The Assessment Of Social Mobility Essays - Social Inequality

The Assessment Of Social Mobility Are the 35 million Americans who fall below the poverty line there because they are lazy and have let all opportunities for social advancement pass them by? Or is there currently a social structure that successfully reproduces classes and limits upward social mobility in America? Certain institutions in American society, including education, work and occupational structure and the family help perpetuate social class stratification. These institutions widen the gap between the rich and the poor by placing inherent restrictions on opportunities for those born into different classes. Although the degree of effort put forth by each individual is critically important, their relationship to the aforementioned institutions can severely limit upward social mobility. The current educational system creates a unique contradiction. While traditionally the best way to climb the ladders of society, American schools are now reproducing social classes. Those children born into poor families and neighborhoods usually begin their school career at a steep disadvantage. Public schools that are run down and lack sufficient funding or other key resources like good teachers are endemic to these lower income areas. The idea of class reproduction, or the correspondence principle, is obviously present in education. As mentioned above, differences between schools and school districts exist. In his article on the inequalities of public education in New York, Kozol describes an elementary school in North Bronx where 63 children share an average sized classroom. The room has no windows, for the building used to be a roller-skating rink. Consisting of 90% black and Hispanics, the student body of 1,300 has only 26 computers. (Kozol, 95) On the other hand, educational s tandards in upper-middle class communities are far superior. Here in Grand Blanc, Michigan an average second grade class would have one teacher for under thirty students and more than one computer in the room. When their parents can afford it, the technology and quality of teaching is even superior for students enrolled at private schools. Although bussing and other programs aimed at leveling these inequalities have been implemented, the majority of children born into lower income families are not presented with any choices. They are confined to minimal technology and deprived of individual attention from teachers, just to name a few disadvantages. Even a student with a high I.Q. and mental capacity for college might not fulfill his potential because of these restrictions, which are also present at the high school level. Variations within schools also help to restrict opportunities for some students. Admission to certain programs like G.A.T.E. and magnet schools can be class based. Once on a higher track or in one of these programs, a student is exposed to many useful and intellectually stimulating opportunities. Unfortunately, many minority students and those from lower income households are not encouraged to enroll in these programs despite their potential. In a lower track, they are confined to remedial education and poor teachers with emphasis on basic and monotonous tasks. The differences within the classroom have also been shown to limit opportunities for some students. Depending on a student's social class, a teacher may be more apt to help or disregard that student. A student with poor mannerisms and speech pattern may be presupposed to have little room for improvement, while one from a higher class background could receive much more help from a teacher. In addition, education tends to provide a hidden curriculum promoting cultural capital. For example, a rich school might emphasize self-confidence and proper speech patterns, while a poor school might stress subordination to authority and other basic ideas that would prepare a student for a lower class existence. These inequalities in the educational system severely limit opportunities for some students, while opening up windows for advancement for others. Even with a high I.Q., a child born in the north part Flint, Michigan would have to overcome great obstacles to get on a path to college. On the other hand, the superior educational environment at a rich school, like Grand Blanc would tend to promote and foster a desire for higher education among the students, thus granting them access to upward social mobility. Another institution in this country that has a tendency to preserve the current separation between

Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essays

Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essays Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essay Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essay Essay Topic: Arguments Death Penalty The death penalty, the ultimate punishment for man some may say. There are equally valid arguments for both views. This essay will discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder.Capital punishment is punishment by death hanging, electrocution, gas chamber, firing squad, lethal injection or beheading. It is normally reserved for murder although can be used in certain other exceptional circumstances (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001).Hanging was used in England and Wales between 1016 and 1964 (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001: 24). The purpose of which seems to have been retributive as well as deterrent. After May 1868, executions took place inside the prisons as previously, when they were public affairs, spectators often used the occasion as an opportunity to commit further crime thus turning what was supposed to show the power of law into a crime spree itself (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001).The death penalty was abolished in this country in 1965 (Davies, Croall and Tyrer, 1995: 6) although this was only for a five year trial period and was abolished officially in December 1969 (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001). It is still retained in some states in the USA and in certain African and Asian countries.In many places where the death penalty is still used as a means of punishment, more people are actually sentenced to death than are killed. For example, in the USA during 1995, 3,000 people were under death sentences but only 56 were executed. Statistics like these often bring about critical questions like, whether there is any point in retaining the death penalty and whether or not it does actually have an effect on society or on crime.Some states may justify the use of capital punishment simply on retributive grounds although the most common political belief is that it has a general deterrent capacity to save further innocent lives and significantly reduce other capital offences (R. Hood, 1 989).With regards to retribution, those who commit crime deserve to be punished, execution is a very real punishment with the criminal being made to suffer in proportion to the offence committed (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).It is necessary to distinguish two different, although often related, conceptions of general deterrence (R. Hood, 1989: 119). The death penalty implies that the threat of capital sanction, or to be more precise the risk of death, prevents those who are about to commit a capital offence from doing so, in more cases than would the threat of life imprisonment. Therefore there would be an obvious relationship between the risk of execution and the rate of capital offences (R. Hood, 1989).The second conception implies that the existence of capital punishment emphasises the severity of a crime therefore reinforcing criminal inhibitions against committing it (R. Hood, 1989). The death penalty is only a deterrent if execution is an absolute certainty and homicide is usually a crime committed in undeterrable states of mind anyway (N. Walker, 1991: 16).Capital punishment incapacitates criminals, obviously removing them from society permanently, thus eliminating the chance of them re-offending even though murder has the lowest reconviction rates.One of the main arguments of those who oppose the use of capital punishment is the chance that an innocent person may be incorrectly convicted and sentenced to death. Two of the leading opponents of capital punishment in the United States today, Professors Hugo Adam Bedau and Michael L. Radelet, concluded in a 1987 study that 23 innocent people have been put to death in the United States since 1900 (M. Grossman, 1998: 129). In todays society, courts commit resources to avoid such miscarriages of justice to ensure that innocent people are not put to death, although even as late as 1962, James Hanratty, subsequently considered innocent, was put to death for a crime committed on an English ro ad although another man later confessed to the offence, and in 1997 a British commission concluded that Hanratty may well have been innocent (M. Grossman, 1998).Capital punishment has always faced a lot of controversy. One of the reasons is due to the cost of actually carrying out the death penalty. Those in favour of capital punishment persistently argue that, cost cannot be considered as part of the judicial equation when justice is being sought (M. Grossman, 1998: 60). Those against the death penalty utilise numbers to prove their argument that it actually costs the state more to execute someone that it does to keep them in prison for the rest of their life. Margot Garey states that because of constitutional requirements and the diligence of attorneys in capital cases, death penalty litigation is a long, expensive process where, after conviction, appeals which usually last decades follow as courts examine the case and investigate possible legal errors that could overturn the deat h sentence (M. Grossman, 1998).Another main controversial topic when discussing capital punishment is human rights and the right to life. Does a particular murderer, taking into account the full circumstances of his or her life, really deserve to die at the hands of the state? (A. Sarat, 2001). Criminals, although they may have committed the most awful murders, are still real people who have a life, and with it comes the capability of feeling pain, love, fear and all the other emotions the rest of society feel (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).There is no such thing as a humane method of putting a person to death, irrespective of what the state may claim (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html). Every form of execution causes suffering and being executed is a terrifying and gruesome ordeal for any criminal (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html). A Canadian writer, Bernard Lande Cohen wrote The state has a duty to protect itself and its citizens not only from foreign enemies but from the domestic variety as well but he also insists the right of a government to take the life of any of its subjects ought to be subject to the strictest review in all instances and no matter how deserving of death and how little deserving of pity, it would be entirely wrong to inflict pain or torture upon him, or any form of death that is of a painful nature (M. Grossman, 1998: 6).An often, overlooked reason for opposing the death penalty is the depth of feelings of the friends and family of the criminal. They suffer pain and trauma leading up to and during the execution and will no doubt suffer serious trauma for years afterwards. Although, some may argue that the criminals family and friends feelings are now the same as the victims and, in that way, just (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).The discriminatory nature of the death penalty was recognised in the United States by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972. The evidence shows rac ial bias continuing to influence the jury. A report released in 1990 by the General Accounting office in the states shows indications of racial discrimination. The study concluded that, a person accused of killing a white was 4.3 times more likely to be sentenced to death than a person accused of killing a black (www.igc.org/africanam/archives/eh2/factsheet.html).There does not seem to be any other alternative to the death penalty except life imprisonment without parole. Punishment must be fair and in proportion to the offence committed and for the worst murderers life meaning life is an option. It protects the public from the risk of re-offence and allows time for rehabilitation. Most criminals are only, if at all, deterred by the thought of being caught and even the best review of the evidence from research concludes that it has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment' (N. Walker, 1991: 16).In conclusion we see th at the arguments for and against capital punishment are both very strong and depending on ones situation, circumstances and beliefs the ultimate decision to support or oppose the death penalty is that of the individual. The likelihood of Britain ever reintroducing the death penalty for murder is minimal. Politically it would be extremely hard given British commitment to human rights and our membership of the EC, which itself is highly opposed to capital punishment and contains no member states that still retain the death penalty as its highest form of punishment (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).

