As was mentioned in the culture chapter a Normis a set of expected behaviors for a given role and social
status. In most societies, the majority of people conform
to the most important norms most of the time. For example, wearing
casual clothes to class is normal on many campuses. Attending class
in your European Bikini might not be normal for some. Yet, I
witnessed this back in 1982 as a student in the newly accredited
West Georgia University. Many of the female students wore Bikinis
to classes. It was a striking departure from what I had experienced
while in high school. But, I wondered back then if swimsuits were
in fact deviant given that so many students at WGU wore them to
class. Deviance is not as easily defined and established as some
might think (especially if you are sensitive to cultural relativism
and ethnocentrism). Devianceis a
violation of norms or rules of behavior that are typically outside
of the norms (see figure below).
A typical dictionary definition of deviance sounds something
like this: “one that does not conform to the norm;” “one who
behaves in sharply different ways from customs;” or “one who
ignores the common and behaves in unique ways.” A thesaurus might
also list: “abnormal; aberration, anomaly, weird, irregular, and
even unnatural” as similarly related words. Most references attest
to the nature of deviance as being something that violates normal
behaviors, thoughts, or actions. But, is deviance weird/cool,
positive/negative, desirable/undesirable, or good/bad?
For Sociologists the answer is found by considering exactly who
has the power and authority to define the behavior as being normal
or deviant. Throughout the history if the United States
governments, religions, education, media , and family types have
influenced and shaped what is considered “normal” or “deviant” on
subjects as insignificant as swimsuits on beaches and as
significant as women having the same rights that men have. You see,
deviance is considered at both of C. Wright Mills’ larger social
and personal levels.
A personal level example might be considered with the swimsuit
on campus issue. Students back then did not need to look at
university, governmental, or media for approval on how they dressed
for class. They typically considered a source much more valuable to
teenagers and young adults—their peers. Friends who also wear
swimsuits to class may have defined the swim suit issue as being
normal among students who were their friends, yet deviant among
students who run in different crowds. Since they value their own
peer evaluations the most they defer to peer-based norms.
But, would it be acceptable to wear nothing at all to class? On
Wikipedia there is an interesting article about Andrew Martinez who
attended naked at Berkley for a few years. Berkley is considered to
be a very liberal campus in comparison to most US campuses. A
controversy developed and eventually his nakedness came before the
university leaders and the City of Berkley leaders (he often walked
about town naked). He was eventually asked to leave Berkley and
both the City and University of Berkley passed anti-nudity laws and
policies to prevent nudity (taken from Internet en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Martinez
15 September, 2008). Martinez would often find himself being
labeled “deviant” throughout the remainder of his life(he died in
jail May 18 2006 from an apparent suicide).
Can Deviance Be Functional?
Let’s pause here to consider Emile Durkheim’s observations about
deviance (original text from “The Division of Labour in Society”
1893).Durkheim argued that deviance, especially extreme forms are
functional in that they challenge and offend the established norms
in the larger collective conscience. In other words extreme
deviance pushes things enough to make members of society reconsider
why they even consider some behaviors as being deviant. Building on
this idea, Functionalists often argue that: deviance reaffirms
norms when the deviants are punished; deviance promotes solidarity
among those who support and those who oppose the deviance; deviance
provides a clear contrasting point of comparison for society’s
members; and deviance often stimulates social change.
In Martinez’s naked guy case, both the City and University had
to take a serious look at why and how they defined public nudity
and which formal norms they would develop to support their
position. Similar formal evaluations of deviance occurred after Dr
“Death” Kevorkian assisted severely ill persons in taking their own
lives; after September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the US (Twin
Towers, Pentagon, and flight crash in Pennsylvania) killed about
3,000 people; and more recently after major US corporations which
have been mismanaged and have deeply shaken markets, investments,
and economic stability. Extreme deviance does make us consider
“normal” behavior on the personal and larger social level.
As a sociologist, you should strive for an objective stance when
studying deviance. It take practice but is truly rewarding because
of the clarity it brings to your evaluation. It’s like you try to
see society and people the same way statisticians see things. Look
at the diagram below. Here you see a distribution of numbers. From
a statistical point of view you can see that the mean lowest score
is 0, the mean is 80, and the highest score is 100. Is a mean of 80
good or desirable? That depends on what these scores represent. If
these are test scores from your first sociology test then a mean of
80 indicates that most students did well on the test. The grey area
of the diagram indicates the First Standard
Deviation is the area in the distribution where about
two-thirds of the scores fall (1/3 above and 1/3 below the
mean).
