1. Culture influences crime by shaping the values, norms, and expectations people live by. In communities where basic needs aren’t met and opportunities are scarce, a different kind of culture can emerge one that adapts to struggle and survival. When I think about my own experiences and the environments l’ve worked in, I’ve seen firsthand how some young people grow up surrounded by messages that equate respect or success with money and power no matter how it’s obtained. In areas where legal paths to success feel blocked, crime can start to look like a reasonable route. It’s not always about greed; sometimes it’s about necessity or self-worth in a world that’s constantly telling you that you’re not enough.
Poverty and lack of opportunity don’t just lead to frustration they can shape entire belief systems. People begin to value toughness, street smarts, and loyalty to those around them over mainstream ideas of education or employment. This subcultural shift isn’t born out of failure, but out of resilience. People are doing what they feel they need to do to survive. Understanding this doesn’t excuse crime, but it gives us a clearer lens. Crime isn’t just about individuals making bad choices it’s about the conditions and cultural norms that influence those choices.The evolution of strain theories in criminology, starting with Merton
Strain theory has played a big role in helping us understand why people engage in crime, especially when they feel blocked from achieving what society tells them they should want. Robert Merton first introduced this idea in the 1930s. He argued that American society pushes the idea of the “American Dream” having wealth, success, and status but not everyone has equal access to the legal or socially accepted ways to get there. So, when people can’t reach those goals through hard work, education, or career opportunities, they experience strain. That strain leads some people to find alternative ways to succeed, even if that means breaking the law.
Later, other theorists added more depth. Agnew’s General Strain Theory is one that really hit home for me. He pointed out that strain isn’t just about money or blocked opportunities it can also come from negative relationships, trauma, or losing something important. He focused on the emotional side of things, like anger, frustration, and even hopelessness. For many youth I’ve encountered, it’s not just about being poor it’s about feeling powerless, ignored, or unloved. When you combine those emotional wounds with limited opportunities, crime can start to feel like the only way out or the only way to be heard. Strain theory continues to evolve, but it keeps coming back to one truth: people don’t act out in a vacuum they act out based on what they’ve been through and what they believe is possible for them.
2. Through the readings of Chapters Three and Four, we explored how the social environment and structural conditions influence criminal behavior, with a focus on cultural deviance theories and the development of strain theory. The Chicago School, led by theorists such as Shaw and McKay, argued that crime is a sociall product shaped by neighborhood disorganization. In communities marked by poverty, residential instability, and ethnic diversity, traditional norms tend to erode, giving rise to criminal subcultures that persist across generations. Elijah Anderson’s Code of the Street further demonstrated how inner-city youth adopt alternative value systems as adaptations to social and economic deprivation.
Chapter Four shifted the focus to strain theory, beginning with Robert Merton’s argument that American society promotes material success but limits access to legitimate means of achieving it. This disconnect generates strain, leading to adaptations such as “innovation,” where individuals may resort to crime. Later, theorists like Robert Agnew expanded the framework by incorporating emotional responses to strain and identifying a range of stressors beyond economic pressure.
Together, these perspectives emphasize that crime stems not solely from individual choices, but from the broader social and structural forces that shape those choices.
Culture plays a significant role in influencing how individuals perceive crime and respond to their social environment. In communities with limited access to education, employment, and stable housing, subcultures often emerge that normalize or justify criminal behavior as a means of survival or self-expression. As illustrated in Code of the Street by Elijah Anderson, inner-city youth frequently adopt alternative value systems in which respect is earned through toughness and displays of violence, particularly when traditional avenues for success are perceived as inaccessible.
While poverty and lack of opportunity may not directly cause crime, they foster conditions where alternative norms can thrive. These cultural adaptations are rooted in economic hardship and social isolation. When individuals feel marginalized or excluded from mainstream society, they may reject its values and develop their own.
This process helps explain why crime rates tend to be higher in disadvantaged areas, not due to personal failings but because of systemic inequality and restricted access to legitimate opportunities.
Strain theory originated with Robert Merton, who contended that American culture places a strong emphasis on material success while providing unequal access to legitimate means of achieving it. This disconnect creates a “strain” between culturally approved goals and the means available to attain them. Merton identified five modes of adaptation to this strain, including innovation, where individuals accept societal goals but resort to illegitimate means such as crime to achieve them.
3. In a recent case, two teenagers from Grand Forks, North Dakota, were transferred to adult criminal court. Walker Poitra and Mason Allery, both facing attempted murder charges, were accused of shooting at an occupied vehicle on January 3rd.
Opinion on Appropriateness of the Transfer: Transferring juveniles to adult court is a contentious issue. In this case, the severity of the charges (attempted murder) likely influenced the decision to transfer the teens to adult court. The rationale is that the gravity of the crime warrants a more severe legal response, which the juvenile justice system may not be equipped to handle.
Explanation:Severity of the Crime: Attempted murder is a serious offense that poses a significant threat to public safety. The adult court system is designed to handle such severe cases with appropriate legal consequences.Deterrence: Trying juveniles as adults can serve as a deterrent to other potential offenders, signaling that serious crimes will be met with serious consequences.Rehabilitation vs. Punishment: While the juvenile system focuses on rehabilitation, the adult system emphasizes punishment. In cases of severe crimes, the focus may shift towards ensuring justice for the victims and society.
However, it’s important to consider the potential negative impacts of such transfers.
Research shows that juveniles tried as adults are more likely to reoffend and face significant challenges in rehabilitation Balancing justice, public safety, and the potential for rehabilitation is crucial in these decisions.
4. Curtis and Catherine Jones shot and killed their would be step-mother in 1999.
Originally it was alleged the motive was the decreased attention the two were receiving from their father created jealousy that drove them to killing Sonya Nicole
Speights. However, since then it’s come out that the reason was a male family member living with the Jones’ and Speights allegedly molested young Catherine and neither CPS nor their father and Speights took the allegations seriously causing Catherine to feel trapped and helpless. She and her brother made a plan to kill everyone in the house including their father. One night they were left home alone with Speights and decided to kill her first, shooting her 9 times, 4 being fatal. They fled after they realized what they’d one and were arrested the next day. They were tried in he adult system and were the youngest in US history at the time, and pleaded guilty to second degree murder. They have since been released
Even if they had not taken a plea deal they still would have been tried as adults.
When it comes to juveniles being tried as adults I think it’s crucial to look a the psychology of it. Obviously, everyone’s morals an vary, but in general the overwhelming majority’s morals would believe killing or harming anyone would go against those morals. From a general perspective moral understanding can be developed at a very young age with small moral dilemmas being able to understood (Ammann, 2018). At a individual level each case will be different and each child should be assessed for competency to be tried as an adult when the situation deems it necessary like heinous crimes. Overall doing this should not be done liberally and only carefully in those extreme circumstances. While children know right from wrong they are still developing their moral compass, so small wrongdoings can be corrected at a juvenile level.
