Category: Social Control

The quality of subjective research is its capacity to give complex literary depictions of how individuals encounter a given research issue. It gives data about the human side of an issue that is, the regularly conflicting practices, convictions, conclusions, feelings, and connections of people. Theories, for example, interactionism, phenomenology, and basic hypothesis can be utilized to help outline an exploration question, control the choice of pertinent information, decipher the information, and propose clarifications of causes or impacts. Subjective scientists additionally depend intensely on speculations drawn from the sociologies and humanities to manage their examination procedure and light up their discoveries. These methodologies contrast in the level of the specialist’s drenching as far as experiential commitment, coordinate contact with the subjects, and physical inclusion in the setting. In “within” or subjective approach, the analyst goes for an all-encompassing picture from verifiably one of a kind circumstances, where mannerisms are critical for importance. However looking outside the information we assemble in top to bottom meetings, gather dialogs, or perceptions is essential to the uprightness of our subjective research plans. The thought of elective wellsprings of data serves to check the investigation information while giving the analyst an alternate, more enhanced point of view on examine results.

Subjective techniques are likewise successful in distinguishing impalpable variables, for example, social standards, financial status, sexual orientation parts, ethnicity, and religion, whose part in the examination issue may not be promptly evident. At the point when utilized alongside quantitative techniques, subjective research can assist us with interpreting and better comprehend the mind boggling reality of a given circumstance and the ramifications of quantitative information. The obstruction of regular logical epistemology and system, joined with an absence of information in regards to subjective philosophy, is coming up against a quickly developing acknowledgment of the qualities of subjective research. As the coding system advances, the expert moves into more elevated amounts of reflection, starting to compose and control the classes themselves.

Working at the same time with endeavors to manage self are exercises intended to address issues for representative and material delights. Exactly what images and material props are satisfying is, to some degree, dictated by the setting of an association. Phenomenology has turned into a helpful and important outline among instructive and sociologies investigate. The greater part of them, have comprehended that phenomenology is an honest to goodness way of speaking to the substances that members involvement in their lives. The hypothesis of phenomenology recognizes this duty by executing tangible plan with a specific end goal to build up experiential, design space. Phenomenology exhibited in engineering is the control of room, material, and light and shadow to make an essential experience through an effect on the human detects.

In spite of the fact that discoveries from subjective information can regularly be reached out to individuals with qualities like those in the investigation populace, picking up a rich and complex comprehension of a particular social setting or marvel ordinarily outweighs evoking information that can be summed up to other topographical zones or populaces. In this sense, subjective research varies marginally from logical research when all is said in done. It is asserted that all sciences are established on the subjective experience of making finely point by point judgments and elucidations. Phenomenology is the strategy for turning theoretical philosophical considerations and objectives towards regularizing this establishing, by a nitty gritty examination of question coordinated mindfulness. Despite the fact that this preface is valid, one of the greatest misguided judgments about phenomenology is that it can be connected to all subjective methodologies. In reality, recognition is a component in all subjective research plans, be that as it may, it is critical to think about the aim of the examination and the issue to be settled, before choosing phenomenology as an outline. Speculations give perplexing and extensive conceptual understandings of things that can’t be bound: how social orders work, how associations work, why individuals interface in certain ways. Hypotheses give scientists diverse focal points through which to take a gander at muddled issues and social issues, concentrating on various parts of the information and giving a structure inside which to direct their examination.

It isn’t critical whether this extra information bolsters the scientist’s decisions from the essential information; and, without a doubt, inconsistencies in the confirmation procedure don’t really refute the examination’s discoveries. What is imperative, in any case, is that the scientist perceives how different perspectives can add to a more adjusted and more hearty and important examination instead of depending on contemplate information alone. The scientist utilizes an inductive mode, giving the information a chance to talk. Interestingly, customary “outside” or quantitative scientists intend to segregate the marvel, to diminish the level of intricacy in the examination and to test theories determined already. The key distinction amongst quantitative and subjective techniques is their adaptability. By and large, quantitative strategies are genuinely firm. With quantitative strategies, for example, studies and surveys, for instance, specialists ask all members indistinguishable inquiries in a similar request. The reaction classes from which members may pick are “shut finished” or settled.

“When I was Puerto Rican” by Esmeralda Santiago is an autobiography that shows how Negi goes through many changes based on the challenges she endures by moving to new areas where society is different. Whether Negi was living in the Santurce, Macun, or Brooklyn, Santiago uses themes like identity, coming of age, and family throughout the memoir to show her development through her day-to-day problems.

Throughout the memoir, identity was something that Negi has always questioned. She often tried to figure out how or where she fits into her world, since her world is always changing, undefined, or uncertain. She struggles to find her identity when parts of herself don’t make sense. When Negi is young, she begins to question her father, Papi, about what a soul is, concluding that her soul is the part of her and that she even notices her soul walking beside her or watching her. During school experiences, Negi must constantly navigate a social order that she finds difficult to figure out then also struggles to fit into because it differs from the social structure that she’s used to. The necessity of code-switching becomes even more noticeable when Negi moves to Brooklyn and must work her way through the more tenser social fabric of a public school made up of distinct ethnic groups, where she struggles to make friends and find safety. In the epilogue, readers learn that Negi goes on to study at Harvard, while in the beginning, Negi mourns the loss of her Puerto Rican identity. This juxtaposition of a major success with a sense of cultural loss that shows even though Negi eventually experiences outward success, the challenge of creating her identity is something she will struggle with as she tries to restore her childhood desire to be a “jíbara” with her American educational successes as an adult.