Figure 2. Example of Distribution of Test Scores: Standard
Deviations
A mean of 80 indicates that about two-thirds of the other scores
where between 70 and 90 in this distribution. By the way, even
though they are not indicated in the diagram, the Second
Standard Deviation has the next 28 percent of the scores (13.6%
above and 13.6% below); the Third Standard Deviation has the next 4
percent (2.1% above and below); and the Fourth Standard Deviation
has the last 0.2 percent (0.1% above and below). You’ll
learn more about deviations when you take your statistics
classes.
Back to the test scores, a higher score way above the mean is
good and desirable to most students. If the highest student score
was 99 and the lowest was 3, both would statistically be considered
deviant scores. In a sense, you’d want to deviate as high above the
mean as possible, right?
But, what if this distribution was not an indicat8ion of test
scores, but rather the frequency of times potential roommates stole
food from the private stashes of previous roommates? You’d clearly
want a score closer to 0 than 80. Likewise, what if this
distribution was an indication of how many times your boyfriend or
girlfriend flirted with others while they were dating you? Again 0
would be good and desirable. Finally, what if this distribution
indicated the number of times during a student’s college career
that they performed a “random act of senseless kindness” for
others? I hope the point makes sense—the value placed upon the
deviance depends greatly on how the deviance conforms to or
violates the norms of the community and society you live in.
Let’s consider a sensitive and sometimes controversial issue —
Homosexuality, or a sexual preference for
persons of the same sex. I often ask my student to
consider this simple question, “is homosexuality deviant or
normal?” I am surprised at how passionate my students argue that it
is normal or that it is deviant. Eventually when the discussion
runs out of energy a student will ask me what I think. I answer
like this. National studies indicate that less than 5 percent of
the United States population considers itself to be exclusively
homosexual.
“Does that make it more or less common and therefore more or
less deviant?” I ask.
“It’s less common,” they reply.
“Yet, every society in the history of the world has typically
had homosexuality among its members. That includes almost all
societies with recorded histories and almost every society in the
world today,” I continue. “Is it common or uncommon, deviant or
normal?”
“Common and normal,” they reply. “But, how can something be
deviant and normal at the same time?”
The answer is found in the complexity of modern societies. Not
all members of society agree on the same issue in the same way. We
rarely have total agreement on what’s normal. In the US we have
over 300 million people, hundreds of religions, thousands of
voluntary organizations, thousands of political interest groups,
and thousands of personal interest groups, many of which are in
striking opposition to other groups (IE: White supremacists vs.
Nation of Islam).
Many sociologists have argued that it is normal to have deviance
in a healthy society. If you regard homosexuality as being normal
or deviant, as a sociologist you can step into a more objective
role and understand the larger social level of consideration. It
allows you to become more of an analyst and less of an advocate
when understanding deviance. To build upon this idea, let’s
consider how sociologists strive for objectivity when considering
cross-cultural issues of deviance. Remember that ethnocentrism
tends to burn cross-cultural bridges while cultural relativism
tends to build them. Can we study deviance without becoming
ethnocentric? Absolutely!
Deviance tends to vary on three major levels: across time;
across cultures, and from group to group. When considering deviance
we must realize that collectively people experience social levels
of shifting values. In one example, contrast the I Love Lucy
show which aired in the 1950’s to the Sex and The City show
which aired 1988-2004. As a child I wondered how Little Ricky was
born given that Lucy and her real-life and TV-life husband, Dezi
slept in different beds on the TV show. Their kisses were
controversial to some at the time.
Today, Sex and the City is an in-depth story line which
follows the sexuality of four New York City women. As you read in
the culture chapter, values shape norms, which in turn shape morés
and folkways, which in turn shape laws. As values shift and change
over time, so eventually do laws. Check out a fun Website called
http://www.dumblaws.com/ to
see if your home state had some rather bizarre laws (values) back
in the day.
How Does Culture Influence Deviance?
Deviance varies between cultures because values vary between
cultures. In Washington D.C. there is a non-profit research
organization that performs international studies (see http://pewglobal.org/about/). On
their Website they discuss their mission statement and
organizational purpose.
“The project provides to journalists, academics,
policymakers and the public a unique, comprehensive,
internationally comparable series of surveys. Since its inception
in 2001, the Pew Global Attitudes Project has released 21 major
reports, as well as numerous commentaries and other releases, on
topics including attitudes toward the U.S. and American foreign
policy, globalization, terrorism, and democratization (taken from
Internet 16 September, 2008).”
