Crime and persistence of drugs in American Society - Essay Example

? Crime and Persistence of Drugs in American Society Compare and contrast critical and structural arguments with regards to crime? Do you see any parallels between these two views? Are they relevant in your opinion? The critical argument regarding crime usually takes a conflicting perspective, like feminism, Marxism, critical theory, or political economy theory. In essence, critical criminology is a theory that focuses on the nature of justice and the cause of crime within a structure of status and class inequalities (Siegel 2011). The critical causal argument for crime is that it is a product of oppression. The less advantaged groups and poorly paid workers in the society are the most likely groups to encounter oppressive social relations resulting from racism, class division, and sexism. In general, all criminology topics that considers contextual factors of crime, or topics of critique in the mainstream criminology are the critical arguments on crime. Criminologists supporting the conflict tradition argue that the inevitable process of capitalism is the main cause of crime. That is to say, disputes emerge between those who embrace the society in a pluralistic view and those who do not. Pluralists believe that groups in the society exercise power with an objective of furthering their own influence and power within that society. These criminologists, or conservative conflict theorists, argue that difference in economic status, and culture or the struggle in ideology, morality, status, race, ethnicity, or religion are the sources of crime. These theorists believe that such groups that gain allegiance to the mainstream culture obtain control of the necessary resources that allow them to criminalize those conflicting individuals who do not observe the same cultural values and moral code. According to Siegel, therefore, crime has its root in the instrumental or symbolic conflicts that occur at different sites of a fragmented society (2011). Critical theories concerning crime base their arguments on group difference on the larger social environment; some highlight class difference, others gender difference, and others societal difference. In this regard therefore, there are different critical arguments and theories on crime, but all focus on group difference in power. The theories include Marxist theory, institution anomie theory, and feminism theory. According to Marxist theory, the capitalist class (those who have means of production like businesses and factories) advocate for laws that criminalize and prohibit low-class street crimes, but merely restrict or prohibit some harmful actions resulting from their factories and business (Siegel 2011). These individuals use power to their advantage, and their main aim is to make profits. The theory on institutional anomie borrows from social learning and control theories to argue that the high rates of crime in the US result from the emphasis on the “American Dream”. People are encouraged to achieve success in monetary terms, but with no emphasis on the legitimate means of obtaining such success. Lastly, the feminist theories base its argument on crime because of gender difference in power. They try to explain why men engage in most forms of crime in comparison to women. Structural arguments on crime try to use a structural methodology in developing theoretical perspectives on delinquency and crime. Theorists supporting this approach focus on the study of social structures with emphasis of power relations between groups or individuals. The common approach in the study of these social structures is the concern of vertical, hierarchical relations among the members of the society (Siegel, 2011). The structural approach to criminology embraces the study of power relations as the centre of criminology research. In essence, the approach studies both power relations to criminal behavior and other people’s reactions to criminal behavior. The main theory in structural criminology arguments is the power-control theory. According to the power-control theory, the class structure in a family plays a crucial role in explaining social distribution of criminal and delinquent behavior within gender relations in social reproduction. The simple translations of the contribution of the theory is that family structure or the distribution of power, with emphasis on the positions of parents in and out of the family, have an important role in the determination of children interpretation of gender roles (Siegel 2011). Consequently, this will have an impact on the social distribution of children crime and delinquency. The theory concentrates on the etiology of delinquency and crime, and further proposes study of causal relationship reproduction of gender roles and class structure of family in the fact that more boys as compared to girls engage in criminal behaviors. Accordingly, control and power theories are similar but serve different empirical and conceptual functions. Power theories focus on the relationship between employee and employer or worker and owner, while control theories concentrate on issues of power but in a family level, like between a child and a parent. Power-control theory, however, studies the degree to which children in a family may be free to deviate from norms in relations to power structure within such a family. The issue of patriarchy is common in the theory. Comparing the two approaches to crime, critical and structural arguments, both focus on power and its distribution. Critical criminology applies the theory of power distribution, so does structural criminology. In addition, both approaches focus on the difference in gender participation on crime and delinquency, with both approaches trying to explain the difference between the high involvements of criminal behaviors on men in contrast to women. Nonetheless, the two approaches contrast with each other to some degree. The critical approach to criminology considers power distribution in a societal level, between individuals or groups within a society and their impact on criminology behavior, while the structural approach bases the family social structure as the focus of power distribution (Siegel). Again, the critical criminology approach incorporates the issue of economic, political, and social status in a society, which the structural approach disregards to some degree. In addition, the critical approach to criminology highlights capitalism as the main cause of crime in a given society, while the structural approach points at patriarchy as the foundation of characteristic gender involvement. From a personal perspective, the tow approaches are parallel in that they both focus on power distribution but on different levels. They also focus on the variance in gender involvement. Additionally, they are relevant in understanding society behavior, especially the causes crime and delinquency. 