Another theme that was expressed throughout the book was coming of age. “When I Was Puerto Rican” follows Negi from age 4 to 14. During this time, Negi is required and expected by her mother to grow up and mature much faster than her younger siblings. Consequently, Negi becomes very aware of how she mentally and emotionally develops. Her family members seem to have little care for her emotional development and instead focus on Negi’s physical development from child to woman. Though Negi is interested in by her changing body, she sees Mami’s consistent refrains to sit with her legs closed as reductive and not useful considering the very intense emotional coming of age that Negi goes through. Her physical coming of age is more of a public process than her internal. Negi’s true coming of age happens in several events: first, when she realizes she’s strong enough to escape School in Manhattan which accomplishes her goal of getting out of Brooklyn. These events are moments in Negi’s life when she gains freedom and independence for the first time in her life, and gets to decide the course of her future, set her own goals, and later on accomplish them.

Lastly, Esmeralda Santiago uses family as a theme to develop her story. Negi’s family, both nuclear and extended, is large, ever-changing, and at times fiercely loyal. However, a family is not always perfectly defined, particularly during times when Negi lives with various extended family members, she struggles to understand what it really means to be family and tries to define what family means. In this way, Negi questions who her family is, who is not, and who is technically family but does not act like a family member should. Throughout the memoir, Negi is offered conflicting narratives regarding what is expected from a man in family life. This fight defines Negi’s relationship with her family. She comes to see her mother as fully in the right, particularly when Papi shows so little remorse when he drives Mami, Negi, and her younger siblings to the airport. She feels even more betrayed when she finds out that Papi distributed Negi’s remaining siblings among family members and married another woman when Mami left. Negi sees her father’s unwillingness to keep their family together as the ultimate betrayal, the true meaning of family is tied closely to reliability and loyalty.

In conclusion, Esmeralda had to overcome many obstacles and fears to make her dreams a reality. She faced many struggles like finding her identity, coming of age and family but these same struggles helped her become the Harvard student she became years later.

Law enforcement in the United States is one of three major components of the criminal justice system of the United States, along with courts and corrections. Although each component operates semi-independently, the three collectively form a chain leading from investigation of suspected criminal activity to administration of criminal punishment. Also, courts are vested with the power to make legal determinations regarding the conduct of the other two components.

Law enforcement operates primarily through governmental police agencies. The lawenforcement purposes of these agencies are the investigation of suspected criminal activity, referral of the results of investigations to the courts, and the temporary detention of suspected criminals pending judicial action. Law enforcement agencies, to varying degrees at different levels of government and in different agencies, are also commonly charged with the responsibilities of deterring criminal activity and preventing the successful commission of crimes in progress. Other duties may include the service and enforcement of warrants, writs, and other orders of the courts.

Law enforcement agencies are also involved in providing first response to emergencies and other threats to public safety; the protection of certain public facilities and infrastructure; the maintenance of public order; the protection of public officials; and the operation of some correctional facilities (usually at the local level).

1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

Social control as stated by the item is a way for order to be implemented in society by setting rules and standards that harness individuals to conventional standards. Formal social control is imposed by official bodies like the police, courts, schools and other institutions. There are punishments for breaking formal written rules or laws such as fines, going to prison or being excluded from schoolcollege. Informal social control is unwritten rules in our society such as how we treat our friends and family. When someone breaks these rules, we show our disapproval in informal ways like not speaking to them or telling them off.

Functionalists view social control as a positive function for society as the order given through shared values and consensus allows norms and values to be created. Marxists and feminists agree with the basic process of social control however suggest that the main reason for social control so that members of the bourgeoisie can rule society in their own interests otherwise known as the bourgeois hegemony where the bourgeoisie create and promote ideology and therefore people who their aiming to control such as the lower working class and women buy into this ideology rather than reality. In some sense to Marxist and feminist point of view social control is brainwashing and manipulating to convince people on their conditions of existence and how they should expect to live.

Formal social control is imposed by official bodies like the police, courts, schools and other institutions. An example of formal social control would be the government’s criminal justice system. Government or judicial processers create rules for all modern states which are then written down as legal code. Which everyone is bound to. These formal rules and then enforced by an agency such as the police. If found the rules have been broken some form of judicial system such as a court will then have some sort of punishment for the law breaker that’s in accordance with the legal code. In the UK the given punishments may range from prison, community service or a fine. And when arriving to prison people will find them in a similar condition with set rules that are not to be broken and if found to have been broken the individual will find themselves facing another punishment of some sort. The use of punishments sets the idea into the individual that there is no space of their behaviour in society and therefore they will need to adapt as there is nowhere else, they can simply go. For individual that do not actively go against the law, having the punishments set up for those who do allow then to see the same conditions they will be put into and therefore will hopefully lead individuals away from breaking the laws set in place. There are similar systems of rules and punishments situated throughout the state. For example, with the example given in the item we can go further from the suggestion of teachers and look at the wide focus of how education and the educational system implements informal social control with clearly stated rules and codes of conduct that if ignored and broken will result in some form of punishment such as sanctions or being expelled.

