Anomie theory
This can be defined as the feelings of lack of social norms and values and it can also be said to be the situations where cultural norms breakdown due to drastic changes. According to Wright & Decker (1996), book criminals have a motive why they decide to steal. Therefore the writer tries to find out the state of mind of the criminals before they decide to commit an offence. According to his findings, almost nine out of ten of the offenders tend to commit the crime due to the urgent desire for money. These criminals try to find out how they will quickly acquire money and in the easiest way.
These criminals as stated in the book have an urgent need for money and since they don’t have they decide to steal.
The offenders were not driven by the desire for money as such since they didn’t accumulate it as capital for a long term goal rather they needed the money to solve an immediate problem which they were faced with. The criminal’s reason to commit burglary was to meet their day to day expenses such as food, shelter and clothing. These criminals would only commit the crime once they have exhausted their previous amount which they had acquired in the similar way. The criminals state that once they have acquired the money they were cool with that therefore they had no reason of getting high and thereafter committing the offence.
But in some cases they committed the crime out of greed and the desire to make more. They were addicted to it and like the case of a cigarette where once the user smokes the first puff he always has a desire to smoke more of it and so are the burglars. Actually what was common with the criminals is that they didn’t even save a penny of what they got, they actually spent it on luxuries, parties and they were trying to maintain their sudden high profile life which was mainly associated with drug use.
Most of their offence was mainly committed by the criminals when they were intoxicated and since some of the drugs were expensive they therefore had no choice but to commit burglary. Some of the drugs they took include cocaine which made them to have an urge of taking more of it and in turn they ended up being addicts. According to Lemert as he states in the book he says that these criminals have a behavior that is self enclosed in that they have an internal urge which calls for more even if it involves breaking the law.
The writer states that these criminals never think of what they are doing as it is not a reasoned process. In other words there is a natural flow of events which tend to come from nowhere and it is motivated by the use if drugs. The writer states that their aim is not to be always high but its how they will get high. These criminals have a drug problem as in they have got no control of them since they have already formed a habit and this is what compels them to committing residential burglary
Therefore according to our study, these criminals don’t have any convectional goals since the money they acquire is not saved but they use it for partying and taking drugs. According to the writer, these criminals are desperate in sustaining their lives so the only way they do that is by indulging themselves into stealing. These criminals do not commit such crimes with the intention of making income from it but they are doing it so as to be able to cater for their basic needs. We can conclude that these criminals have a mode of living where their tomorrow will always cater for itself.
Strain-type theories
This theory has its roots in Merton’s theory of anomie. It tends to explain the social structures that influence an individual to commit crime. This theory concentrates on communal accountability of an individual which are mostly the pessimistic relationship. This theory is explained by its name that looks at the strain of an individual whether the strain will lead him into criminal activities so that he can reduce the strain.
Therefore it can clearly be seen that this theory is still useful in accounting for the behavior of individuals as stated in the burglars on the job. This has been illustrated by the writer that the criminals indulged themselves in these activities so as to sustain themselves, and as the strain theory explains that it must be a strain relating to the life of an individual. These criminals as explained by the book had a strain in their life therefore causing them to take on stealing so as to make their life go on. In conclusion this theory is still applicable in accounting for the behavior of the criminals.
Their criminality
The criminals’ behavior could be rooted to their adaptation to strain rather than innovation. This can be illustrated by the fact that the more the criminals involve themselves in burglary, the more they get urge for more. Due to this, they get adapted to these behaviors therefore it is clear that there is no innovation in the minds of the client as most of the time they are always intoxicated. Hence they can’t control some of their actions. In conclusion we can say that their criminality was because of their adaptation to the strain (Siegel, 2008).
A control-theory explanation
This theory was created by one of the most prominent theorists known as Travis Hirschi who has come up with various significant works of criminology over the past few decades. He wrote this theory as a result of the societal disorganization in the field of criminology that was prevalent in the American society. He considered this as a result of a loss of social control over persons in the society. He felt that social institutions such as religion and family had lost focus and those activities like drug taking and civil rights have brought about the increased social norms. There is emphasizing on the social bonds in this theory.
Chances of criminality will only occur if the social bonds are weak. In actual terms there were no motivational factors that would have urged someone to get involved in crime but the sheer lack of control is a key factor in causing criminality. Hirschi (2002) came up with four norms as to why individuals tend to be deliquescent.
Therefore from the findings we can conclude that the main reason why hustlers tend to engage in burglary is not explained by this theory. This is because the theory tends to explain why there are very many cases involving social bonds becoming weak drastically therefore leading to criminality and also the religious bodies are not playing its roles in addressing this issue (Deflem, 2006).
The control theory tends to explain that the increase in criminality has been caused by society’s disorganization and also by lack of social control by persons in the society. The various religious groups and families have tendency not to play its role in the society and that activities like drug taking and rock and roll have brought about increase in social norms. While the strain theory tends to explain that the increase in social norms has been brought about by the strain in an individual. This strain refer to the financial constraints that face an individual therefore the individual may tend to look for ways in which he can sustain himself therefore causing him to indulge in unethical activities.
The hustlers’ criminality in terms of low self-control
Self control is the key factor where all known facts about crime can be organized. When an individual has low self control, this determines their propensity to avoid committing a crime or committing it. It is also easy to note that persons who engage in crime also engage in other activities which may include smoking, taking alcohol, having irresponsible sex, gambling and lastly speeding of cars. These activities are carried out by an individual so that he can acquire easy gratification.
The path leading to crime begins very early in life and this can easily be known, for instance a child with behavioral problems may find himself in juveniles and he may mature to be an adult offender. Therefore the level of control depends on the mode of parenting that one acquires in the early years. But the lack of self control is not a sure indication that the person will end up committing crime since other properties of the person may counteract ones chances or likelihood of committing crime. But a low self control and a weak bond within the society can easily enable us detect the possibilities of crime but this doesn’t provide a guarantee that crime will be committed (Cullen & Wright, 2008).
Explaining the hustlers’ criminal activity
Socialization is a termed commonly used that involves acquiring customs or ideologies from other people and due to this, one may acquire skills and habits that will enable him participate well in the society. In the formation of self social interaction is very vital and someone’s personalities emerge with the interaction with other people. Interaction with the right persons will reduce chances of indulging in social evils but to the contrary interacting with the wrong persons may as well lead to criminality. Therefore we can conclude that lack of both may highly lead to criminality.
References
Cullen, F. & Wright, J. (2008). Taking Stock: The Status of Criminological Theory Volume 15 of Advances in Criminological Theory. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
Deflem, M. (2006). Sociological Theory and Criminological Research: Views from Europe and the United States. London: Elsevier.
Hirschi, T. (2002). Causes of delinquency. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publisher.
Siegel, L. J. (2008). Criminology. 10th ed. New York: Cengage Learning.
Wright, R. & Decker, S. (1996). Burglars on the job. New Jersey: UPNE.