The Relationship between Poverty and Crime

In this article, as the title suggests, it explains the use of social class differences to explain racial differences in crime. Among earlier arguments are the subculture of violence and subculture of poverty theories, which argue that African Americans tend to have pro-crime norms and values. The article's author, Robert D. Crutchfield, goes in depth with recent and more advanced theories to explain the link between poverty, crime, and race, while criticizing the subcultural theories. These new theories tell a different view from that of the subcultural theories with evidence showing that economic disadvantage and the way how society is structured accounts for the link between poverty, crime, and race. From these evidence, ethnographers conclude

In society, things are not as they seem at times. The criminal justice system was created to help deter crime and to punish those who break the law. Laws are put in place to be fair to all citizens. Your economic situation, gender, race should not become a factor for you to be given “due process”. Years have come and gone and the crime rates increases and decreases with the years. There have been many senseless killings and everyone has their point of view as to the causes. The focal point of this report will be the findings from the readings of, “The rich get richer and the poor get prison by Jeffery Reimer and Paul Livingston”. I will discuss the causes of the rise and fall of the many different types of crimes ; why the rise and fall of crime rates; what contribution has the criminal justice and or police system has contributed whether positive or negative; and lastly discuss which economic group ends up in prison and why.

Poverty fosters large crime rates. Where you find poverty, you often find crime. Urban areas are commonly known to be densely populated. High population along with the close proximity of businesses provide criminals with larger amounts of potential targets. For many impoverished people, the potential benefits of crime outweigh the risks of being caught. The pressing need for material goods, such as food, can steer people to commit crimes. Often threats and violence produce larger quantities of goods, which provokes people to commit even more violent acts. These acts are carried out primarily by people from poorer segments of the population and who are more likely to live in urban areas.

When it relates to violent crimes, specifically murder, the level of poverty in a city has been shown to be a contributing factor. According to (Horton, 2002), in his research comparing the rate of poverty to the rate of homicide, he found that there was a correlation between the two. In his article he talked about how those who fall under the poverty line tend

The United States is made up of social classes which are divided based on the socio economic status of the citizen or the family. The three different levels to the class sys-tem are the upper class, the middle class, and the lower class. Unfortunately there is also poverty that exists which is also a factor to be considered when analyzing crime. There are many theorist who believe that a person’s socio economic status has a large impact on the likelihood of whether or not a person will commit crime during their life-time. According to Bank, Flavin, and Leighton, “Marx and Engels believed that crime was about defects of society and the product of the demoralization and alienation caused by the conditions of capitalism.” In short this statement is saying that there are underlying reasons why people commit crimes, it is not just about whether poverty is present, how wealthy a person, what social class they are in, or what a person’s socio economic status is. However, socio economic status, poverty level, and social class all do have an effect on the rate of which crime is committed by citizens.

So far, both theories are able to explain the crime inequality observed insides neighbourhoods; however, when it comes to explaining the difference in crime rates between neighbourhoods with similarly low levels of poverty, social disorganization theory is not able to fully explain why such difference may occur, as it places a greater focus on the internal dynamics of the neighbourhoods than on the external contingencies (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 92). Based on Table 4.5 of Divergent Social Worlds: Neighborhood Crime and the Racial-Spatial DivideI, minority low-poverty areas have roughly two and a half times more violence than their white counterparts (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 88). Social disorganization theory insists that residential instability (percent of those who owns and percent of those who rent) , population heterogeneity (internal differences, including ethno-racial differences), poverty (percent of those who live in poverty), income, deteriorating neighbourhood, and population loss (percent of those who leave due to deterioration) are mechanisms that leads to the absence of informal social control and increases social disorganization, causing the loss of control over youths who then hang out at spontaneous playgrounds and form gangs with delinquent traditions that get passed down through cultural transmission. If such was the case, then one would expect neighbourhoods with similar and comparable local conditions to have similar average rates of crimes. However,

contributor to crime in the United States is a young, black male living in an

The relationship between Crime and less fortunate people cannot underestimated; it may just be the way the media has conditioned us to characterize what a criminal looks like and how they live their lives. There are many low income cities and crime rates widespread across America. One may say that people with low income have nothing to lose when they commit crime or depressed or desperate to the point that they will commit crimes for the profit of money. Even though crime is committed at all walks of life, one can still pose a question to know if crime is more likely to be committed by people with low income that those with high income.

Crime and criminalization are dependent on social inequality Social inequality there are four major forms of inequality, class gender race and age, all of which influence crime. In looking at social classes and relationship to crime, studies have shown that citizens of the lower class are more likely to commit crimes of property and violence than upper-class citizens: who generally commit political and economic crimes. In 2007 the National Crime Victimization Survey showed that families with an income of $15000 or less had a greater chance of being victimized; recalling that lower classes commit a majority of those crimes. We can conclude that crime generally happens within classes.

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

Almost half of the 83,000 people in prison ran away from home as a child and cannot read as well as an 11 year old. Almost 30 per cent have been through the care system and similar proportions were homeless before entering prison.

Crime in this country is an everyday thing. Some people believe that crime is unnecessary. That people do it out of ignorance and that it really can be prevented. Honestly, since we live in a country where there is poverty, people living in the streets, or with people barely getting by, there will always be crime. Whether the crime is robbing food, money, or even hurting the people you love, your family. You will soon read about how being a criminal starts or even stops, where it begins, with whom it begins with and why crime seems to be the only way out sometimes for the poor.

This book attempts to conduct research in order to extend the field of criminology, not any other matter. Sutherland was attempting to bring attention to an area of criminal behaviour that criminologists had not previously studied. At this time, theories of criminal behaviour placed a large emphasis on poverty being the cause of crime or on other social conditions and personal traits which

A violent crime occurs every 23.5 seconds in the United States of America. Even though crime has been at a low during the past decade, violence is still prevalent in today’s society. Most of these crimes happen in places that are socio-economically disadvantaged. There then is the debate of whether violent crime is associated with environments struck with poverty. There is a correlation between violent crimes and poverty because of the unemployment rates in major cities, the culture of poor areas, and drugs.

Although most people look at poverty and crime as two different social problems, they are interconnected in our society. Wheelock and Uggen (2006) made five core arguments in the article Race, poverty, and punishment: The impact of criminal sanctions on racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic inequality. This article discusses how crime, poverty, and punishment are all connected. Understanding each of the five core arguments allows someone to grasp how this interconnection of social problems affects society.