Deviance and Social Control

“It is not the act itself, but the reaction to the act,

that make something deviant.”

Howard Becker, 1966

What is Deviance?What is Deviance?

Relative Deviance What is Deviant to Some is not Deviant to Others “Deviance” is Nonjudgmental Term

What is Deviance?What is Deviance?

TERMS IN DEVIANCE Deviance

Violation of Rules or Norms Norms Make Social Life Possible by Making Behavior Predictable Norms Bring Social Order

Crime Violation of Norms as Laws

Stigma Blemishes on “Normal” Identity

Social Control - Formal and Informal Means of Enforcing Norms Sanctions

Positive Negatives

Legal Change

Medicalization of Deviance Neither Mental nor Illness?

Homeless Mentally Ill

Need for More Humane Approach

Reaction to DevianceReaction to Deviance

Sociobiology Look for Answers Inside Individuals Genetic Predispositions

Psychologists Focus on Conditions Within Individuals Personality Disorders

Sociology Look for Answers Outside Individuals Social Class

Explanations of DevianceExplanations of Deviance

Learn to Deviate or Conform

Through Group Association

Families

Friends, Neighbors

Subculture

Prison or Freedom?

Symbolic Interactionist Symbolic Interactionist PerspectivePerspectiveDifferential Association Theory

MoralityConscienceReligious Principles

Symbolic Interactionist Symbolic Interactionist PerspectivePerspectiveControl Theory - Inner Controls

Control Theory - Outer ControlsAttachmentsCommitmentsInvolvementsBeliefs that Actions are Morally Wrong

Focuses on the Significance of Labels Labels Become Part of Self-Concept Propel Towards or Away from Deviance

Symbolic Interactionist Symbolic Interactionist PerspectivePerspectiveLabeling Theory

Denial of Responsibility Denial of Injury Denial of a Victim Condemnation of Condemners Appeal to Higher Loyalties

Rejecting Labels

Embracing Labels Outlaw Bikers

The Power of Labels Saints and Roughnecks

Clarifies Moral Boundaries and

Affirms Norms

Promotes Social Unity

Promotes Social Change

Functionalist PerspectiveFunctionalist PerspectiveCan Deviance Be Functional?

Social Values Generate Crime

Cultural Goals

Institutional Means

Strain Leads to Anomie

Functionalist PerspectiveFunctionalist PerspectiveStrain Theory

Functionalist PerspectiveFunctionalist PerspectiveFour Deviant Paths (Merton’s

Deviance and Anomie)Goal

(wealth)Means (Hard Work)

Approach

Yes YesConformist

Yes No Innovator

No Yes Ritualist

No No Retreatist

Neither Neither Rebel

Power and Inequality

Capitalist Class

Working Class

Marginal Working Class

The Law as an Instrument of Oppression

Conflict PerspectiveConflict PerspectiveClass, Crime, and the Judicial System

Street Crime and Prisons

Reaction to DevianceReaction to Deviance

How Much is Enough? The Explosion in the Number of U.S. Prisoners.

Prisoners on Death Row

Reaction to DevianceReaction to Deviance

  Males Females

  Total1 White2 Black2 Hispanic Total1 White2 Black2 Hispanic

Number 1,316,495 454,300 586,300 251,900 92,785 39,100 35,000 16,200

Rate per

100,000915 465 3,405 1,231 62 38 185 84

Sentenced state and federal prisoners by gender and race, 20031. Includes American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders.2. Excludes Hispanics.

Recidivism of U.S. Prisoners.

