Crime & Punishment

1. From a functionalist perspective, there are a number of reasons why a society may “need” crime. The existence of crime creates career opportunities for millions of people. In fact, if criminal activity was to stop altogether today, the government would probably pass new laws criminalizing more trivial offenses. Crime helps citizens recognize the boundaries of acceptable behavior. Rules and laws are a part of the glue that holds society together. However, no society could enforce total conformity. It would be too repressive. Instead, they give citizens just enough room to make their own decisions and then punish them when they make the “wrong” decision. Crime and punishment strengthens the norms and the ideals about behavior that a society holds and demonstrates its values.
2. Racial profiling acts as a self fulfilling prophecy. If there are ten cars driving by and 5 are driven by minorities, racial profiling would pull those 5 over on the basis of “probable cause” and maybe find 2 out of the 5 guilty of some traffic or legal infraction thus validating their belief that minorities commit more crimes than white people. However, if the 5 white drivers had been pulled over, the chances that 2 out of those 5 had committed some infraction would be just as likely. Racial profiling undermines public confidence in law enforcement and erodes the legitimacy of the justice system. People, minorities especially, become so fearful of law enforcement officials and so willingly compliant that the result is exactly what the profiling meant to accomplish. A decrease in attempted crime by minority races. While such discrimination may seem to have societal benefits like lowered criminal activity and increased compliance during routine traffic stops, I do not believe the benefits outweigh the costs. I believe that far more damage is done to the credibility of law enforcement agencies as well as the possibility of increased criminal activity by white members of society who may feel that they can get away with more since the police seem to be watching minorities more closely.
3. Laws were first intended to “correct the effect, and check the cause”; punishment was only meant to prevent future mischief. Punishment only needs to be severe enough to produce the desired effect of compliance and anything more severe is superfluous and therefore tyrannical. If the paradigm shifted and value was placed on leading men to the maximum of happiness and the minimum of misery instead of a maximum of obedience, with money poured into education and employment programs, and emphasis on community involvement rather than increasing police, implementing new laws, and constructing more jails, the crime problem would begin to solve itself. The law enforcement industry is far too lucrative, and the implementation of new, tougher laws and stronger punishments only stands to create more criminals and thus more revenue. NCPA.org (The National Center for Policy Analysis) reports that punishment does work as a deterrent to future offenses and that those that receive harsher punishments are less likely to be repeat offenders than those who received softer, alternative treatment. They also dispute labeling theory and the effectiveness of rehabilitation. However, other research has shown that harsher punishments and tougher laws have done little to deter crime. The three strikes law, for example has had little effect on the recurrence of criminal behavior.There could be a number of reasons for the steady increase in violent and aggressive behavior. From media representation of violence and frequent images on the news, to untamed frustration and lack of self control. It is definitely too rampant to blame on individual responsibility alone. There is a societal value at play that seems to be normalizing aggressive behavior, especially among boys and more recently among girls as well. Two functionalist theories that relate to increased aggression are strain theory and social bond theory. Strain theory would propose that people tend to act more aggressively when they are exposed to goals they cannot reach. Social bond theory would say that people’s ties to society are generally weaker than in the past and that would explain the increase in aggression. Symbolic Interactionists value Differential association theory, which would theorize that since aggression and violent behavior is becoming a societal norm, individuals will be more likely to associate with deviants and therefore more likely to participate in criminal behavior.