In the 90s, useful offenders found that Chrystler cars were easier to steal, causing high levels of motor
theft. Implications introduced to control the theft.
HOT SPOT RESEARCH by Weisburd and Sherman. In Minneapolis what happens when we really
concentrate the police in one area? You could possibly disperse crime in that area, 5% of the locations
were responsible for 64% of the calls to the police (?) which resulted in an increase in guardianship in
those areas. In this research, 110 hot spots were chosen (bars, street corners, places were liquor was
sold etc) and were split up into 2 groups of 55 each. It was noted that the experimental group had twice
the police attention as compared to the control group.
Other policies that led to increased guardianship? Examples: shoot in Scarborough led Mayor Ford to
introduce crackdowns in neighbourhood, airports post 9/11, presence of surveillance cameras in
America/England to monitor your speed. These were all instances where control was engineered into
our environment. However, it is quite evasive and assumes that all offenders are rational actors as they
consider costs and benefits of committing crime. But it is important to remember that crime is an
irrational act where some amount of adrenaline and anger aggravates irrational behaviour. For instance,
Hershey’s assumption that everyone is motivated to commit crime. “It does not matter if it reduces
crime. Lets do it, who cares about evasiveness”.
According to Conflict theory, crime and deviance are products of perpetual class struggle. Rulings of
capitalist society (a) define what criminal behaviour is
(b) produces/creates conditions that force people to commit crime
(c) deduces machinery for control
There were a number of problems that were appearing during that period. New generation of
criminologists who searched for (?) Introduction of critical criminology during this time. However, the
entire theory wasn’t entirely new but derived ideas from the approaches of labelling theory, conflict
theory and Marxist theory.
SUPER THEORIES/GRAND THEORIES –
Two grand perspectives:
1. Consensus – The model stressed that all parts of society are not fully integrated but are working
toward equilibrium. Change occurs in a rational/stable way instead of a violent one. It assumes
that since moral values are shared, a criminal/delinquents different from a normal person. Most
theories we have covered in the course are consensus theories.
2. Conflict (Marx) – It focuses on the importance of social change and the exercise of power by
limited individuals. Who has the power to make decisions? If society has moral values they are
enforced by the powerful. Individuals are termed as criminals/delinquents because it is in the
interest of the ruling class to call them so, Thus, the ruling class or the powerful may not
recognize white collar crime but street crime even though white collar crime can be a matter of concern. Distribution of power in society causes only certain people to be labelled as
In a nutshell:
Well integrated Conflict
Elements have functions Elements contribute to change
Value consensus Consensus from coersion
KARL MARX – His writings reflected on th economic and social disruptions during the time he lived.
Dialectical theory of human progress. He stated that history showed perpetual struggles between
people and that there was conflict due to economic arrangements *weaker vs powerful) However,
the consequence of the perpetual struggle was betterment i.e. shift from slavery to feudalism, from
feudalism to capitalism. Thus, the economic arrangements ended up improving and there was a
progress of humanity BUT there were also seeds of destruction that ultimately caused a downfall.
Capitalism more material good, constitutional govt, eco growth. But this new form of
constitutional govt created a ruling class that accum