Labeling Theory

++A theory that involves deviance that can help reduce crime rate is the Labeling Theory. Aaron Cicourel, in his 1976 study, illustrates the labeling theory by investigating the relationship between the Californian police officers and the people whom they were more likely to arrest. Cicourel found that the police were more likely to arrest a group of people that fit the criteria of poor education, poor social status, and minority members. The police would interact with this group of people, that were suited to this list, more harshly than middle-class offenders, who were warned and then let go. The unequal treatment of the people within the society show how the view of specific acts affects their place, however, realists argue that interactionists
Higher government should reinforce the law that says to treat all classes equally. The United States Constitutions has laws that require a fair hearing for the perpetrator, and protects them from questions that can be used against them (Vinson). This technique is quite often used in place of a confession by police officers who ask, “Do you know why I pulled you over?” Police officers should train in new techniques and social programs that ensure that whoever they're pulling over and arresting isn't due to their label on social status and financial background. A new law should be passed in certain parts of the United States that has the most injustice within the community. This education program teaches the police officers their rights as well as the rights that the community has over them. Teaching the technique to both parties is a way to be definite that no one in this situation gets discriminated against. The lack of labeling anyone that fits the criteria of poor education, poor social status, and minority members will culminate respect between the enforcers and the
This is where the theory takes places in the United States prison systems. Labeling people on their sex, race, and financial background may also affect the time spent in prison for their crimes. This can be achieved by a better judgment and a heavier investigation. When comparing the sentence given to robbery from the United States, other countries range from five to seven months, while the United States, striking longer than the two countries, totals in around twelve months (Liptak). By reducing the sentences given to people for nonviolent crimes, we are able to keep the perpetrators in prison just enough to pay their dues, but not to the most maximum effect. Many criminologists and legal experts have backed up the incarceration rates, claiming that the United states have a more brutal and harsher crime rate, which meets up with the harsher sentences. This is proven evident by Michel H. Tonry, who states that criminal sentences are now “vastly harsher than in any other country to which the United States would ordinarily be compared.” However, reducing labeling of people with different races, and the involvement of better judgment, may also reduce the discrimination between social class and race. In addition, the reduction of discrimination