2. Explain the transnational connections for the persistence of drugs in American society. What are some of the difficulties associated with policies designed to control this problem? Transnational connections refer to relationship that exists beyond international boundaries. Transnational connections enhances drug trafficking into United States thereby making the fight against drug abuse difficult. Connection that exists between trafficking groups in Colombia and Mexico provide a small spot for trafficking drugs into the United States. Entry routes for drugs are Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands, which lies on the southern part of United States (Sherman, 2010). In penetrating the borders, drug cartels mainly use shipment of the drugs, which is a modern method replacing the traditional methods. Link between Mexico and Colombia makes it easy for the drug traffickers to ship the cargo. Other trafficking routes for the penetration of drugs from Colombia into United States are Puerto Rico and Dominican Republic. Although modern shipment methods of drugs are common, drug traffickers also use the traditional methods. Evolution in the drug trade has changed the methods applied by the drug cartels to market their drugs in United States. Largely, drug lords have lucrative businesses in United States cities. It is important to note that drug traffickers use United States neighboring countries to facilitate their trade. Shipment of drugs from many locations across the world land into these neighboring countries before penetrating the United States borders. Drug groups in Columbia uses smugglers in Mexico to ship their drugs into United States. Research reveals that once the drugs have penetrated the United States borders, Mexican groups hand the drugs to Columbia based drug lords living in United States. These connections are vital for the trafficking process because it makes it easy for the shipment from Colombia to reach the desired destination. The drug cartels have eliminated complex logistic processes that made transportation of drugs difficult and prone to seizure. It is evident that Columbia drug dealers still command wholesale trade in major cities in the United States. Policies that aim at controlling drug trafficking across the United States borders have yielded little fruits. Drug interception in the United States is a clear indication that drug trafficking is still at large. State security agents have recorded an increase in number of criminals netted carrying little amount of drugs such as marijuana, cocaine or heroin. Further, arrest of drunk drivers and other traffic offenders under the influence of drugs attests to this fact. One of the problems that United States International narcotic policy faces is that the policy requires cooperation among the countries involved. Cooperation between countries involved defines the certification process that controls movement of products from one country into another. The policy further gives the US president powers to withdraw is aid to countries that have failed to implement the policy (Sherman, 2010). To some extent, this policy is complex to the neighboring countries because it threatens the diplomatic connections among countries. Matters of diplomatic concern are usually critical because they can end up in a diplomatic spit. Balancing foreign policy interest and political stability of United States is another challenge that United States is facing. Analysts believe political stability of the United States depends on foreign policies executed by United States of America. Suspension of US Aid to countries such as Mexico, Colombia, and Puerto Rico would hamper the economic growth in those countries. On the other hand, politicians in United States would use the foreign policy as a political campaign tool to destabilize the current trends. Concerning the above issue the United States government has to devise a method that would balance the interest of United States in the foreign countries as well as implementing the policy. Another challenge to the implementation of international narcotic policy is how to interdict the drugs in foreign countries before they penetrate the United States borders. United States has to spend its resources in training and buying facilities that foreign personnel will use to counter drug trafficking in their respective countries. Provision of resources and training of the personnel requires goodwill from the United States and governments of respective countries. The countries involved must show their commitment towards an effort that aims at stumping out drug cartels. In many cases, political inclination is a challenge that United States may not be able to deal with in the respective countries. In addition, politicians in the transnational connection countries must vote in support to the US international narcotic control policy. Further, a means that would link the criminal facilitators to drug organization is a challenge that law enforcement agencies face. Notably, a growing link between terrorist and drug lords is another worry that the policy must address. The challenge comes when dealing with criminals who practice both drug trafficking and terrorism activities. Decision on which agency should handle dual issues is critical issue that has raised some contention. Analysts argue that the international policy to solve issues of drug trafficking has multilateral problems (Sherman, 2010). They view the policy as a hindrance to globalization because it advocates for economic sanction to countries, which do not comply. An approach that aim at stumping drug trafficking has to consider moral will to the society as much as it handles drug trafficking. Economic sanctions prescribe by the policy would further slacken the process of development in the respective countries. This makes the implementation of the policy beyond the American borders difficult. In conclusion, transnational connections among countries neighboring United States have facilitated drug supply in United States. Drugs originating from Columbia and other destinations find their way into United States through drug traffickers in Mexico and Puerto Rico. Implementation of US international narcotic policy faces lot challenges, which include diplomatic threats, political threats, implementing agencies among others. Cooperation of United States and countries involved is vital for the success of the policy. References Sherman, J. (2010). Drug Trafficking. Minnesota: ABDO. Siegel, L. J. (2011). Criminology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Read More