Informal social control is unwritten rules in our society such as how we treat our friends and family. When someone breaks these rules, we show our disapproval in informal ways like not speaking to them or telling them off. To ensure that these unwritten rules are not broken there may be some forms of rewards given to us when were younger. For example, if a child is well behaved and doesn’t break any unwritten rules such as not talking when other people are then they may get rewards such as certain snacks, being allowed to watch more Tv or go on their electrical device for longer. This controls the behaviour of the children as they are presented with benefits of not breaking any of these unwritten rules.

A gang is three or more people of associates, friends or family members with a defined leadership and internal organization. Gangs are motivated by violence or illegal activity such as drug trafficking, auto theft, weapon trafficking assault, swarming, shootings, stabbings, murder and violent behaviours. All gangs have agreed on upon a common behaviour that shares the same norms and values which promotes the strength between the gang members. Gangs often have distinctive characteristic that is used to identify gang members, such as graffiti tags, certain coloured clothing to distinguish different gangs from one another, slogans, hand signs, hair styles, code words, slurs and so on.

Territorial gangs control a geographical location, they are in the midpoint of criminal groups and community groups as they strive to gain control over a selected tertiary to oversee all criminal activities while also protecting the people living there. The boundaries that are set by the gangs mean that the community and gang members feel ‘safety in numbers’ if confrontation becomes an issue with others from differing areas and gangs. Organised or corporate gangs have a hierarchy, definite leadership and rules, that keeps the members in control of the person at the top, with the most control. Organised crime gang members have a main purpose is to carry out criminal activities

Being part of a gang can offer a sense of belonging normally associated with being part of a family or extended family. Since many young people do not have a patriarchal role model due to the absence of the fathers, being in a gang that is male dominant has that sense of having male figures you can rely on as well as belong to. Due to the family sense in gangs that is created from the shared norms and values. The sense of family is also created by the sense of protection as people can be confident that their other gang members will protect them.

In most gangs you will find that number of their members are young students who are in anti-school subcultures. We can see this in Sewell’s study in 2000 when he looked at African-Caribbean subcultures that suggests that schools were openly racist to this subculture due to them being seen as threatening by the teachers. From this a number of African-Caribbean students began forming an anti-school subculture that went against schools. However due to the lack of educational focus the African-Caribbean kids who were in these anti-school subcultures are left with no skills, no qualifications along with a fatalistic attitude. Therefore, they turn to gangs to provide them with an opportunity to earn money which allows them to provide for themselves and their families.

Furthermore, other members of the gangs may only see there for excitement in 1990 Stephen Lyng termed this as “edgework” he interviewed young men and found gained an identity of being “bad” from which they found to get pleasure from being bad, the members further more stated that being a gang member provided them with ‘good times’. Laughter, camaraderie and a general feel-good factor. Their risky actions are an escape from an obligation caused from rationales and restrictions. Moreover, Katz in 1988 identified a different type of edgework called “vicarious edgework”, it notes how young women are drawn to bad boy male gang members to derive the excitement of risk indirectly while remaining law abiding.

Sociologist Mac an Ghaill in 1994 studied macho lads, an anti-school subculture formed from their experience with a crisis of masculinity. He claimed that girls had gained a higher status in school by achieving more educational susses than the boys. As a result, the boys are unaware of what male identity is or should be due to women now coming out as top in education as well as traditional male jobs disappearing from the job market. It was claimed that the boys were now demoralised with a lacking sense of purpose in life. So, to deal with their new educational position and the stronger fear of failure from the possibility of not being able to get a job and earn money due to male jobs dropping and lacking educational smarts, the boys began forming anti-school subcultures that would cause them to misbehave and get in trouble, breaking the school rules. This can also be linked with the work of Cohen who sees the formation of anti-school subcultures as a way of dealing with status frustration. So, with the boys new lowered status in education and the workforce, their anti-school subcultures are a way for them to deal with it all and vent their frustration by acting out.

A second reason why anti school subcultures were formed was because of the stigmatisation around people from the precariat and working class. People from these classes were believed to be rude, unmotivated and idiotic, especially by the teachers. Students in these lower classes realised that there was no way to break the stigmatisations around them and therefore decided to form anti-school subcultures that gave into these stigmas, act exactly how they were perceived to be. In links to Becker, by being labelled as deviant, rude, idiotic and unmotivated leads to this label becoming our master status with how we perceive ourselves. The people in the lower classes start to believe these bad behaviours is who they really are and therefor make it their master status – our main characteristics and personality. It is said that the labelling and master status leads to deviancy amplification, which we can see as the people who are being labelled come together and act in the behaviours that they are believed to own, and break the school rules or act out in deviant behaviours.

