Shaw and McKay would account for the high crime neighborhoods that seem to exist in almost every city through saying the particular place in question creates problems and crimes for the people the live in the zone 2 (The Zone of Transition according to Concentric zones model created by Park and Burgess)(Lecture). Shaw and McKay found that three major aspects led to the problems in Zone 2. The first is poverty most of the people in zone 2 do not have the resources to move out of that particular area which allows for these people to stay in the area of temptation that breeds crime and promotes problems(text, ch7). A second aspect is Ethnic Heterogeneity, basically melting pot of people that can’t agree on which rules should apply (Lecture). The
…show more content…
al., Bellair, and Sampson & Groves. It seems has continued closest to the city but has spread everywhere. High crime neighborhoods today look like kind of run down. It seems the police have abandoned such arears or are too afraid to prevent crime in those areas. High crime areas today do not only have minority population, but other ethnicities as well as Shaw and McKay mention it’s about socioeconomic status in the high crime areas (text, ch7). As stated in the Lecture the African American were one of the last groups to move into zone 2 I believe most African Americans are still overcoming disadvantages that the ethnicities left them with along with still overcoming racism. The changes among high crime areas now compared to those back in Shaw and McKay’s time seem to be bigger and have spilled out into the other concentric zones. Crime is everywhere and now how with advancements in technology and transportation crime is even easier to commit in all areas compared to just the “zone of transition”. This is similar to what is mentioned in the article by Shaw and McKay “…growth of cities and the increase in devices for transportation and communication have so accelerated the rate of change in our society that the traditional means of social …show more content…
Sampson and Groves brought the development what causes social disorganization with weak social ties giving rise to the Systemic Model crime (Sampson &Groves, 1989). Bellair built upon Sampson & Groves and Shaw &McKay’s findings with finding that interaction among neighbors should be frequent and infrequent to stabilize a “connected” social network and increases social control (Bellair, 1997). Bellair also mentions Social interaction among neighbors that occurs once a year or more is more common in relatively affluent and homogeneous communities, and it transmits moderate proportion of the effects of these variables on at least one of the crime rates…”(Bellair, 1997). A final development was made by Sampson et.al. which continued to build on social disorganization theory and creating something known as collective efficacy(Sampson et.al, 1997). All of these news developments for social disorganization theory continues to be supported or unsupported just like with all the other theories. Poverty and Collective efficacy crated by Sampson et. al. seem to be the focus of Shaw and McKay’s Social Disorganization theory today. To lower crimes rates those two things will have to be focused upon to bring
al., Bellair, and Sampson & Groves. It seems has continued closest to the city but has spread everywhere. High crime neighborhoods today look like kind of run down. It seems the police have abandoned such arears or are too afraid to prevent crime in those areas. High crime areas today do not only have minority population, but other ethnicities as well as Shaw and McKay mention it’s about socioeconomic status in the high crime areas (text, ch7). As stated in the Lecture the African American were one of the last groups to move into zone 2 I believe most African Americans are still overcoming disadvantages that the ethnicities left them with along with still overcoming racism. The changes among high crime areas now compared to those back in Shaw and McKay’s time seem to be bigger and have spilled out into the other concentric zones. Crime is everywhere and now how with advancements in technology and transportation crime is even easier to commit in all areas compared to just the “zone of transition”. This is similar to what is mentioned in the article by Shaw and McKay “…growth of cities and the increase in devices for transportation and communication have so accelerated the rate of change in our society that the traditional means of social …show more content…
Sampson and Groves brought the development what causes social disorganization with weak social ties giving rise to the Systemic Model crime (Sampson &Groves, 1989). Bellair built upon Sampson & Groves and Shaw &McKay’s findings with finding that interaction among neighbors should be frequent and infrequent to stabilize a “connected” social network and increases social control (Bellair, 1997). Bellair also mentions Social interaction among neighbors that occurs once a year or more is more common in relatively affluent and homogeneous communities, and it transmits moderate proportion of the effects of these variables on at least one of the crime rates…”(Bellair, 1997). A final development was made by Sampson et.al. which continued to build on social disorganization theory and creating something known as collective efficacy(Sampson et.al, 1997). All of these news developments for social disorganization theory continues to be supported or unsupported just like with all the other theories. Poverty and Collective efficacy crated by Sampson et. al. seem to be the focus of Shaw and McKay’s Social Disorganization theory today. To lower crimes rates those two things will have to be focused upon to bring