What are the assumptions inherent in the social problems perspective on crime?
478714
Crime is assumed to be due to an uneven distribution of wealth.
692828
I don't have any specifics, but I think it is safe to assume that one exists.\nThe reason I say that has nothing to do with what Ethnic group we are talking about. Every society has criminals, all criminals end up working within a hierarchy, those hierarchies end up leading to Organizations, and those criminal Organizations tend to form based on who can be trusted, & who can be trusted usually means people you feel bound to such as your ethnic group.\nThere's gotta be a better way of saying all that, but it's really early here.
741828
There will always be crime. As long as there is more than one person on this planet there will be crime. Because no two people see things the same way. What is fine in one persons book is wrong is someone elses. So there is no solution. Even if people were to stop breaking the laws there are today new laws would be made just to make sure that laws continued to be broken. When the govenment says it is at war with crime and that everything is being done to end crime they are giving a pacifier to a baby thats all they are doing. To many jobs depend on the fact that people are commiting and will continue to commit crimes.  Crime is a business. In the jungles where they dont worry about money and business they dont have jails or police and have very little crime. They dont have drug addicts and they dont have drive bys or hit and runs or drunk drivers. The men hunt and the women stay with the kids so they also dont have strange people watching thier children that could be doing more than watching them. They dont watch tv so they dont have bad ideas made to look like something really glamourous or exciting. \nI think it is a crime for parents to hit thier kids and other parents think that is a crime for parents who dont.  The only macro solution would to be to start all over again with all new people but there would still end up being crime as soon as greed sets in just like today.
282998
There are several.  First, it is less of a theory (which requires explicitly testable hypotheses, etc.) and more of a perspective on deviance.  More than this, at a conceptual level, it dehumanizes the deviant, as it seems to imply that the fate of a person is determined by the label applied by another.  It also does not seem to distinguish between non-normative behavior such as homosexuality and more malevolent types such mass murder, etc.  In any case, it draws unreaslistic policy implications (drastic overhaul of the criminal justice system, etc.), and in that sense is quite radical...
1118519
How the mind of criminals work i.e serial killers & stuff like that.  You learn why they do what they do - I'll give you the answer now, they all blame it on their childhood (what a cop out)!!\n\nIt should be really interesting - I did a few weeks of it on my current course & I loved it.\n\nGood luck
677690
Depends on the type of crime.
358142
Crime (in general): thought to be the work of Satan, proven to be the activity of the masses. Crime is this Nation's largest employer and the mover of more money through our economy than any other activity. To prove this point, simply try to envision how our society and its economy would be with the total absence of all crime: no police, no private security industry (rent-a-cops, etc.), no lawyers, no judges, no courts. no FBI, no ATF, no law makers (senators, representatives, county supervisors, city councilpersons, etc.), no criminal justice system of any kind, half as many firefighters (arson and criminal code violations account for most fires), half as many doctors, nurses, and hospitals (with all their supporting personnel) to take care of all the stabbings, beatings, shootings, poisonings, and a host of others injuries and ailments brought about as the result of crime, no more lock, key, and safe industry, few walls and fences would be needed, the media (TV, news- papers, etc. would have to lay off thousands without crime stories and dramas), the paper industry would all but collapse, two million inmates would have to be released, a million hookers would have to be cared for, and the number of industies, large and small, that supply all the cars, vans, buses, helicopters, uniforms, medical supplies, and thousands of other products and services that are needed as the result of crime, would simply disappear. Without all crime, tens of millions would be instantly unemployed, millions upon millions of square feet of real estate would lie vacant, and the domino effect from all this would bring ruin. And just who is committing all this crime? There aren't enough atheists and freethinkers around to hold accountable. Got any ideas? The ads say "Take a bite out of crime." (Don't take too big a bite, it just may cost you your job or business.)
