Crime Control, American Style: From Social Welfare to Social Control

2021 ◽  
pp. 136248062199545
Author(s):  
Eva Magdalena Stambøl

This article explores an increasingly significant trend in crime and mobility control that has received scant criminological attention: border externalization, specifically scrutinizing land border security-building by international actors in West Africa. Going beyond the usual focus on migration in border studies, it develops a criminologically grounded theorization of the border as a political technology of crime control and its relationship to the state. This is done by arguing that borders, theorized as ‘penal transplants’ embodying specific (western) visions of state, political power, social control/order and territoriality, are transformed and often distorted when performed in ‘heterarchical’ contexts in the global South. Further, empirically based concepts from ‘the periphery’ are suggested to enrich border criminology, broadening its geographical scope and spatial awareness.


2020 ◽  
pp. 165-180
Author(s):  
Katherine Beckett ◽  
Bruce Western
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Tim Newburn

‘How do we control crime?’ discusses the formal and less formal means thought to control crime. The formal means refer to the use of the criminal justice system: the police, courts, and prison system. Arising from what we know to be the limitations of organized criminal justice in relation to crime control, the less formal means to control crime are considered as the processes of socialization, whereby social norms and values are learned, reinforced by what is often referred to as informal social control. Recent trends in the use of punishment, from incarceration in prisons to the use of non-custodial, community-based penalties are also discussed.


Author(s):  
Danielle M. Reynald

This article provides a critical overview of the concepts of guardianship and informal social control. The discussion compares these fundamental criminological concepts and highlights areas where there is overlap, as well as key points of departure. The relationship between these concepts is scrutinized to illustrate their distinct origins as well as the distinctive ways each of these concepts have developed within the criminological literature. This article focuses on informal social control as a multi-level community process, and on guardianship as a multi-dimensional situational concept comprising, in its most fundamental form, the presence or availability of guardians, inadvertent and/or purposive supervision and direct or indirect intervention. In doing so it showcases the dimensions of guardianship which bear close resemblance to aspects of informal social control, while simultaneously emphasizing that there are important distinctions to consider when comparing some of these dimensions and the levels at which they operate. One core distinction is that informal social control is dependent on neighborhood social ties and collectively shared expectations. On the other hand, while guardianship can be strengthened by social ties at the street-block or neighborhood level, it does not necessarily require such ties to function effectively at the microlevel. Although these concepts do coincide the discussion stresses that theoretical and empirical clarification about what makes them distinct is important. In conclusion, this article shows how each concept makes a unique contribution to criminological understanding about the role of informal citizens in crime control at places.


1997 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis T. Cullen ◽  
Paul Gendreau ◽  
G. Roger Jarjoura ◽  
John Paul Wright

In their best-selling book, The Bell Curve, Herrnstein and Murray argue that IQ is a powerful predictor of a range of social ills including crime. They use this “scientific reality” to oppose social welfare policies and, in particular, to justify the punishment of offenders. By reanalyzing the data used in The Bell Curve and by reviewing existing meta-analyses assessing the relative importance of criminogenic risk factors, the present authors show empirically that Herrnstein and Murray's claims regarding IQ and crime are misleading. The authors conclude that Herrnstein and Murray's crime control agenda is based on ideology, not on intelligent criminology.


Author(s):  
Andrew Cumbers ◽  
Robert McMaster

Author(s):  
Leslie Leighninger

This entry discusses some topics in social work and social welfare history. It covers different approaches to that history, such as an emphasis on social control functions of social welfare; a stress on the “ordinary people” involved in historical events; or particular attention to the stories of women, people of color, and other groups who have often been excluded from formal sources of power. It notes the importance of using original sources in writing history, and explains the various steps involved in researching and interpreting these sources.


Author(s):  
Christi Metcalfe ◽  
Deanna Cann

Numerous studies in the United States, as well as a smaller number of studies in other Westernized countries, have linked racial and ethnic attitudes to support for more punitive forms of crime control. The current study explores this relationship in Israel by assessing whether the degree to which Israeli Jews typify crime as an Israeli Arab phenomenon and/or resent Israeli Arabs is related to support for punitive criminal justice policies. The findings suggest that ethnic typification and resentment are related to general punitive attitudes, whereas ethnic apathy and resentment are related to greater support for the death penalty. Also, the relationship between ethnic typification and punitiveness is stronger among those who are less resentful.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document