Choose three criminal acts. Describe and discuss how each of the three key sociological perspectives in the Schmalleger text explains the commission of the criminal acts. Each criminal act must have been disposed of ( by conviction or acquittal of the accused ) within the last three years.
How would you like us to help you with this assignment?
I need to choose three criminal cases that has been disposed within the last three years. Each of the cases must have been disposed of based on the three key perspectives of sociology.
The answer must be in APA format single spaced to a maximum of two pages.
As an AI language model, I don't have real-time access to specific convictions or acquittals of criminal acts in the past three years. However, I can provide you with a general explanation using the three key sociological perspectives outlined in the Schmalleger text: the structural-functionalist perspective, the conflict perspective, and the symbolic interactionist perspective. I'll choose three criminal acts as examples and explain how each perspective might provide an explanation for them.
1. Burglary:
Burglary is the act of unlawfully breaking into a building to commit theft or other felonious crimes. According to the structural-functionalist perspective, social disorganization or the breakdown of social institutions and systems may contribute to burglary. For example, if a neighborhood lacks effective community policing or has high levels of poverty and limited economic opportunities, individuals may resort to burglary as a means of survival. From a conflict perspective, the focus would be on power imbalances and socioeconomic inequalities. This perspective argues that some individuals may engage in burglary as a response to the unequal distribution of resources and opportunities within society. Lastly, the symbolic interactionist perspective emphasizes the significance of social interactions and how they influence behavior. In the case of burglary, this perspective might explore how the labeling of individuals as "criminals" or association with criminal networks can lead to a higher likelihood of engaging in such acts.
2. Drug Trafficking:
Drug trafficking involves the production, transportation, and distribution of illegal drugs. From a structural-functionalist perspective, drug trafficking can be seen as a response to the demand for illicit substances in society. It highlights how social institutions, such as the family, education, and economic systems, may fail to provide individuals with legitimate means of obtaining income, leading them to engage in the illegal drug trade. The conflict perspective would focus on the power dynamics and social inequalities involved in drug trafficking. This perspective argues that the criminalization of certain drugs disproportionately affects marginalized communities, and criminal organizations may exploit these structural disadvantages for financial gain. Symbolic interactionism would examine how individual interactions shape participation in drug trafficking. For instance, peer pressure, social norms, and the influence of drug networks can contribute to an individual's involvement in drug trafficking.
3. Cybercrime:
Cybercrime refers to criminal activities conducted online, such as hacking, identity theft, or online fraud. From a structural-functionalist perspective, cybercrime can be seen as a consequence of rapid technological advancements outpacing the development of effective security measures and legislation. This perspective highlights the need for stronger regulatory systems and improved social control mechanisms. The conflict perspective might focus on how power imbalances in cyberspace contribute to cybercrime. This perspective suggests that economic inequalities and a lack of access to technology may lead some individuals to resort to cybercrime as a means of obtaining wealth or seeking revenge against more privileged individuals. The symbolic interactionist perspective examines how individuals interact in virtual spaces, such as online forums or social media, and how these interactions shape their involvement in cybercrimes.
It is important to note that these perspectives are not mutually exclusive, and criminal acts can be analyzed from multiple angles. Additionally, specific cases and their corresponding explanations may vary depending on the sociocultural context, offender motivations, and accompanying individual factors.