One such study is called the “Pew Global Attitudes Project”
which is a series of worldwide public opinion surveys that
encompasses a broad array of subjects ranging from people's
assessments of their own lives to their views about the current
state of the world and important issues of the day. More than
175,000 interviews in 54 countries have been conducted as part of
the project's work.”
Based on 91,000 of these surveys from 50 different countries,
Kohut and Stokes (2007) wrote an insightful book comparing US to
other cultures and explaining how we are perceived. America
Against the World: How We are Different and Why We Are Disliked
(Holt Publishing, 2007). These authors talk about the perception of
non-Americans about the United States. In this book American
values, culture, economic influence, and military activities have
lead to a singular notion about what America does to the world.
Many have misguided ideas from TV and news reports. Most see the
need for another superpower to keep the US in check. In sum, the
average non-American views Americans much differently from how they
view themselves.
How might a value compare between countries of the world? Pew
also studied the concept of trust between countries and found that
Eastern Europe has lower levels of Trust than did the US when asked
“Most People in Society are Trustworthy” (See Table 1).
Table 1. Pew Study: Percent who Agreed with Statement (Rank
Ordered)
Among the 47 countries included in this survey, wars, famine,
economic downturns, street and organized crime, and other local
social influences have contributed to higher or lower levels of
trust over time.
Values also vary between groups (group to group). When I was a
research professor at Case Western Reserve University, I arranged
for a former Folks gang member to come and speak to my Social
Problems class. He was a larger man, 6 foot 3, about 275 pounds,
and also a black belt in martial arts. He explained that when he
was much younger he had to go through an initiation ritual called a
beat down in order to be admitted to the gang. He eventually
converted to Christianity and chose to leave the gang (he qualified
his comments by saying “no one ever leaves the gang”). Typically to
go on an inactive status with the gang there is another beat down.
Because of his stature and fighting skills it was decided to forego
his beat down for the overall benefit of everyone involved. The
point of this story is that in most social groups a beat down would
be considered deviant. In a gang it’s very much normal. Yet, in
this situation, not beating him down was deviant within his gang,
yet a wise choice.
Not only do values vary over time, between cultures, and between
groups, it also varies a great deal between individuals. If you
interviewed 11 people you personally know and asked them when
abortion should be available to American women, you’d probably find
some very strong opinions that change from person to person. If you
polled the entire country, as did CBS and the New York Times in
2003, you would begin to see patterns that gave you a global
understanding of US attitudes about abortion. In the CBS and NYT
survey only 1 in 4 felt that abortion should not be permitted under
any circumstances (see
http://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States#Public_Opinion
Taken 17 September, 2008 from “Abortion in the United States”).
These trends are very similar across political parties and
gender.
But how does one person feel about abortion? It can be best
understood by looking at one of three perspectives that typically
frame an individual’s perspective on an issue.
The Absolutist Perspectiveclaims that
deviance resides in the very nature of an act and is wrong at all
times and in all places.
The Normative Perspectiveclaims that
deviance is only a violation of a specific group's or society's
rules at a specific point in time.
The Reactive Perspectiveclaims that
behavior does not become deviant unless it is disapproved of by
those in authority (laws).
For more, Google “Moral Relativism.”
Perspectives on Deviance
An absolutists would probably fall among the 1 in 4 who feel
that abortion is always wrong, because it is an unacceptable act. A
normative individual would consider the circumstances (rape,
incest, diagnoses, or health of mother) while a reactive would
consider the legality of abortion.
In every society when deviance is considered it is most often
controlled. Social Controlis formal and
informal attempts at enforcing norms. There are a few
basic concepts that help to understand social control. The
Pluralistic Theory of Social Controlclaims that society is made up of many competing groups
whose diverse interests are continuously balanced.
Social Order is the customary and typical social
arrangements which society's members use to base their daily lives
on. Control is easier if attachments, commitment,
involvement, and beliefs are stronger.
Attachments: strong social mutual bonds that encourage
society's members to conform
Commitment: the stronger our loyalty to legitimate opportunity,
the greater the advantages of conforming
Involvement: the more a person participates in legitimate
activities, the greater the inhibition towards deviance
Belief: strong understanding in values of conventional morality
promote conformity
Society’s members use informal and formal sanctions to reinforce
control efforts. Negative Sanctions are punishments or
negative reactions toward deviance. Positive Sanctions are rewards
for conforming behavior (see Table 2).