Changing Criminal Behaviour Case Study Bert Essay

Changing Criminal Behaviour Case Study Bert - Essay Example In order to fulfil the study's first aim, recall and recognition will be tested in 100 to 150 adult participants. Eyewitness identification accuracy will be observed during this process. Participants will be required to watch a brief video, following this video participants will be required to answer a series of questions pertaining to that video. Another data collection will involve participants completing an online questionnaire which assesses accuracy of recognition and recall. The experiment aims at identifying the misidentification rates of adults and how recognition and recall can lead to false eyewitness testimony and subsequent false identification. In order to fulfil the study's second aim, the literature on the factors which promote and those which inhibit eyewitness accuracy will be reviewed. A list of inhibitors and promotors will be generated and subsequently employed to inform a set of recommendations for the enhancement of eyewitness accuracy. The researcher will organise and maintain a web based questionnaire and online video through Surveymonkey. The researcher will send the website a participants' inclusion and exclusion criteria and specify that all respondents are to be from Australia. A 100-150 participant figure will be requested. Surveymonkey will then inform its relevant participant database of the survey. 3.2. Research plan 3.2.1 Describe the theoretical, empirical and/or conceptual basis, and background evidence, for the research proposal, eg. previous studies, anecdotal evidence, review of literature, prior observation, laboratory or animal studies. NS 1.13 The goal of the proposed research is to examine conditions that may influence eyewitness memory. Wells and Loftus (2003) used a 'memory as trace' (p. 149) metaphor to compare physical evidence and memory. That is, memory for an event can leave a trace in the brain just like physical evidence (e.g., fingerprints, blood, and semen) can in the outside world. As will be discussed at length later, eyewitness identification procedures can be employed to minimize any bias or suggestion that can contaminate a witness memory. In the present studies the effects of certain estimator variables on eyewitness identification will be examined. More specifically, the issue of whether knowledge that one is viewing a crime suspect, compared to learning that one had seen a suspect after-the-fact, and the seriousness of the crime for which the suspect is wanted, will be investigated for their influence on identification accuracy in line-ups in which the suspect is either absent or present. An additional question is whether crime severity enhances memory for an individual, or whether attention needs to be directed towards the individual to influence memory. There is equivocal evidence that crimes of a more serious nature increase motivation to attend to the criminal scenario (Leippe, Wells, & Ostrom, 1978), while others do not support this finding. As eyewitness investigation is relevant to psychologists, the legal system, witnesses, the accused, and society at large, it is