable.

Organized crime includes: 1) a complex hierarchy; 2) territorial division of authority and practice; 3) tendency towards violence at any degree; and 4) capacity to corrupt public officials at any level of government. The reason organized crime works so well is that it typically: 1) is highly organized; 2) deals with services in high demand; 3) involves lots of political corruption; 4) very little organized opposition; and 5) uses lots of violence and intimidation. Organized crime has become rooted on every continent and in almost every country of the world. It undermined the former USSR; it brought the world super power to its knees and left only a skeleton of a powerful nation in the current Russian Federation.

Organized crime-type of economic pillaging is developing dramatically with the mainstream US economy. Unlike formally organized crime types such as Mafia, national Biker gangs, yakuza, Dugan Hands Bank, Triads, etc. current organized crime is more "mom and pop" small time operator such as Madoff and others like him that, even though small, can render tremendous devastation to a national economic system. The FBI has a report on US organized crime concerns which includes issues with: Russian mobsters who fled the former USSR to come to the US; Nigerian scam organizations; Chinese tongs; Japanese Boryokudan; and other Eastern European organized crime syndicates.

As technology continues to improve and become more affordable and therefore available to more individuals, there has been a corresponding in crease in reported Internet scams and reported economic losses by victims. For example, in 2014 there were only 269,422 reported Internet Scam crimes which rose steadily to 351,937 in 2018. The losses suffered by victims increased from about $800 million in 2014 to $2,706 million (2.7 billion) in 2018 (see 22 Apr. 2019 report called “FBI Releases the Internet Crime Complaint Center 2018 Internet Crime Report” retrieved 7 July 2020 from SOURCE.

Additional Reading

• For an example of false accusations at a large scale see the article on satanic ritual abuse located at SOURCE
• FBI famous cases files LINK Wikipedia article on white collar crime http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-collar_crime
• FBI’s International Organized Crime page LINK
• Wikipedia LINK
• genetic predisposition
• differential association
• control theory
• degradation ceremony
• labeling theory
• institutionalized means
• strain theory
• illegitimate opportunity structure
• white-collar crime
• recidivism rate
• capital punishment
• serial murder
• police discretion
• medicalization of deviance
• corporate crime
• organized crime
• crimes against the person
• crime against property
• due process
• plea bargaining
• deterrence
• criminal recidivism
• community-based corrections
• cybercrime
• the Milgram Experiment
• informal social control
• formal social control
• anomie theory of deviance
• social disorganization theory
• societal-reaction approach
• social constructionist perspective
• differential justice
• victimless crime
• professional criminal
• hate crime
• transnational crime
• index crimes
• crime trends
• victimization surveys
• international crime rates
• Durkheim’s theory of deviance
• Merton’s theory of deviance
• social disorganization theory
• gender and crime
• Retreatists
• Social control agents
• Primary deviance
• Secondary deviance
• Rule creators
• Rule enforcers
• Moral entrepreneurs
• Moral panic
• Stigma
• Discredited stigma
• Discreditable stigma
• Criminology
• Specific deterrence
• Tertiary deviance
• Deviance Avowal
• Uniform Crime Report (UCR)
• Retribution
• Incapacitation
• Capital Punishment
• Positive Deviancwe
• Human Trafficking