In conclusion as stated by Mac an Ghaill changes such as girls gaining higher educational status and the lack of male jobs leads to a crisis of masculinity as men are shut out from their traditional roles, and are not adequately socialised to be able to fit into these new rules and therefore act in a deviant anti-school way creating subcultures as a way of dealing with their social frustration. As well as being a result in stigmatisation and labelling that leads onto a deviant master status causing ant-school subcultures and behaviours being formed.

In terms of the economic system, traditional Marxism describes social conduct, with the bourgeoisie seeking profit. As a starting point, modern writers then use classical Marxism to then go on to describe behaviour, culture and ideas. Neo Marxists look at classes, but propose that individuals from different social classes perceive the world in different ways, how different stresses are encountered and how they react in an Individual way.

Marxists as a whole agree that youth cultures share certain characteristics despite their different styles. They see that youth subcultures are a form of resistance against capitalism exaggerating working class values. They further state that the large variety of youth subcultures is because each generation is facing different sets of problems and challenges all caused by capitalism.

Examples of youth cultures would firstly be Hall and Jefferson. In 1976 Hall and Jefferson looked at teddy boys, they claimed that their style was an expression of contempt middle class values as they were talking old Edwardian-style and wearing it in the face of the advancing social mobility of the working and middle classes, to revive a pre-war concept of class hierarchy. Secondly Cohen in 1972 and Clark in 1976 looked at skin heads. They both argued that the aggressive racism by skinheads was an attempt to preserve their traditional working-class identity. Yet many find fault in this Marxist theory, they see that Marxism romanticises the youth cultures, overlooking their racism by stating it was a result of their social class issues. Lastly Paul Corrigan’s 1979 study of aggressive hooligan working class males in Sunderland was due to them looking for excitement because they were bored in school. Therefore, violence was a way of expressing frustration with capitalism.

Mike Brake in 1984 claimed that youth cultures provided magical solutions to the lives of their member. Young people are relatively powerless in society and cannot alter their social world. He indicated that youth cultures are magical solutions to the problems of poor urban youth who can do nothing to improve their lives and futures, so turn to youth cultures to make them think they have the power to change society.

Many Marxists in the 1970’s worked with the CCCS, they viewed youth subcultures as a form of counter- culture resisting and capitalist control of society. Youth culture was seen as a politically uniformed action against society, which showed evidence of working-class rebellion by a class conscience

Other criticisms of the Marxist explanations of youth subcultures by Len Barton and other feminists in 2006 criticise the CCCS for stating that the working-class youth subcultures are a resistance to capitalism. However young people themselves would not have recognised themselves doing it out of capitalism resistance. They also mentioned how Marxists were romanticising and excusing the racism by the skinheads as racism shouldn’t be excusable just because of their class issues. Furthermore, feminists have complained that the CCCS had a mainstream bias, only looking at youth culture from a white working-class male point of view.

A postmodernist argument against Marxist explanations is that the spectacular youth cultures may have not existed in the way that Marxist suggest, and the ideological believes of Marxists analyses do not reflect the social reality.

In conclusion the Marxist explanation of youth subcultures has an in-depth analysis of how youth cultures are made to rebel against capitalism as well as creating a magical solution that they can turn to in hopes of changing society. Hoverer many other sociologists find issues with the Marxist evaluation as they only study white male working class youth cultures and not anyone else, concluding that they are all a result of resisting against the capitalist society that doesn’t serve them.

A growing society is one that will continue to transform its way of thinking and facilitate new methods of controlling social order. As society continues to expand its knowledge of politics, crime, medicine, daily task, and technology the need for social control consistently changes to adapt to behavioral differences, laws, rules, and economic growth. Due to behavior and actions changing as society grows, each official follows a standard procedure to ensure people are following the laws set in place. Police officials within Seattle have established Banishment, a social control that is supposed to reduce and provide a solution to social and criminal problems. Banishment represents a change in Seattle it is also questioned whether it is the best alternative for society, and if not, what is.

Social is a term based on people or organizations, controls are solutions or approaches that resolve social predicaments, and a proliferating society adapts to an individual lifestyle. Circumstances can implicate an individual’s perspective on what is deemed morally right or wrong without the use of a law or rule. Gestures such as smiling, criticizing, being sarcastic, and gossiping about others are examples that can implement or deter individuals from doing something or enable them to carry out an action. This social control is known as informal, informal social control uses television, religion, life circumstances, and an individual’s domain and or environment to govern actions and views on society and various topics that affect political laws and regulations.

In contrast, another social control known as formal social control is used with law enforcement officials and within the criminal justice system to adjust the behaviors of individuals. When laws are broken, punishments are imposed upon the individual who broke a rule or law. An example of punishment would be paying a fine, facing imprisonment, placing the individual on probation, or restricting the person were about to confirm the person’s behavior and turn him or her into a productive member of society. Punishing the person, would encourage the person to live a better lifestyle and deter him or her from a life of crime.

