The Saints & The Roughnecks
1.Chambliss used the field Observation method
2. The saints engaged is delinquent behavior such as truancy ,drinking wild driving, petty theft and vandalism. The saints were perceived to be good respectful kids with bright futures By all authority figures. (They felt they only were sowing they’re oats) good boys who only went in for an occasional prank.
3.The Roughnecks also engaged in delinquent behavior they hung out at night drank, fought ,stole The Roughnecks were perceived to be kids heading for trouble (bad bunch of boys)
4.The Saints were looked upon as good because they were respectful of authority they dressed nice drove nice cars ,vs. The roughnecks who didn’t dress so nice had little money and were very disrespectful to authority. The saints were very mischievous but they showed no threat or harm to anyone when they were caught they were always apologetic the roughnecks engaged in fighting and showed they could be a harm to someone and the saints were never seen doing their mischief the roughnecks did their dirt out in the open for everyone to see the saints and the roughnecks engaged in similar behavior but it was the way the saints did there dirt that kept their clean image.
The saints ended up with different careers than the roughnecks because they kept there squeaky clean image and all except jerry graduated with a “B” average and went off to college to good schools and grad schools entitle ling them to good careers some of the roughnecks did turn out alright but some did not the delinquent lifestyle they lived eventually got the best of them and they ended up in jail. The Labeling Theory
The Saints and The Roughnecks engaged in relatively the same behaviors But the Roughnecks were perceived to be a bunch of bad boys from their demeanor, attitudes and behavior they developed a “stigma” for themselves that caused authority figures to look at them as boys headed for trouble. The...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document