145823
Social work has always been subject to competing claims of definition and practice, as social workers, politicians, service users and policy makers have struggled to lay claims on what social work is, and what it might be.\n\nIn 2001, the International Association of Schools of Social Work and the International Federation of Social Work agreed the following definition:\n\nThe social work profession promotes social change, problem-solving in human relationships, and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well-being. Utilising theories of human behaviour and social systems, social work intervenes at points where people interact with their environments. Principles of human rights and social justice are fundamental to social work ( IASSW (International Association of Schools of Social Work), 2001).\n\nWhatever the legitimate or validated notion of social work is seen to be, from other perspectives, social work can be seen to be an agent of social control. Far from addressing the inequalities with which we live, it may well play an important role in sustaining or perpetuating the very social and economic system which promotes such inequalities. Rather than liberating, it can be viewed as oppressive and for that reason not true to the core values on which it claims to be based (Jordan and Parkinson, 2001; Jordan, 2004).
252429
I would think that you must start by studying criminology and psychology. Perhaps a course in sociology?
6588
1.  I believe that God will take into account the forces that shape us when we face him for the final reckoning.\n\n2.  "Blame", or rather responsibility, is not divided when it is shared.  I may be fully responsible for my actions, but if I act the way my father taught me to act, he too has some responsibility for my behavior.  \n\n3. In reality, people who do evil almost never think they are doing anything wrong.  Hitler thought he was cleaning the world of inferior humans when he sent homosexuals, gypsies and jews to concentration camps.  When you see a criminal blame society for their crimes, it's usually more in the way of lashing back out at the people who are putting them into jail than trying to explain their actions.\n\n4.  For those of us try to explain how certain circumstances led to a person's actions, we are not trying to excuse their behaviour, we are trying to *understand* it so that we can prevent it EFFECTIVELY.  How can you fix a problem if you don't understand what caused it? Before you say "That's what prisons are for", I will point you to recidivism rates. When someone is sent to jail, society loses almost all of the leverage that the threat of punishment provides.  So we have to understand how people get to the point that the threat of punishment doesn't work before we can effectively stop crime.
635039
Wow, that's tough.  Is your assignment to argue that retribution is socially cohesive, or did you come up with this yourself?\n\nThis is what I can think of:\n\nRetributive justice is based on the idea that criminals should be punished for undermining social "harmony" or "balance."  Therefore, we can't dole out retributive punishment before we first have a definition of what is social harmony or balance.  Social harmony and balance can be defined through laws, custom, or religion.  The PROCESS of defining social harmony and balance is socailly cohesive because, to some extent, we must generally agree on what the definition of social order is.  In other words, the PROCESS of accepting and agreeing on laws/customs/religion is socially cohesive.\n\nThe rehabilitation theory of punishment is probably the most socially cohesive because it is based on rehabiliting the criminal so that he can successfully reenter society.
775071
Poverty\nBelief systems\nGender / sexism\nCultural practices\nAvailability of resources to meet needs\nGeographic location\nAvailability of meaningful work or activity\nHaving suffered personal trauma (assault) or public tragedy (war, natural disasters, etc.)\nSocial isolation due to disability, old age, etc.
890413
it all depends on the crime really and the institution were a person is being held
321841
Criminals have one thing going for them: They know how to gain ones trust. This skill helps them the achieve their ultimate goal. That is why I believe a bit of skepticism when you meet people for the first time is OK. I don't think social morals are dying out, rather, they are changing. Although I don't think that murder and theft will ever be accepted in the literal sense, people have changed their ideas about right and wrong, and to the extent of which what is right and wrong measures. An example of this could be music and piracy laws (stealing), and murdering while depressed, etc. (my thought is murder is murder, and depression should not be used as an excuse, but I was brought up in old school beliefs). You can expect a lot of things to change. In 50 years, someone else is going to be asking the exact same question.
1052275
Does seem a bit out of whack...now the one committing the crime is considered the victim of an uncaring society.\n\nMy favorite is that folks will be sent to jail for longer sentance for tax evasion than for a robbery & assualt or even rape.
52126
Obvious physical factors such as DNA, also mental illness and genetics affect ones propensity to commit crimes.
920597
Collective efficacy is an empty theory like community policing.  Criminal behavior is normal when people have addictions and are driven most consistently by a "need" not being fulfilled.  Couple this with messages in media about all we don't have (and don't need) and cherishing the self above all others - you have a deluded population seeking only immediate gratification and intolerance for going without.  This creates an incessant drive to acquire by any means all the material things that can not ever fully satisfy us.