White Black Other White Black Other

All homicides 50.90% 46.90% 2.10% 45.80% 52.20% 2.00%

Intimate 56.60% 41.20% 2.20% 54.40% 43.40% 2.20%

Family 60.70% 36.90% 2.40% 59.20% 38.50% 2.30%

Infanticide 55.90% 41.60% 2.50% 55.40% 42.10% 2.50%

Eldercide 69.20% 29.10% 1.60% 54.50% 43.80% 1.60%

Felony murder 54.70% 42.70% 2.60% 39.10% 59.30% 1.60%

Sex related 66.90% 30.50% 2.50% 54.70% 43.40% 1.90%

Drug related 37.40% 61.60% 0.90% 33.90% 65.00% 1.10%

Gang related 57.50% 39.00% 3.50% 54.30% 41.20% 4.40%

Argument 48.60% 49.30% 2.10% 46.80% 51.10% 2.20%

Workplace 84.60% 12.20% 3.20% 70.50% 26.70% 2.80%

Gun homicide 47.20% 50.90% 1.90% 41.90% 56.40% 1.70%

Arson 58.90% 38.10% 2.90% 55.70% 42.00% 2.30%

Poison 80.60% 16.90% 2.50% 79.80% 18.40% 1.80%

Multiple victims 63.40% 33.20% 3.30% 55.70% 40.80% 3.50%

Multiple offenders 54.80% 42.50% 2.70% 44.60% 53.00% 2.40%

Weapon

Multiple victims or offenders

The race distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide

For the years 1976-2005 combined -

Black victims are over represented in homicides involving drugs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, workplace killings, and homicide by poison.

Race patterns among offenders are similar to those among victims.

Homicide Type by Race, 1976-2005

Victims Offenders

Victim/offender relationship

Circumstances

Although slightly less true now than before, most murders are intraracial

From 1976 to 2005 --

Understanding Race and Understanding Race and CrimeCrime

Source: FBI, Supplementary Homicide Reports, 1976-2005.

U.S. Department of Justice · Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm#vrace ) Accessed 12OCT07

Types of OffensesDrug Offenses: 100,588 (51.4 %)

Weapons, Explosives, Arson: 29,803 (15.2 %)

Immigration: 21,848 (11.2 %)Robbery: 8,629 (4.4 %)

Burglary, Larceny, Property Offenses: 6,867 (3.5 %)

Extortion, Fraud, Bribery: 9,969 (5.1 %)

Homicide, Aggravated Assault, and Kidnapping Offenses:

5,407 (2.8 %)

Miscellaneous: 1,871 (1.0 %)Sex Offenses: 8,606 (4.4 %)

Banking and Insurance, Counterfeit, Embezzlement:

867 (0.4 %)

Courts or Corrections: 664 (0.3 %)

Continuing Criminal Enterprise: 520 (0.3 %)

National Security: 95 (0.0 %) 

* Data calculated for those with offense-specific information available.

19

State

Sales as Percent of White Drug

Arrests

Possession as Percent of White

Drug

Sales as Percent of Black Drug

Arrests

Possession as Percent of Black

Drug State

Sales as Percent of White Drug

Arrests

Possession as Percent of White

Drug

Sales as Percent of Black Drug

Arrests

Possession as Percent of Black

Drug

Alabama 7% 93% 6% 94% Nebraska 10% 90% 14% 86%

Alaska 30% 70% 44% 56% Nevada 20% 80% 25% 75%

Arizona 13% 87% 16% 84% New Hampshire 22% 78% 34% 66% Arkansas 16% 84% 19% 81% New J ersey 16% 84% 31% 69%

California 13% 87% 25% 75% New Mexico 50% 50% 67% 33%

Colorado 11% 89% 56% 44% New York 8% 92% 15% 85%

Connecticut 14% 86% 55% 45% North Carolina 10% 90% 21% 79% Delaware 28% 72% 45% 55% North Dakota 19% 81% 34% 66% Georgia 23% 77% 22% 78% Ohio 10% 90% 15% 85%

Hawaii 22% 78% 20% 80% Oklahoma 14% 86% 19% 81%

Idaho 12% 88% 55% 45% Oregon 8% 92% 12% 88% Indiana 19% 81% 26% 74% Pennsylvania 28% 72% 47% 53% Iowa 10% 90% 11% 90% Rhode Island 16% 84% 31% 69%

Kansas 17% 83% 18% 82% South Carolina 14% 86% 27% 74%

Kentucky 11% 89% 20% 80% South Dakota 7% 93% 14% 86% Louisiana 15% 85% 22% 78% Tennessee 23% 78% 32% 68% Maine 21% 79% 42% 58% Texas 13% 87% 12% 88%

Maryland 15% 85% 27% 73% Utah 12% 88% 13% 87%

Massachusetts 25% 75% 44% 56% Vermont 15% 85% 32% 68% Michigan 18% 82% 29% 71% Virginia 17% 83% 26% 74% Minnesota 37% 63% 14% 86% Washington 14% 86% 8% 92%

Mississippi 9% 91% 14% 86% West Virginia 18% 82% 32% 68%

Missouri 12% 88% 17% 83% Wisconsin 16% 84% 33% 68%

Montana 9% 91% 4% 96% Wyoming 10% 90% 10% 90% National 15% 85% 25% 76%