A social control technique known as Banishment has reemerged, the term Banishment is considered a punishment for getting rid of or exiling someone from a place. Banishment is being used as a social control method in various states within the United States. One city mentioned in Banished: The New Social Control in Urban America is Seattle, Washington. Seattle is using banishment to reduce deviant and obtrusive behaviors within the city limits. With Seattle using this technique as a form of social control, it is punishing criminals by excluding them from a town, city, state, or country for a specific period (Beckett & Herbert, 2011). The intent of banishment is to exile a person due to an offense that is deemed uncivil or criminal. Such as selling or purchasing narcotics, having a drug addiction problem, and being homeless.

Banishment influences geographic locations within a city or state, crime rates, the lively hood of individuals, and how police officers administer rules and regulations. This social control practice is becoming widespread and represents changes within not only communities and societies but in the uses of social control. Banishment was amended to a city, Seattle, where individuals had to adapt to the changes and live with the consequences of what the social control entailed.

An interview was conducted by Beckett and Herbert (2011) to showcase how banishment has changed Seattle residents’ livelihood for the better or worse. The interview is a platform to truly understand how to select individuals’ lives before banishment, during, and after. Some of the interviews that took place were with different ethnic groups and genders to give an understanding that banishment was not limited to affecting one type of individual or group of people. Forty-one interviews were conducted and only five had a positive experience from banishment (Beckett & Herbert, 2011). Of many of the interviewees, eighty-eight percent had a negative experience from the exclusion order.

A resident that experienced a negative experience includes Tom a thirty-year-old Native American homeless man, and Jose a Latino man in his late thirties who has bipolar disorder and alcohol addiction (Beckett & Herbert, 2011). The thirty-year-old Native American was given a park exclusion order for drinking alcohol inside a park. His actions were a violation of the park’s rule and the police officers were within their rights to provide the exclusion order. The first issuance gave a one-week restriction to Tom where he would not be able to go to the park, this limitation restricted Tom from being around his peers, a public restroom, and an area he deemed safe. Due to these reasons he violated the exclusion order before the week ended and received another violation that was now ninety days long eventually leading to an exclusion that was yearlong. Tom also received another exclusion order for possessing alcohol while on the metro bus system, this order makes it difficult for him to travel (Beckett & Herbert, 2011). Due to Tom being arrested several times and spending time in jail he eventually had no choice but to leave Seattle and move to Nebraska to live on

Geography is changing due to banishment and exclusion orders reducing and limiting the amount of homeless, Native Americans, and African Americans that frequent the downtown Seattle area. Downtown is usually an area where tourists, professionals, and wealthy individuals frequent very often with an increased amount of vagrancy and minorities trespass, and park exclusions are given to those individuals to reduce nuisances (Herbert & Beckett p.83). exclusion influences those who are banished to relocate thus creating an area that is strictly off-limits, when an individual is caught in a specific area he or she is arrested for trespassing.

Banishment changes the focus of social control by not regulating laws and crimes but to control what type of people can enter an area, one of the goals of banishment is to remove disorder and improve the quality of life for residents within Seattle who work and live in the specified area. Social control is to suppress chaos within society; however, banishment doesn’t necessarily meet that condition because although it punishes individuals from entering a specific zone it does not deter the person from taking a chance. Many individuals will continue to take the risk and revisit the prohibited location because of specific reasons, whether that’s for a job, shelter, to see family, or simply because of feeling at home. The individuals who were given exclusion orders were not arrested for committing a crime which is why he or they received an admonishment, but the officer who gave the admonishment had probable cause that he or she may commit one, he or she was considered trespassing or violated a park or metro regulation. Once a person violates exclusion, he or she is then arrested thus increasing crime rates and causing a rise in Seattle’s population. Social control is a set of laws, rules, or regulations society must adhere to reduce and suppress crimes and punish those who do not obey. Banishment is not a law that individuals know of or can follow to not receive, banishment can be given to anyone by any authorized official such as police officers, transit police, and security officers. Banishment represents the change in social control because an individual does not necessarily have to disobey a law, rule, or regulation to be punished by an authorized official.

A few alternatives were proposed by Beckett and Herbert (2011) that would be deemed effective. The first alternative involved confronting how banishment was recreated regarding the legal system. The second method is to use therapeutic courts to help individuals rather than punishing them with the form of banishment. The third choice involves the combination of harm reduction and the housing first movements (Beckett and Herbert, 2011). The purpose of finding an alternative route to banishment is to help individuals who are at a disadvantage while using proper means of social control to reduce and suppress actual criminal behaviors.

Banishment in the legal system gives individuals who were ordered to stay out of an area any justification to plead their case in court. Police officers are given the ability to restrict individuals from places without having to consider due process, police officers have the right to use their discretion to decide who is deemed worthy to enter an area or establishment. Individuals who are ordered to stay out of an area have no rights to plead their case in court, banishment in the legal system makes it difficult for defense attorneys to win a case because the defendants are willing to accept an agreement from the prosecutor and sometimes the jail sentence is short so the individual finds no reason to endure a long process. Even if the case made it to court, winning a lower court-level case will not be effective to change the law pertaining to banishment; this alternative would be considered the least effective of the three mentioned previously.