Table 2: Types of Groups and Their Sanctions
Group
Sanctions
Negative
Positive
Family
Spanking
Praise
Religious
Excommunication
Recognition
Work
Fired
Pay raise
School
Expulsion
Award
Finally one of the harshest forms of controls comes when intense
labels are given to a person because of their actions. A
Stigma is an attribute which is deeply
discrediting and that reduces the person from a whole and usual
person to a tainted or discredited one. I know of an individual who
was in prison for 5 years, falsely incarcerated for child
molestation and even captured on Americas Most Wanted. His charge
was child abuse. Eventually he was acquitted of the charge and
awarded 16 million dollars in damages for having his civil rights
violated when it was revealed that his former wife and the
investigating detective had an affair, eventually married, and
perhaps fabricated the entire case together (see http://www.innocenceprojectmidwest.org/index.php
or Google Free Ted White). A charge and conviction of child abuse
are very permanent and harsh stigmas to deal with, even if you are
exonerated later on.
In sum, deviance is a violation of a norm, simply not behaving
in expected ways given the social circumstances. But what is the
difference in conformity, crime, deviance, and both deviance and
crime combined? Look at the matrix in Table 3 below:
Robert Merton On Deviance
Table 4: Robert Merton’s Deviant and Criminal Behaviors
Actor complies with legal code
Actor violates legal code
Actor complies with group norms
Conforming behaviors
Criminal behaviors
Actor violates group norms
Deviant behaviors
Deviant and criminal behaviors
See Merton’s structural-functional typology of deviance
When an actor complies with group norms and the law it’s called
Conformity, or an adherence to the
normative and legal standards of a group in society. An
example might be the clothes you wore to class today—legal and
normal. When an actor violates group norms but complies with the
law, it is deviance. An example might be if you wore your Halloween
costume to class…in July. If an actor complies with group norms yet
breaks the law, it’s called crime. Crimeis behavior which violates laws and to which governments
can apply negative sanctions. An example of this might be
when you drove 10 miles over the speed limit just to avoid being
rear-ended on the freeway today. If everybody speeds and you do
too, it’s still “normal crime.” Over–reporting deductions and
under-reporting income is also “normal crime.” Finally, if the
actor violates norms and breaks the law, then it’s Deviant and
Criminal behavior. An example might be when our neighbor in a
middle class neighborhood started a meth lab and got busted while
their 2 children watched, crying on the porch (this happened to our
across-the-street neighbors during the mid-1990s).
Like deviance, crime is often found in every society. Why?
Functionalist point out that: crime exist because members of
society find it very difficult to reach total agreement on rules of
behavior; no society can force total conformity to its rules or
laws; people are normative, we continuously categorize behaviors
into "right" or "wrong"; crime/deviance function as a warning light
indicating an area that needs attention or consideration;
crime/deviance often brings about solidarity or togetherness in
society ; and there is a vital relationship between crime/deviance
and societal progress. As mentioned, deviants and criminals make us
reassess our values and make new rules and laws (Google search
Emile Durkheim or Robert K. Merton with functionality of
deviance).
Robert Merton was a Functionalist who studied why people conform
or deviate (see Merton, Robert K. (1938). "Social Structure and
Anomie", American Sociological Review, Vol 3 No 5, October 1938).
Using Durkheim’s concept of anomie (remember that
Anomie is a state of social normlessness which
occurs when our lives or society has vague norms). Merton devised a
theory of deviance that brings in the concept of materialism. The
average American sees the “American Dream” as a goal of monetary
success. They typically desire to have the dream but realize that
they often lack the means to attain it. How do they respond to this
goal---means gap? Merton claimed in 1 of 5 ways (see Table ).
Table 5. Robert Merton’s Five Goal—Means Gap Coping
Strategies***
1. Conformity
people live with what they have and get by (they accept and
pursue their goals with socially accepted means—Average US
Citizen)
2. Innovation
people commit crime to attain their goals (they accept and
pursue their goals by replacing legitimate with deviant/criminal
means to attain them—Criminals)
3. Ritualism
people try but fail and lower their goals (they appear to
pursue goals but confuse means and goal—Someone who focuses on
following rules, fitting in, or conforming instead of attaining the
dream)
4. Retreatism
people withdraw and reject most of the goals (they reject and
don’t pursue their goals—Street people, bag ladies, and
hoboes)
5. Rebellion
people reject both the goals and the means to attain them (They
reject socially approved goals and replace with deviant
goals—Terrorists and freedom fighters)
Theories of Deviance and Crime
Conflict theories of deviance and criminality of course focus on
issues of power and powerlessness. It’s about who has the power and
how they attempt to force their values and rules upon those who
don’t have it. The wealthier, more educated, and elite of society
typically have the most power. The Power Eliteare the political, corporate, and military leaders of a
society are uniquely positioned to commit Elite Crimes, or crimes
of insider nature that typically are difficult to punish and have
broad social consequences upon the masses. A few recent
examples of this might include corporate mismanagement,
embezzlement, and fraud which lead to massive Federal bailouts and
prosecutions.
