Criminology forms one of the key areas of concern that has received significant research especially with the development of different theories explaining sociological crime. Although different theories exist, the paper focuses on Anomie and Social Disorganization theories. Essentially, although both theories are vital in providing explanations for crime occurrence, they exhibit comparative features. Social disorganization theory explains crime as highly associated with the existing ecological, environmental and sociological set-ups of the community in which persons exists (Hagan, 2012; Kaylen & Pridemore, 2013). Also, according to Pridemore (2013), social disorganization as a necessity for crime is influenced by cases of victimization Hence, with this theory, crime is influenced by matters such as social status, places of residence, family disruptions, mobility etc. (Akers, 2013).
Conversely, suggested by Emile Durkheim, anomie theory explains crime as caused by lacking social regulation or normlessness (Hagan, 2012). It is caused by societal mal-integration arising when there exits dissociation between the people values, cultural ends as well as legitimacy of the societal means in reaching ends (Akers, 2013). Also, anomie as a cause of social crime is influenced by instability conditions resulting from poor purpose or values and standards breakdown (Hagan, 2012). The two theories are also similar as both are impacted by social norms, values and communal belief systems with crime arising due to disruption of social integration or cohesion (Akers, 2013; Hagan, 2012). Also, in both theories, the poor moral values and ethical practices are seen as highly contributing to crime cases either learned from colleagues or passed down from adults to their children. With more moral degradation, there is culmination of anomic and socially disorganized crimes in the society. Finally, both theories agree that there is high prevalence of crime in lower-class and minority groups (Akers, 2013; Kaylen & Pridemore, 2013).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Suicide crime can be explained by Durkheim’s Anomie theory. In Durkheim’s view occurrence of crime as linked to instability in social behavior caused by poor values, lack of purpose and breakdown in one’s standards (DiCristina, 2016; Hagan, 2012). Hence, although when faced by stress or pressing issues, seeking counselling ranks as a best alternative than committing suicide. In its occurrence, killing oneself indicates declined purpose, esteem and ethics.
Armed robbery can be explained by social disorganization, as due to the poverty in low income persons, there is a conflict between meeting one’s goals and the societal living status. The variations in goals and needs in a way results to the communal rise in robbery with violence as men or women try to meet their social needs.
The theories provide vital policy measures for application in dealing with social crime. As explained by Akers (2013), the control and management of crime is dependent on the application of measures aimed at solving the external factors that in their existence impacts on social disorganization. Thus, various stakeholders, like government and other agencies must ensure provision of efficient social amenities, residential facilities and minimize social inequalities.
The policy and program formulation is well evident in dealing with criminal cases in society. In Bruinsma et al. (2013), the authors note that even if social disorganization model can describe societal criminal causes, evidence exists showing that distinct processes within the urban settings also play a role. Based on the findings, the improvement of policies, security and social education is relevant. By defining the processes and aligned systems linked to crime, proper management is hence possible, like communal teaching on crime, dealing with alcohol and social programs to erase poverty. There is need for application of childhood interventions like good parenting, improving social responsibility, community cohesion and teaching good citizenship (MacLeod, Grove & Farrington, 2012).
References
Akers, R. L. (2013). Criminological Theories: Introduction and Evaluation . Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Bruinsma, G. J., Pauwels, L. J., Weerman, F. M., & Bernasco, W. (2013). Social disorganization, social capital, collective efficacy and the spatial distribution of crime and offenders: An empirical test of six neighbourhood models for a Dutch city. British Journal of Criminology , 53 (5), 942-963.
DiCristina, B. (2016). Durkheim’s theory of anomie and crime: A clarification and elaboration. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology , 49 (3), 311-331.
Hagan, F. E. (2012). Introduction to criminology: Theories, methods, and criminal behavior . Thousand Oaks Sage Publications: California.
Kaylen, M. T., & Pridemore, W. A. (2013). Social disorganization and crime in rural communities: The first direct test of the systemic model. British Journal of Criminology , 53 (5), 905-923.
MacLeod, J., Grove, P. and Farrington, D. (2012). Explaining Criminal Careers: Implications for Justice Policy . Oxford: Oxford University Press