Therapeutic courts as an alternative can make a positive and effective difference within Seattle, therapeutic courts focus on personal behavior and if mental illness or an addiction affected his or her inhibitions. Drug courts, mental health courts, and community courts are implemented to focus on the defendant’s case, not on the criminal case, the purpose of the courts is to create a plan of action to ensure the person can become successful without having to endure incarceration (Beckett and Herbert, 2011). Specific services are provided to the individual and treatment is developed for the person to follow that will reduce the amount of time that is spent within a courtroom. Another key element that is important and can help defendants is having court personnel follow the individual’s progression regarding the treatment plan. Therapeutic courts help not only the individuals that need treatment, but it is a positive change for Seattle because it reduces the number of individuals who are incarcerated, reduces crime rates, and allows individuals to stay out of areas without police officers providing an exclusion order.

Unlike therapeutic courts, the last alternative suggests that harm reduction and housing first allow offenders to partake in their activity while giving them a place that will condone their behavior as well as give them a place to sleep without having to be on the streets of Seattle. This method would not intervene with the criminal justice system as much, but the goal is to hope that the individuals will gradually stop their deviant behaviors and gain stability within their lives. The behaviors and actions of the individuals are not those that can be helped by the criminal justice system but by health care and social services officials. Diminishing the use of punishment and providing a safe area for a trusting relationship with care providers will help those who have illnesses to abstain from disdainful behaviors. Enabling individuals to partake in their actions will not showcase their actions are wrong, it may increase their usage and allow them to feel comfortable, and give them a sense of security that they don’t have to worry about being arrested or punished for being themselves. This method is not connected to the criminal justice system, but it does exhibit a problem if one can participate in these actions without any consequences.

In conclusion, banishment is not an effective social control, it represents the change in a negative limelight not only for residents but for the city of Seattle as well. It increases the number of people who are excluded from a geographic location as well as increase the number of arrest and jail time for the city. Although the purpose of it is to act as deterrence it simply is not effective because people reside within the city and have attachments to the areas in which they can not visit. Based on the three alternatives Beckett and Herbert suggested the most effective choice is the therapeutic courts that focus on the individual and not the crime he or she has committed. The court allows the individual to take responsibility for their actions while creating a treatment or plan for him or her to regain stability in their life without relying on criminal or unmoral acts.

Approaching school security from a new perspective, that being Social Control Theory, is essential to promoting the safety of students.

In an analysis of school violence and threat assessments, the United States Secret Service details several key findings to prevent a targeted attack (2019). Among their discoveries are four that closely align with the four social bonds of Hirschi’s Theory of Social Control. They also provide recommendations for addressing these influences in schools before they reach catastrophic levels. The first finding best supports the implementation of Social Control theory as a means to prevent school shootings because it stresses gathering information from various environmental factors to get a more holistic assessment of an individual’s risk for violence. This author italicizes the lines that orient with Social Control Theory. The following are directly taken from the executive summary in their report:

1. There is no profile of a student attacker, nor is there a profile for the type of school that has been targeted: Attackers varied in age, gender, race, grade level, academic performance, and social characteristics. Similarly, there was no identified profile of the type of school impacted by targeted violence, as schools varied in size, location, and student-teacher ratios. Rather than focusing on a set of traits or characteristics, a threat assessment process should focus on gathering relevant information about a student’s behaviors, situational factors, and circumstances to assess the risk of violence or other harmful outcomes (2019).
2. Half of the attackers had interests in violent topics: Violent interests, without an appropriate explanation, are concerning, which means schools should not hesitate to initiate further information-gathering, assessment, and management of the student’s behavior. For example, a student who is preoccupied or fixated on topics like the Columbine shooting or Hitler, as was noted in the backgrounds of several of the attackers in this study, maybe the focus of a school threat assessment to determine how such an interest originated and if the interest negatively impacts the student’s thinking and behavior.
3. All attackers experienced social stressors involving their relationships with peers and/or romantic partners: Attackers experienced stressors in various areas of their lives, with nearly all experiencing at least one in the six months prior to their attack, and half within two days of the attack. In addition to social stressors, other stressors experienced by many of the attackers were related to families and conflicts in the home, academic or disciplinary actions, or other personal issues. All school personnel should be trained to recognize signs of a student in crisis. Additional training should focus on crisis intervention, teaching students skills to manage emotions and resolve conflicts, and suicide prevention (2019).
4. Most attackers had a history of school disciplinary actions, and many had prior contact with law enforcement: Most attackers had a history of receiving school disciplinary actions resulting from a broad range of inappropriate behavior. The most serious of those actions included the attacker being suspended, expelled, or having law enforcement interactions as a result of their behavior at school. An important point for school staff to consider is that punitive measures are not preventative. If a student elicits concern or poses a risk of harm to themself or others, removing the student from school may not always be the safest option. To help in making the determination regarding appropriate discipline, schools should employ disciplinary practices that ensure fairness, transparency with the student and family, and appropriate follow-up (2019).