Another key conflict issue in studying crime is the
disproportionately high level of non-whites who ended up among the
2006 1,570,861 incarcerated members of society (that’s about 1 in
300 for the US) about 35 percent are White
(www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/p06.pdf “Prisoners in the United
States 2006” taken 17 September, 2008).
Among Symbolic Interactionists who study crime and deviance a
few core theoretical approaches are used. The Labeling
Theory claims that the labels people are given affect their
perceptions and channel their behaviors into deviance or
conformity. Perhaps people grow up and self-fulfill the
expectations others have for them…they grow down to low
expectations. Edward Lemert studied deviant identity formation and
identified Primary Deviance (when an individual violates a
norm), becomes identified by others as being deviant while
maintaining a self-definition of being a conformist; and
Secondary Deviance - when the individual
internalizes the deviant identity others have placed upon him/her.
In the Movie, Boyz n the Hood (1991 film directed by John
Singleton), Cuba Gooding Jr.’s character, Tre is faced with a
tremendous amount of pressure when his best friend is gunned down
by street gang members and he has a profound urge to retaliate. Tre
is deeply supported by his father who helps him to reject both the
opportunity and label of street thug and to remember his own
potential. This film was nominated for an Academy Award and was
listed on the National Film Registry.
One final consideration is when someone is given a
Master Status, or a social position that
is so intense it becomes the primary characteristic of the
individual (ex-con, gang banger, etc.). Understanding how
powerful a master status can be as a labeling influence helps to
understand why so many criminals reoffend and end up incarcerated
again. Recidivism is being arrested again
after having served a sentence for another crime.
Recidivism rates indicate that the majority of US prisoners have
been in prison before (perhaps 60-80% depending on the studies and
how they were taken).
Social Learning is an approach that studies how
people learn behaviors through interactions with others. In
studying crime Edwin Sutherland taught the concept of
Differential Association, or the process of
learning deviance from others in your close relationships who
provide role models of and opportunities for deviance. There’s a
useful formula to remember:
I used this theory to understand the neighbors who started the
Meth lab. They were young, high school drop outs who had: a sports
boat, Ski Doos, jet skis, new truck and car, all new furniture. The
only catch is that his brother’s best friend had them employed in
the Meth business. Both men served time in prison, but the wife who
was expecting their next child was not charged. It was a group of
family and friends who saw criminal behavior as being worth the
risks and acceptable given the tough economy.
During the 1800’s various scientists attempted to explain
deviant and criminal behavior by searching for common patterns of
shapes and bumps on the skull. Phrenologyis an outdated scientific approach of studying the shape
and characteristics of the skull. Of course the scientific
data did not support the assumptions of phrenology. Other
biological attempts have included body shape and size, racial-group
membership, and most recently genetic factors. To date no branch of
science has been able to identify universal biological predictors
of unwanted behavior.
There are three classifications that need to be made about crime
types: White-Collar Crimesare crimes
committed by persons of respectable and high social status
committed in the course of their occupations. These types
of crime are rampant and increasing, and they are the underlying
cause of the economic crises of the years 1998-present. In
white-collar crime, crimes are committed in the elite suites of
corporate offices. These could include insider trading, safety
violations where employees are injured or killed, environmental
destruction, deception and fraud, and inappropriate use of
corporate funds. To commit a white-collar offense one would have to
be very well educated, wealthy, and somewhat powerful—a position
most in society cannot claim for themselves. When caught, laws
(which were created by society’s elite) rarely punish the elite
criminal with the same type of justice street criminals face. One
inmate said, “I walk into a bank with a gun and get 50 years. I go
to college and do my stealing using a computer or some secret
technique that I can’t be caught with, I get 15 months in a cushy
security prison with nuptial visitation rights (my interview with
ex-con who spoke to my Introduction to Sociology students).
