On the other hand, an individual with a better paying job will most likely have so much more to lose. Social status, lucrative business, an accomplished career, and a relatively stable family life are all at risk if this person is imprisoned. Therefore, in this somewhat simple, but very real way of thinking, people make their daily decisions based on a summary of the future perceived outcomes. Basically, if the opportunities of legally sanctioned employment, severity of punishment, and risk of being caught don’t exceed the expected gains from crime, many people will find themselves engaged in illegal behaviour. This is the basic theory that researchers such as Ann Dryden Witte and Robert Witte explain in abstract from the “Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice”.
Economic pressures have adverse effects on the family structure as well. Ironically, these pressures come from opposite directions. Not having a job as well as working too much can contribute to the stresses that are often too strong for families to overcome. In the case of unemployment, it is often related to the “economic marginalisation of whole communities” says Elliot Currie. This would lend one to believe that this is a case of institutionalised racism. Whenever a homogenous group of people are discriminated against economically, it is a sure sign of prejudice at some level. For instance, if whites in England and America are more likely to get jobs than blacks (even if both are equally qualified), unemployment or discrepancy in pay are almost certain to result. This seemingly hopeless situation may provide more incentive for crime.
The other side of this double-edged sword is the problem of inadequate jobs. Many of the jobs available to young families pay poverty level wages which has given us a generation of young parents who have no leisure time and are constantly stressed. This results in parents having to increase their hours or even take up two to three jobs. This affects the children. Children from these types of homes often turn to crime as a cry for attention. Such youth begin with seemingly benign “gateway crimes” such as truancy, window-peeping, and graffiti. However, it is not uncommon that these activities can later progress into more serious crimes.
Dutch criminologist Willem Bonger explained that “The best preventative against crime [is] to make prosperity and culture as general as possible.” He did, however, make the distinction between “prosperity” and “luxury”. Clearly he meant that while societies could or should encourage upward mobility for all individuals with the will to succeed, it is important to be aware of the fact that limited resources prevent everyone from enjoying life’s most lavish luxuries and achieving their socially desirable goals.
In a culture driven by capitalistic ideas, it is easy to get caught up in the consumer mentality. For many (if not most), success is determined by the number or value of possessions one has accumulated over the years. The danger in this kind of situation is explained well in a quote from John Lea, “Relative Deprivation is the excess of expectations over opportunities”. This saying illustrates how big business and marketing forces with the aid of mass media in all it’s forms ( internet, TV, radio, print, etc.) can help create an air of desperation and discontent. If society says, “Your value is equal to the sum of your assets”, it is completely understandable- even if it’s not condonable- why so many people who are economically disenfranchised lean towards crime.
Many preach that opportunities for gainful employment abound through education. This is good and well if you have been fortunate enough to have had good schooling. It is difficult to preach such optimism to those who through no fault of their own were born in areas with a property value too low to attract the best and brightest teachers. Far too frequently, we find that students in classrooms have no order, minimal care, and low expectations. Many such students will find themselves under the heavy allure of crime and it will be difficult to protect them from it.
Finally, there have been multiple studies that indicate the unfair practice of prejudice against ex-convicts seeking jobs. One such study conducted by Devah Pager from the University of Wisconsin. According to her findings, employers were only half as likely to contact and consider applicants with felony convictions in comparison to equally qualified men without prison convictions. For example in the United States, there are over 2 million individuals in prison today. What does this mean for people who have served their debt to society and have gone through the rigors of “rehabilitation” with the hopes of being functional members of society upon release? Such unfair conditions seem to perpetuate a cycle of joblessness that is almost certain to push ex-convicts back to a life of crime again.
It is commonly believed that the “solution” to crime is prison with the purpose of rehabilitating prisoners for a new life. The goal is to see legal activities and gainful employment take the place of crime. If that is true, how can the governments in western society hope to stem the tide of crime when ex-cons can’t find work? This is clearly a case where “societies do not provide the institutional means necessary to secure socially acceptable goals”. In fact, they have failed miserably in this particular area. As long as there are a high number of imprisoned people being released every year, no society should expect anything but the persistence of crime.
In conclusion, it is quite clear that when resources are scarce, families are fractured, consumerism and unfair hiring practices are the order of the day, there will continue to be many who are unable to escape these scourges on western societies. I totally agree with the statement that “crime occurs when societies do not provide the institutional means necessary to secure socially desirable goals”. Crime is increasing so obviously institutions are not working effectively. On a positive note particularly in England contributory factors towards crime seems to be a recognised problem. The government has attempted to aid these issues for example by implementing policies such as the E.O.P (equal opportunity policy) which supposedly promotes equality in the workplace and by introducing the “new deal” to help create employment opportunities for the unemployed. Clearly this isn’t enough.In order to curb the problem of crime, western institutions need to create enough outlets to help criminals return to the straight and narrow. Perhaps money wasted on futile wars could be used in this instance. America has adopted a “0 tolerance” policy and Mayor Gulliani of New York started a stop and search campaign, this, in hope of reducing gun crime. The manifestation of cultural change in western society is ever growing. As it grows it is only inevitable that crime on the whole will continue to increase if preventative measures are not addressed.