Unstable home lives, little attachment to school or familial structures, and the adoption of an obsession with violent values, all point to signs an individual is at risk for carrying out a targeted attack. Examining the environmental and institutional factors that influence students, coupled with an understanding of how weak bonds to these social structures result in deviant behaviors, can help prevent future school shootings. It is imperative to note, no catch-all psychological profile exists for the school shooter. Any efforts, be they financial or investigative, into developing a one-size-fits-all profile is a waste of resources. The evidence laid out in my analysis show school shooters varies in economic status, family structure, ethnicity, age, and suicidality. However, through the lens of Social Control Theory, there are shared clear indicators that Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, and Nikolas Cruz were on a path to destruction. Implementing an informal security measure such as Social Control Theory in elementary, middle, and high schools will identify potential assailants and strengthen their social bonds to deter them from deviant behaviors.

To be clear, this author is not saying school districts should replace existing security measures with Social Control Theory. Rather, district leaders should consider implementing this theory before spending resources on safety efforts with no evidence to support their effectiveness. This author also recognizes the theory he is in support of has not been field tested, however, hopes the analysis in this paper will appeal to school officials’ willingness to understand the whole picture. Building resilience to deviant behaviors by strengthening social bonds is an effaceable means of preventing school shootings. Training all school district staff to promote the 10 strategies to build resilience as outlined by The American Psychological Association is a step in the right direction (“Road to Resilience,” 2019). Below are the strategies they recommend:

1. Make connections. Students should develop positive relationships with their friends, family, classmates, and community members. Fostering a support network with the people around you can strengthen the bond of attachment, and reduce the temptation to engage in deviant behaviors.
2. Avoid seeing crises as insurmountable. Stress is a part of everyday life. Responding to these stressors in a healthy way is paramount to moving through them. Looking beyond the present struggle, and focus on future goals where circumstances are better. Commitment to long-term valued goals will reduce one’s susceptibility to deviance.
3. Accept that change is a part of living. With age comes change. Accepting previous goals are no longer attainable will allow you to focus on other circumstances that are within your control.
4. Move toward your goals. Developing realistic goals is another way to build resilience against deviant temptations. Regularly completing tasks, even menial ones, instills a sense of accomplishment and motivates you to move toward longer range goals.
5. Take decisive actions. Rather than avoid stressful problems, take action to improve your situation. Detaching completely will not make it go away.
6. Look for opportunities for self-discovery. A struggle, loss, or disappointment in life often illuminates something about the person who experienced it. See these challenges as opportunities for self-discovery. Gaining a new appreciation for relationships, one’s ability to endure, and faith in what’s to come are all reported by people who have experienced tragedies.
7. Nurture a positive view of yourself. Trusting your instincts and having confidence in your abilities will help build a positive self-image when faced with a problem. Faith in yourself is one of the most crucial components in this list.
8. Keep things in perspective. It is important to remember a broader context when facing painful experiences. Keeping a long-term positive perspective will help reduce the mental load caused by stress.
9. Maintain a hopeful outlook. Remaining optimistic in light of difficult experiences will develop a belief good things will come. Visualizing what you hope to achieve, rather than focusing on the negatives, will reduce the temptation to engage in deviant affairs.
10. Take care of yourself. Maintaining a sound mind and body are also critical components to building resilience. Routine exercise and participating in activities you enjoy will develop a strong will when faced with a painful experience.

While the federal government has no jurisdiction over mandating educational policies, state legislatures and school district officials should support the implementation of strategies to build resilience. Guidance counselors and psychological service professionals in school buildings should be at the forefront of this charge. The earlier they can identify a weak or severed social bond in students, the sooner they can intervene to provide positive coping mechanisms. Promoting the above-mentioned strategies through informal or formal interventions will not only address the bonds outside the school building but immediately demonstrate how much the school cares. Educators taking the first step to strengthen students’ attachment to school will help prevent targeted attacks on institutions that routinely face criticism for allowing students to fall through the cracks.

Conclusion

Travis Hirschi’s Theory of Social Control is a valid and reliable explanation for why school shooters adopt violent roles. Their weak bonds of attachment to familial and educative institutions, lack of commitment to valued future goals, limited involvement in productive activities, and belief in violent value systems all contributed to the attacks they carried out on their respective schools. The lack of evidence to support the effectiveness of invasive security measures, like metal detectors and armed police presence on campus, necessitate a new approach to student safety. Established organizations such as the United States Secret Service and The American Psychological Association have published reports that corroborate Hirschi’s Theory of Social Control. Looking at the whole student, not just their experience with bullies, proclivity for violent video games, or regional gun laws, will provide the clearest explanation for their deviant behaviors. Implementing strategies to build resilience against deviant behaviors when social bonds are strained will help prevent future school shootings.

Future research into and implementation of Hirschi’s Theory of Social Control should pay special attention to students who appear to have strong social bonds of attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. On the surface, Columbine shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold appeared to be active members of their school community. However, the legacy they left behind tells another story. Future research on this theory should also incorporate a component that highlights online activity. In the digital age, the footprint we leave behind is permanent, and the anonymity users expect on the internet provides an opportunity to explore deviant behaviors unacceptable to conventional society. Uncovering potential assailants’ online history will help further illuminate the strength of their social bonds. Fighting fire with fire is no longer the only way to win the fight. Schools must accept and adopt new ways to ensure the safety of their students.