Street Crimesare crimes committed by
average persons against members, groups, and
organizations. Hate Crimesare
acts of racial, religious, anti-immigration, sexual orientation,
gender, and disability motivated violence. Street crimes
typically fall into a few sub-categories—misdemeanors tend to be
less severe and have less-severe punishments associated with them;
felonies tend to be very serious and often change the standing of a
citizen, permanently denying rights such as voting, owning a gun,
and having social interactions with other felons. The Federal
Bureau of Investigations classifies two types of crimes: Violent
and Property. Violent crimes include: forcible rape, murder,
robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. In 2007 there were
1,408,377 violent crimes reported to police or 467 crimes/100,000
population. Property crimes include: burglary, larceny, theft,
motor vehicle theft, arson, shoplifting, and vandalism. The table
from the US Department of Justice below shows the trend in
increasing violent crimes in comparison to property crimes.
Figure 3. US Department of Justice Crime Trend Data
1980-2004
(Taken from
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/corrtyp.htm on 17 September, 2008, US
Department of Justice)
Hate crimes have become much more concerning in the US over the
last decade. These numbers give the impression that not many occur
each year, but the FBI emphasizes that not all hate crimes are
reported to police agencies and therefore are excluded from this
table. Race, religion, and sexual orientation continue to dominate
the reported hate crime categories (see Table 6 Below).
Table 6. Incidents, Offenses, Victims, and Known Offenders by
Bias Motivation
Bias motivation
Incidents
Offenses
Victims¹
Known offenders²
Total
7,722
9,080
9,652
7,330
Single-Bias Incidents
7,720
9,076
9,642
7,324
Race:
4,000
4,737
5,020
3,957
Anti-White
890
1,008
1,054
1,074
Anti-Black
2,640
3,136
3,332
2,437
Anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native
60
72
75
72
Anti-Asian/Pacific Islander
181
230
239
181
Anti-Multiple Races, Group
229
291
320
193
Religion:
1,462
1,597
1,750
705
Anti-Jewish
967
1,027
1,144
362
Anti-Catholic
76
81
86
44
Anti-Protestant
59
62
65
35
Anti-Islamic
156
191
208
147
Anti-Other Religion
124
140
147
63
Anti-Multiple Religions, Group
73
88
92
49
Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.
7
8
8
5
Sexual Orientation:
1,195
1,415
1,472
1,380
Anti-Male Homosexual
747
881
913
914
Anti-Female Homosexual
163
192
202
154
Anti-Homosexual
238
293
307
268
Anti-Heterosexual
26
28
29
26
Anti-Bisexual
21
21
21
18
Ethnicity/National Origin:
984
1,233
1,305
1,209
Anti-Hispanic
576
770
819
802
Anti-Other Ethnicity/National Origin
408
463
486
407
Disability:
79
94
95
73
Anti-Physical
17
20
21
17
Anti-Mental
63
74
74
56
Multiple-Bias Incidents³
2
4
10
6
¹The term victim may refer to a person, business, institution,
or society as a whole.
²The term known offender does not imply that the identity of the
suspect is known, but only that an attribute of the suspect has
been identified, which distinguishes him/her from an unknown
offender.
³In a multiple-bias incident, two conditions must be met: (a)
more than one offense type must occur in the incident and (b) at
least two offense types must be motivated by different biases. ,
2006 From 17 Sept 2008 http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/table1.html
Finally a word about Organized Crime,
or crime perpetrated by covert organizations which are
extremely secretive and organized, devoted to criminal
activity. The core principle behind organized crime
venture is the pursuit of wealth using socially approved and
disapproved of means, that allow murder, rape, extortion, assault,
street, White-collar, and even hate crime activities if profitable.
Organized crime includes: 1) a complex hierarchy; 2) territorial
division of authority and practice; 3) tendency towards violence at
any degree; and 4) capacity to corrupt public officials at any
level of government. The reason organized crime works so well is
that it typically: 1) is highly organized; 2) deals with services
in high demand; 3) involves lots of political corruption; 4) very
little organized opposition; and 5) uses lots of violence and
intimidation. Organized crime has become rooted on every continent
and in almost every country of the world. It undermined the former
USSR; it brought the world super power to its knees and left only a
skeleton of a powerful nation in the current Russian
Federation.
Organized crime-type of economic pillaging is developing
dramatically with the mainstream US economy. Unlike formally
organized crime types such as Mafia, national Biker gangs, yakuza,
Dugan Hands Bank, Triads, etc. current organized crime is more “mom
and pop” small time operator such as Madoff and others like him
that, even though small, can render tremendous devastation to a
national economic system.