Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
This report critically evaluates Muncie’s and McLaughlin’s (2001) The problem of crime. It
begins by summarising various perspectives in which the problem of crime can be subjected to
social scientific inquiry’ (Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001, p. 8). To get to the core of defining
crime, there must be an understanding of the fact that this concept is constantly undergoing
changes that are directly proportional with time and the evolution of society. For example,
‘stalking a previous partner’ did not hold an illegal aspect to it in the past as it does in the
current moment (Treadwell, 2006). Taking into consideration the volatile nature of crime,
Muncie and McLaughlin (2001) encompass a level of apprehension of ‘criminal law, social
mores and social order’ (Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001, p. 9) in order to grasp a more
reasonable approach towards defining it. The first section of this report will examine crime as
criminal law violation and the role of the criminal justice system in determining the legal
conditions in which this concept can develop. The second part of this report will discuss crime
as social construct and how society shifted its focus from lawbreaker to lawmaker.
criminal law. Meaning, an action is considered a crime only if it goes against the legal
administration of the territory in which it develops (Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001). The most
conclusive and clear definition in regards to the legalistic viewpoint of crime is given by
Michael and Adler (1993) and that is ‘behaviour which is prohibited by the criminal code’
(Michael and Adler, 1993, p.5, cited in Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001). In concordance to this
statement, Williams (1994, cited in Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001) reiterates the statutory
authority of crime by denoting that, it is of no importance the depraved and hazardous nature
of an act in categorizing it as a crime, as long as it was not established so by the legal authorities.
2
A more radical approach was adopted by Tappan, who stated that, ‘Only those are criminals
who have been adjudicated as such by the courts’ (Tappan, 1947, p.100, cited in Muncie and
McLaughlin, 2001). This perspective on crime, also known as the ‘black letter law’ (Muncie
and McLaughlin, 2001, p.10), cannot grasp numerous cases in which distinct acts are legally
and socially depicted as crime due to the fact that they are dependent of the circumstances in
which they arise (Croall, 2011). Considering the definitions discussed above, Muncie and
McLaughlin (2001) identified two essential issues. First, crime would cease to exist in the
absence of criminal justice. Second, the crime per se would have the status of non-existent until
the culprit is seized, sentenced and penalized by the criminal justice system. It has come to an
agreement that, in order to comprehend crime, an analysis of the criminal procedure rules must
be made. It also considers the fact that, individuals exerting their free will must be held liable
for their actions. Lacey et al. (1990, cited in Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001) proposes a change
deviance and how it is established which deviance claims a legal reaction rather than a civil
one. Basically, criminal law falls under the guise of the general public’s opinion about what is
wrong and what is right. Thus, crime cannot be attached to a certain act or conduct for it is
entirely dependent on how other individuals perceive it (Becker, 1963, cited in Croall, 2011).
Crime as social construction indicates that crime is determined by society. Society develops
the laws that coordinates a persons’ way of conduct, and so, it is entitled to establish what is
lawless and what is legal (Treadwell, 2006). Muncie and McLaughlin (2001) state that, crime
is the outcome of human interaction in which the participants are: the offender, the legal
authorities and the ‘law-makers’ (Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001, p.15) who marks an
compose the crime, instead, it is ‘criminalized’ by the way in which it is perceived by legal
agents (Muncie and McLaughlin, 2001, p.15). There is a focus on who created the law and who
3
implemented them, rather than on who violated them (Coleman and Norris, 2000). Muncie and
McLaughlin (2001) stress that crime takes form, only when the label and law complement each
other and it can be triumphantly enforced on a person’s behaviour. Crime cannot be identified
simply by a separate analysis of behaviour and breaches in the legal system. Taking a different
approach and evaluating both the process in which the rules were created, and the law
consequence of this is that the number of crime might increase at the same rate with the labels
This report has discussed Muncie’s and McLaughlin’s (2001) perspectives on crime. The
approach on crime as criminal law violation describes it as any behaviour that goes against the
legal justice system. There is a strong relationship between crime and criminal law as neither
can exist without the other one. When it comes to the concept of social construction, crime
embraces a more volatile aspect as it is dependent on how the human interaction is perceived.
Thus, society has the upper hand in determining which kind of behaviour is illegal and which
is legal.
4
Bibliography
Coleman, C., Norris, C. (2000) Introducing Criminology. Cullompton, Devon, UK: Willan
Croall, H. (2011) Crime and Society in Britain. Second Edition. Harlow, England: Longman
Muncie, J. and McLaughlin, E. (2001) The problem of Crime. Second edition. London: Sage,