It is hard to believe that our society is controlling us and we do not know. Social control can control your thought on different things like media, phones, culture, policy, or even education. It is almost impossible to escape it if you live in a modern society. Those who can control you are some things you are hard to live without, and it seems that we can do nothing to avoid ourselves becoming the slave of society. We are living under many myths like country, nationality, and community, those myths are the reason that people can be the master of the earth, but it also becomes the cage that locks us as slaves.

People are controlled by something they create to let more people controlling to make the government or people with power dominate the public. It seems we can not escape from the cage but what can we do even if we are a part of society and under social control? We can find evidence of social control in social values, media, or even law. We can categorize it as formal or informal. The social values that exist in individuals are the product of informal social control, which is implicitly exercised by society through specific customs, norms, and customs. Individuals internalize the values of their society, whether or not they are consciously instilled. Traditional societies rely mainly on informal social control in their customary culture to socialize with their members. Also, the marketing, advertising, and public relations industries use mass communication to help the interests of certain political and business elites. Strong ideology, economic and religious lobbyists often use school systems and centralized electronic communications to influence public opinion. Both social values and media are an example of informal social control. Formal social control is the law. Society can limit our freedom, mobility, or individuality through legislation.

Cities can implement park exclusion orders (prohibiting individuals from frequenting some or all of the parks in a city for an extended period due to a previous infraction), trespass laws (privatizing areas generally thought of as public so police can choose which individuals to interrogate), and off-limits orders (Stay Out of Drug Areas (SODA) and Stay Out of Areas of Prostitution (SOAP) that obstruct access to these spaces). These are just a few of the new social control techniques cities use to displace certain individuals to the margins of society. These are only a few of the new social control techniques cities use to replace certain individuals to the margins of society.

Several common themes are apparent in each of these control mechanisms. The first is the ability to constrain individuals in their city spatially. Defying any of the above statutes is a criminal offense resulting in possible incarceration. (Beckett, K., & Herbert, S.,2008) Though not all individuals subjected to an exclusion order obey it, these individuals are, at the very least, spatially hindered through decreased mobility and freedom throughout the city. This spatial constraint on individuals leads to disruption and interference in their lives. They can deny someone to enter some public place where they can get inside initially. Also, some privatizing areas such as libraries, public transportation systems, college campuses, and commercial establishments that are generally public give the police permission to remove individuals as they see fit, even if the individual has ethical intent in the space. (Beckett, K., & Herbert, S., 2010). Those examples show how society controls the public by using different laws to limit their freedom or right and make us easier to control and managed by those who rule us.

Now we can see there are different social controls around us in various formats. It is something we can not avoid but what can we do to prevent power by society? The first thing have to do is accepting social control is real and that people already get into it. They appear in everywhere different formats. Once you had born and live in society and get in social control because those learn from school, media or social values can be the way to achieve social control. Moreover, no one can live without those who may control people in society because almost everyone is affected and not one of society if people do not accept those things. People may not find that they are being controlled and even become the ones to spread social control. It is something hard to believe that social control is one of the factors to keep our society stable, but it also limits the power of individuals and freedom because those things may make society unstable. Some of the social control is too much for keeping stable but only the tool of ruling the people. We know the importance of social control to individuals and society but what can we do to avoid us become the one who only listens to society and follows the rules? Human is foolish; they will follow what others do and think it is correct. This is why social control can control many people, and they even do not realize it. If we do not want to become the sheep who only follow others, we should have an independent mindset and critical thinking. Social control can make society stable, but it also restricts the power of the individual. When people are in the education system, they may accept all the things from teachers or schools.

After they grow up, they may think about whether is correct or wrong or only follow the rules like most people in society. Social control is also a tool to rule people and what should be done are to identify whether those things are harmful or not. Although the education system and social values already trick people into trusting the myths create for social control what people need is to ask why question what truth is and think more. Try not to accept those things that seem true because social control can be something that seems to be true. When a lie can trick most people, the lie will come true. The awareness of society, race, or even country is the myth created by people to gang people as a group, and it becomes a truth after many people trust it. Critical thinking did not mean people have to deny everything they have learned or trust but try to think more before accepting it. Therefore, when people are in society and facing social control try to think more and ask more why do not follow something for no reason. If people succeed to do that, we can face social control but not drive by social control. It is known that social control may make people follow something false but why there are many people still following them and do we need this? It is because of the power and importance of myth. If there are millions of Germans who believe in the existence of their race, their country, and the story of their race, they are willing to sacrifice their time, money, or even life for their race. (Harari, Y. N., 2018)

This show the power and importance of myth and social control are also an example of myth created by human. So it is important to have an independent mindset to choose something really good but not harmful, maybe someone thinks to follow social control is the best way to live it may not be wrong because it may be an idea after he genuinely considers it. Following social control does not mean must be wrong but depending on the own will or afterthought for a long time and asking why. To conclude, people living under social control are the truth, and they can not escape from the cage of it but only accept it. The most important thing is people should know what they have accepted and think more and ask more. If people success to do so, they can have critical thinking and an independent mindset to make them face social control without loss. If people live under social control, they should accept it and try to think and ask more to find out their willingness but not what society needs.