No abstract

Traditional subcultural theorists maintain that offenders operate in an environment in which oppositional norms catering to ethics of violence, toughness and respect dominate the social landscape. Such offenders actively reject middle-class value systems and operate beyond the boundaries of what is considered decent society. In their seminal work introducing Neutralization Theory, Sykes and Matza criticized such subcultural perspectives for overemphasizing the extent to which actors reject mainstream values (1957). They maintained that offenders and delinquents are aware of conventional values, understand that their offending is wrong, and self-talk before offending to mitigate the anticipated shame and guilt associated with violating societal norms. This study analyzes street offender decision making and behavior in an effort to expand that perspective. The analyzed data was taken from interviews of hardcore, active, noninstitutionalized (uncaught) drug dealers, street robbers and carjackers to determine how they neutralize to support their offending. Findings indicate that these offenders strive to protect a self-image consistent with a code of the streets orientation rather than a conventional one. That is, they neutralize being good *

The notion that informal sanction threats inpuence criminal decision-making is perhaps the most important contribution to neoclassical theory in the past 15 years. Notably absent from this contribution is an examination of the ways in which the risk of victim retaliation-arguably, the ultimate informal sanction-mediates the process. The present article addresses this gap, examining how active drug robbers (individuals who take money and drugs from dealers by force or threat of force) perceive and respond to the risk of victim retaliation in real-life settings and circumstances. The data's theoretical implications for deterrence and violence contagions are explored. Data were drawn from in-depth interviews with 25 currently active drug robbers recruited from the streets of St. Louis, Missouri.

Several researchers point to the anticipation of early death, or a sense of “futurelessness,” as a contributing factor to youth crime. It is argued that young people who perceive a high probability of early death may have little reason to delay gratification for the promise of future benefits, as the future itself is discounted. Consequently, these young people tend to pursue high‐risk behaviors associated with immediate rewards, which include crime and violence. Although existing studies lend support to these arguments and show a statistical relationship between anticipated early death and youth crime, this support remains tentative. Moreover, several questions remain regarding the interpretation of this relationship, the meanings that offenders attach to the prospect of early death, and the cognitive processes that link anticipated early death to youth crime. In this article, we address the limitations of previous studies using a multimethods approach, which involves the analyses of national survey data and in‐depth interviews with active street offenders.

No abstract

Research has found that many street offenders anticipate an early death, making them less prone to delay gratification, more likely to discount the future costs of crime, and thus more likely to offend. Ironically, many such offenders also hold strong religious convictions, including those related to the punitive afterlife consequences of offending. To reconcile these findings, we interviewed 48 active street offenders to determine their expectation of an early demise, belief in the afterlife, and notions of redemption and punishment. Despite the deterrent effects of religion that have been highlighted in prior research, our results indicate that religion may have a counterintuitive criminogenic effect in certain contexts. Through purposeful distortion or genuine ignorance, the hardcore offenders we interviewed are able to exploit the absolvitory tenets of religious doctrine, neutralizing their fear of death to not only allow but encourage offending. This suggests a number of intriguing consequences for deterrence theory and policy.

In 1957 Sykes and Matza introduced Neutralization Theory as a response to the prevailing criminological wisdom that offenders engage in crime because they adhere to an oppositional subcultural rule set that values law breaking and violence. Sykes and Matza rejected this perspective arguing that, despite their involvement with offending, delinquents maintain a strong bond to conventional society and want to perceive themselves as "good." To resolve their contemplated law breaking with this desired self-identity, they employ neutralization techniques designed to assuage anticipated guilt. Subsequent research indicates that the original formulation of the theory is limited to explaining the behavior of conventionally attached individuals and fails to address the decision-making processes of nonconventionally oriented individuals such as criminally embedded street offenders. The current paper argues that, for a core group of such offenders, guilt is not an issue at all because their crimes are not only considered acceptable, but attractive and desirable. In-depth, semistructured interviews conducted with 191 active, noninstitutionalized "hardcore" street offenders indicate they discount guilt not through neutralizations but by attaching normative definitions to their crimes (as either mundane, inevitable, or enjoyable) that preclude them from eliciting guilt in the first place. In addition, these interviews detail the manner in which such outlooks develop among hardcore offenders and how they are maintained in a manner that supports further offending.

Prior studies have illustrated racial differences in perceptions of police legitimacy. African-Americans' views, however, appear to be complex, shaped by perceptions of over-enforcement of crimes committed by African-American offenders coupled with under-enforcement of crimes involving African-American victims. Using data from the 2002 National Incident-Based Reporting System, we examine whether victim race (alone, and in combination with offender race) affects police case clearance of four types of violent criminal incidents (homicide, aggravated assault, rape, and robbery) as a potential explanation of African-Americans' reduced levels of support for the police. Results suggest that the race of the victim, particularly in combination with the race of the offender, is related to police clearance of violent criminal incidents, but that this relationship is not as strong as those between agency, offense type, and situational characteristics of the incident. Implications for research and policy on policecommunity relations are discussed.