Class Notes (837,435)
Canada (510,273)
York University (35,409)
Criminology (771)
CRIM 1650 (223)
Lecture

Morality and Crime.docx

9 Pages
98 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Criminology
Course
CRIM 1650
Professor
Gordon Anderson
Semester
Winter

Description
Morality and Crime Objectives  exploring “crime on the Margins”  Examining the links between Morality and Crime  Criminalizing Drug Use: Objective Harm versus Social Construction Crime on the Margins  focus on the boundaries or margins between crime and deviance  examination of two related processes o amplification of deviance  process of which deviant aspect of a behaviour or activity are exaggerated or amplified with the result that this behaviour or activity is redefined as a crime  reclassifying a deviance as a crime o normalization of deviance  Process of which the deviant aspect are minimized and downplayed where the result of the activity is not defined as a crime  „objectivist‟ versus „constructionist‟ approaches to social problems. o objectivist:  The status as a behaviour of a social problem is based on objective characteristics as an objective harm  objective harms - effects/harms that we can measure. We are able to see the certain characteristics and quantify them o Constructionist  the status of behaviour as a social problem is a result of process of social construction. defined as problems based on perceived harm, not objective harm.  a moralistic harm – as a social group, when they don‟t like something in terms of the morals of the actions, a „harm‟ is created to deter the action.  links between the process of social construction and the wider social, political, and economic context in which this process takes place. o need to understand the larger context that social construction takes place  the legal Morality and Crime  morality as a foundation of criminal law o morality is used to justify a whole wide range of offenses  question of „Who’s Morality?’  who‟s got the right to impose sanctions and judge such behaviour.  Victimless crime and the ambiguity of harm o unclear of what the harms are and who the harm is impacting o absence of harm, other beliefs/choice become more visible  hypocrisy and societal double standards o prevalence of sexual commodification and strong demand for sexual services  big demand for prostitution  prostitution are not illegal in Canada, but other activities surrounding it are. o widespread consumption and legal status of alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs.  moral distinctions = social political, and economic distinctions  Criminalization of morality as a political accomplishment o politics disguised as morals  Case study: Criminalizing drug use and abuse Criminalizing Drug Use: Objective Harm  Claims o distinctions between legal and illegal forms of drug use are rooted in objectively defined harms  illegal cuz of harm and more harmful than legal drugs o These harms reflect the pharmacological properties of the drugs themselves and take one of two forms.  personal harms  addiction  withdrawal from social connection  societal harms  healthcare and treatment harm  lost economic costs  something else  reality o objective measures of harm fail to differentiate between legal and illegal drugs.  don‟t actually allow us to explain certain drugs being legal and others illegal  prevalence of recreational drug use and limits to physical addiction  impurities creates overdose  Far more harm linked to legal drugs – alcohol and tobacco o Ambiguity of the boundary between legal and illegal forms of drug use  Canada‟s drug strategy – eliminated of alcohol from part of its drug strategy  Harper wanted to remove alcohol  Now, the traditional illegal drugs are only on there  Police inspector in Vancouver claims alcohol is a problem  why is it not on the strategy? o if objective harm is inadequate for accounting for these differences, then what are some other factors should we pay attention to?  causes us to shift from objective POV to constructionalist POV Criminalizing Drug Use: Social Construction  Historically Novelty of Criminalization as a Response to Drug Use o there was a time where there is no legal and illegal line for drug use o 1880‟s illegal drugs were used normally and for medical relations  Historical Context of Criminalization: Social, Economic, and Political Anxieties o Why was there a sudden ban on drugs? o The state of the economy was unstable during the late 1800‟s to early 1900‟s o Suspicion and fears and hate towards specific racial groups  Chinese building railroads in NA and Opium smoking was brought along. o No real shift in understanding of harms in certain drugs, but brought by the matter of public and political perspectives of the drug  Opium Act – against the Chinese  Cocaine – against the Blacks after the abolition of slaves  Marijuana – links to the Mexicans  Characteristics of Users and Contexts of Use o where the drugs are being consumed are usually portrayed as dangerous  opium dens were where the Chinese men led white women to opium and prostitution  Prohibition – saloons, where alcohol is usually consumed, presumed to be anti-American  Claims-Makers o Danger claims about drugs were made by significant figures  Moral Entrepreneurs  Emily Murphy  a woman‟s rights suffragist, a judge  saw the problems of opium in her cases and made a connection between opium and prostitution  also made claims about cocaine and marijuana  Concern of interbreeding of whites and other races o impact on the white purity  Politicians  wanted to show their constituents that they care about the concerns and so they pass legislation  Physicians and the Medical establishment  wanted to ban certain drugs to destroy the competition and make money off of the legal drugs Documentary: “Hooked: Illegal drugs and how they became that way” a case study othmarijuana  19 century: US placed propaganda against marijuana o created educational films to show that marijuana is bad  As marijuana became banned, alcohol became America‟s drug of choice. o when the prohibition happened, marijuana was brought up  Jazz and Marijuana was both popular at bars  New Orleans saw that Marijuana was a link to crime  Minority races were used as a scapegoat to ban certain drugs.  Anslinger – started the propaganda against marijuana. o pressure from the south and southwest to try to get the Mexicans out of US o they used Marijuana to get Mexicans out o Claimed that Marijuana was a gateway drug to other drugs. o Used movies and shows to show the “dangers” of marijuana o Argued that Marijuana caused people to commit suicide, violence, and rape o Used the youth to show that Marijuana could corrupt them Lesson’s Learned  Processes of deviance amplification associated with drugs and prostitution reflect social, political, and economic interests and anxieties rather than objective harms o There is a disconnect in terms of the law and where it stands
More Less

Related notes for CRIM 1650

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit