Contoh Law As A Tool Of Social Control
Jan 19, 2019 Social control, within sociology, refers to the many ways in which our behavior, thoughts, and appearance are regulated by the norms, rules, laws, and social structures of society.Social control is a necessary component of social order, for society could not exist without it.
Michelle Alexander is a civil-rights advocate, lawyer, legal scholar, and professor.Michelle Alexander is the author of the bestseller The New Jim Crow, and a civil-rights advocate, lawyer, legal scholar and professor. She spoke with FRONTLINE about how the war on drugs spawned a system dedicated to mass incarceration, and what it means for America today. This is the edited transcript of an interview conducted on Sept. 5, 2013.What is mass incarceration?Mass incarceration is a massive system of racial and social control.
“I think the way in which we respond to drug abuse and drug addiction in these communities speaks volumes about the extent to which these are people we truly care about.”But the crack epidemic hit after this declaration of war, not before. Many people assumed that the war on drugs was declared in response to the emergence of crack cocaine and the related violence, but that’s not true. “When you take a look at the system, when you really step back and take a look at the system, what does the system seem designed to do? It doesn’t seem designed to facilitate people’s re-entry.”Many people say: “Well, that’s just not a big deal.
So you can’t vote. What’s the problem with that?” Denying someone the right to vote says to them: “You are no longer one of us. You’re not a citizen.
Your voice doesn’t count. You’re relegated to a permanent second-class status, do not matter. You’re not a person to us, a person worth counting, a person worth hearing.”That message is a powerful one, and it’s not lost on the people who are forced to hear it. We say that when people are released from prison we want them to get back on their feet, contribute to society, to be productive citizens, and yet we lock them out at every turn.
We don’t allow them to vote, we don’t allow them to serve on juries, so you can’t be part of a democratic process. Now, if we adopt this attitude, we can’t pretend then to really care about creating safe communities. We can’t pretend that this system that we devised is really about public safety or serving the interests of those we claim to represent.This system is about something else as currently designed. It’s more about control, power, the relegation of some of us to a second-class status than it is about trying to build healthy, safe, thriving communities and meaningful multiracial, multiethnic democracy.
Tell me what effects locking up so many people from one small community has on that community and what horizons and possibilities it then presents to the youth coming up in that community.Some scholars have actually argued that the term “mass incarceration” is a misnomer, because it implies that this phenomenon of incarceration is something that affects everyone, or most people, or is spread evenly throughout our society, when the fact is it’s not at all.Mass incarceration in the United States isn’t a phenomenon that affects most. It’s concentrated in extremely small pockets, communities defined almost entirely by race and class, and in these communities it’s not just one out of 10 who serve time behind bars. No, often one out of three are likely to do time in prison.And in communities of hyperincarceration that can be found in inner-city communities, in Washington, D.C., in Chicago, in New York — the list goes on — you can go block after block and have a hard time finding any young man who has not served time behind bars, who has not yet been arrested for something.And in these communities where incarceration has become so normalized, when it becomes part of the normal life course for young people growing up, it decimates those communities.
It makes the social networks that we take for granted in other communities impossible to form. It makes thriving economies nearly impossible to create. It means that young people growing up in these communities imagine that prison is just part of their future. It’s just part of what happens to you when you grow up.And the behavior of the police in many of these communities only reinforces it as they stop, frisk, search people no matter what they’re doing, whether they’re innocent or guilty. It sends this message that you’re going to jail one way or another no matter what you do, whether you stay in school or you drop out, or if you follow the rules or you don’t. You’re going to jail just like your uncle, just like your father, just like your brother, just like your neighbor.
You, too, are going to jail. It’s part of your destiny.And it affects one’s mindset.
It affects people emotionally. It’s growing up not knowing and forming meaningful relationships with their relatives, their parents. But it’s also devastating for people who come out and want to do the right thing by their family and aren’t able to find jobs and support them.I can’t tell you how many young fathers I have met who want nothing more than to be able to support their kids, maybe get married one day, but they have no hope of ever being able to find a job, no hope of doing anything else than cycling in and out of jail.So we’ve decimated these communities, and we’ve destroyed all hopes of anything like the American dream.
The base of this program lay on the NOD32 which generate a special system of internet security. Eset smart security 9 full crack. It provides a fundamental form of security with its deep protection instrument for all personnel operating devices. ESET Smart Security 9 Crack Setup With LifeTime License Key Free DownloadESET Smart Security 9 License key is very advanced and modern antivirus and antimalware which has become the most utilized and trusted program from its development to till now.
You could look at the numbers and say, OK, crime rates are at historic lows in the United States; incarceration rates are at historic highs — great, it works. Locking all these people up has bought crime rates down. So if you view this as the great prison experiment, as an effort to eradicate crime, has it been successful?Many people imagine that mass incarceration actually works because crime rates are relatively low now, so hasn’t this worked? Hasn’t this been a grand success story?The answer is no. We have decimated millions of people’s lives, locked up and locked out millions of people, but in the places where the war on drugs has been waged with the greatest intensity, places where we have locked up the most people, gone on the most extraordinary incarceration binges, crime rates remain high and have actually increased.You take communities like Chicago, New Orleans and in this neighborhood in Kentucky where the drug war has been waged with just extraordinary, merciless intensity and incarceration rates have soared as crime rates have soared. When you step back and actually look at the data on crime and incarceration, you don’t see a neat picture of incarceration rates climbing as crime rates are declining. No, in fact in many of the places where crime rates have declined the most, incarceration rates have fallen the most.
In order to foster a civil and literate discussion that respects all participants, FRONTLINE has the following guidelines for commentary. By submitting comments here, you are consenting to these rules:Readers' comments that include profanity, obscenity, personal attacks, harassment, or are defamatory, sexist, racist, violate a third party's right to privacy, or are otherwise inappropriate, will be removed. Entries that are unsigned or are 'signed' by someone other than the actual author will be removed. We reserve the right to not post comments that are more than 400 words.
We will take steps to block users who repeatedly violate our commenting rules, terms of use, or privacy policies. You are fully responsible for your comments.
Social Control: LawLawSocial control entails rules of behavior thatshould be followed by the members of a society. Some of the rules ofconduct fall into the realm of good manners as the culture defines them.As such they describe behavior that is socially desirable but notnecessarily compulsory. Other rules of conduct are not optionaland are enforced by laws.
In complex, large-scale societies, laws areusually written down formally so that they can be known clearly to everyone.This is not the case with laws in small-scale societies such as those offoragers, pastoralists, and horticulturalists. Their laws commonly aremuch more informal, being rarely written down. Since they are part ofthe evolving oral tradition that is familiar to members of these societies,there is no need to explain them to anyone. However, people visitingfrom other societies are not likely to know what the laws are until there isa dispute.How laws come about varies. In small-scalesocieties, they usually evolve over time and are part of the culturaltradition. These are referred to as common laws.
Inlarge-scale societies, many laws derive from old common laws that are nowformalized by being written down in penal codes. Other laws in thesecomplex societies do not evolve organically but are created by enactment inlegislatures or by rulers. These may or may not be codifications ofexisting social norms. Those laws that parallel the existing normsusually are more likely to be accepted and followed without coercion.It is not uncommon for some laws to be confusingbecause they are inconsistent or open to interpretation in differentsituations.
Murder laws in the United States provide an example.Killing another individual is considered to be a serious crime except whenit is done in self-defense or in battle during a war. When it isdefined as a crime,there can be mitigating circumstances that lessen the seriousness of thecrime. State legal codes commonly make a distinction between murder in the 1st,2nd, and 3rd degree. In addition there can be 1st and 2nd degreemanslaughter. The age and mental state of the killer are often alsoextenuating circumstances.
Some states consider advising or aiding in suicideas being a crime. Killing certain classes of people, such as lawenforcement officers, often calls for a harsher sentence as does murder witha gun in the act of committing another crime. The killing of apregnant woman is considered murder, but the simultaneous killing of herunborn child is not necessarily murder. This is because American societytoday is divided on the understanding of when human life legally begins.Crimes and disputes are rarely simple matters inany society.
Laws may be open to interpretation, and there often is adifference of opinion about the evidence. Even when guilt isestablished, there can be a difference of opinion about the appropriatepunishment or terms of settlement. Because these issues are open todiffering conclusions, most societies settle legalcases by the agreement of the entire community or a representative sample ofit.
Jury systems around the world usually are based on this idea.The assumption is made that jurors will come to an understanding that wouldbe acceptable to a ' reasonable man.' In most societies inthe past, the'reasonable man' was thought to be just that, a man. Women andchildren were not thought to be reasonable, nor were uneducated poor men.Subsequently, they were excluded from being jurors and judges.This is still the situation in some of the more traditional societies of theMiddle East and some other regions.Law is by no means the only method forcontrolling the behavior of deviant individuals. People who violatenorms can be subjected to gossip, public ridicule, social ostracism,insults, and even threats of physical harm by other members of theircommunity. These kinds of informal negative sanctions are veryeffective in small-scale societies.
In larger societies, thismethod also works effectively in small towns and sub-groups of cities, such as a family, work group, church, or club.In somesocieties, social control involves the threat of supernatural punishmentfrom the gods or ancestral spirits for deviation from the norm. Sinceit is assumed that crimes against other people in these societies are likely to be punished whetherthey are publicly known or not, this belief in divine retribution provides apowerful tool for getting people to behave properly. Thepossibility that others could use witchcraft against deviant individualsalso is a common effective coercive mechanism for bringing people into line,especially in small-scale non-western societies.Some societies emphasize the use of positivesanctions to reward appropriate behavior rather than negative ones topunish those who do not conform to the social norms. Commonpositivesanctions include praise and granting honors or awards. Simplyreceiving the esteem of one's peers is often sufficient motivation forpeople to be model citizens.
Examples ofeffective positive sanctions in the United States include such things asmilitary promotions, ticker-tape parades, and receiving good grades inschool. In order to be effective, a positive sanction does not need tooffer an immediate reward.
It can be a supernatural reward followingdeath. The Judeo-Christian and Moslem belief that entry into heaven must be earned by alife of good behavior is an example. Similarly, the Hindu and Buddhistbelief that a good life results in being reborn at a higher level ofexistence is a promise of a future supernatural reward.Some norms in every society usually can be ignoredwithout fear of punishment. Being a loner or dressing oddly areexamples of such minor deviations from the norms in North America today.Individuals who do these things may be labeled strange, eccentric, orindependent but rarely criminal. Which of these alternative labels isappliedmay depend on who the deviant individual happens to be. One's gender,ethnicity, age, wealth, and social class are likely to be important factors.Strange behavior by rich, well dressed people islikely to be considered eccentric, while the same behavior by poor peopleliving onthe street is more likely to be defined ascriminal. This is especially true if the deviant individuals arestrangers and members of a subculture that is stereotyped as being 'troublemakers.'
Consistently odd behavior by a homeless woman on the streetis likely to cause others to question her mental health and seek assistancefor her, while the same behavior by a homeless man may be seen as apotential danger to society and get him arrested forcreating a public disturbance. Is either of thesemencommitting acrime orare they only actingoddly? How do youthink a policemanwould interpret thesesituations?What Is ACrime?A crime is a deviation from the social norm thatis of such magnitude as to go beyond what would be considered bad manners orodd behavior. Societies respond to such exceptionally deviant actions by creating laws to curb and sometimes punishthem.
There is no universal agreement between thesocieties of the world about what constitutes criminal behavior or how itshould be dealt with. Sufficient data have been collected over the last century to show thatsocieties with different kinds of economies have radically different sortsof laws and legal concerns. Some activities that are defined asserious crimes in foraging societies are often not thought of as criminal atall in large-scale agricultural ones. The reverse is also true.The way these two dissimilar kinds of societies deal with crime isradically different as well. In order to understand these differences,it is necessary to examine their concepts of what constitutes crime andtheir approaches to dealing with it.Legal ConcernsAmongForagers and HorticulturalistsIn societies that haveorsimple subsistence bases, property protecting laws are rare.This is due to the fact that land and other important economic resources areusually not scarce.
Population densities are generally verylow and they typically have aownership concept. Land, water, and other important resources areeither 'owned' by the community as a whole or they are freely shared.assures thateveryone has about the same amount of food and wealth. In these kindsof societies, the major focus of law usually is on the failure of anindividual or family to freely share food and water with others who need it.In addition, they are concerned about the disruption caused by disputes overmates. The Ju/'hoansipeople of Namibiaand Botswana provide a good example of this. As a result of hislong-term study of the the Ju/'hoansi, Richard Lee observed that they perceive themselves as being a peaceful people, but that theyactually have a relatively high murder rate. The most common cause ofmurder for them has been competition between two men over the same woman.Among the Ju/'hoansi and othersmall-scale societies, disputes and crimes within the community were mostoften settled informally.
They did not have police, courts, judges, orprisons. If a settlement could not be arrived at peacefully by the members of thefamilies involved, the rest of the community expressed its strongdisapproval by publicly talking about the 'bad behavior' and shunning theindividuals involved.
In a small community, being the target of gossipand ostracism is an extremely serious penalty. If this fails toresolve the situation, the adults of the community come together and openly discussit. From their perspective, the most important thing is tofind a solution that will reduce tension and return the community to reciprocity ratherthan 'punish' the wrong doers. Among the Inuitpeople of Alaska, Northern Canada, and Greenland, quarrels that are difficult to settle wereusually resolved by a 'song duel' between the disputants in thepresence of the entire community. This would occur, for instance, iftwo men both wanted to marry the same woman and neither would concede. Theytook turns singing and drumming mocking songs for hours until one ofthem gave up or the audience decided that one of the men was a better songcomposer and singer. Guilt or innocence was not at issue.
Ifthe individual who was the loser in this competition did not accept thedecision or did not make satisfactory amends, the community had littlealternative. It could banish him, which would essentiallybe a death sentence. It could murder him. As a last resort, thefamilies of the disputants and their allies could separate and form two newcommunities.In small-scale societies, crimes are almostalways understood as being family matters. Crimes are againstindividuals rather than the society. They are matters for the familiesthat are affected to settle. The society becomes involved whena settlement cannot be reached.
Paymentfor a crime rather than punishment usually is the primary goal.There is a weregeld,or 'blood money', concept operating in the settlement. This is theidea that a material value can be set for every thing, every animal, andevery human being.
If someone burns down your house, he must pay youthe worth of the house. Similarly, if he kills your dog or your child,negotiations will determine their worth and, subsequently, what he owes you.Once the weregeld payment has been made, the killer is judged by society ashaving satisfactorily settled the matter. The 'crime' is expunged andeveryone goes on with their own business.
Failure to pay the agreedupon amount of weregeld means that the case has not been settled and thewronged party is expected by the community to seek revenge by killing the person who killedhis family member.In the United States and other western nations, legal systems make adistinction between crimes against the state and crimes againstindividuals. The latter are referred to as torts. Theyare settled in civil cases rather than criminal ones. Torts includeany damage or injury done willfully or negligently that harms anotherindividual.
Weregeld was eliminated long ago as an acceptablepunishment in crimes against the state but has survived as a resolution oftort cases. In 1995, the former football player O. Simpson wasfound innocent of murder in a Los Angeles criminal court decision but wasfound guilty of the same crime two years later in a civil case brought bysome of the family members of the two murder victims. Simpson wasordered to pay the family members over $30 million in compensatory damages.While it was not called weregeld, that is what it is in reality.Weregeld is still considered to be an acceptable resolution for murder casesin some traditional Moslem nations.Legal ConcernsInAdvanced Horticultural,Pastoral, and Rich Fishing SocietiesFamilies and sometimes individuals own land andhave considerable amounts of personal property in many advanced horticultural, and rich,settled fishing societies. These societies have in common an emphasison very productive specialized. Because they have, in a sense, put all of theireggs in one basket, they are concerned about other people takingtheir farmland, water sources, herd animals, fishing grounds, surplus food,or other resources that are economically critical to their way of life.It is not surprising that they have the beginnings of property protectinglaws.
Contoh Law As A Tool Of Social Control Summary
With the exception of pastoralists, the population densities inthese societies are higher than among pedestrian foragers and simplehorticulturalists. Due to population pressure, the importanteconomic resources are realistically viewed as being finite and,subsequently, in need of protecting. In the case of pastoralists, thekey resource is not land but the animals that they herd. They would beeasy targets for theft if they were not constantly protected.The traditional pastoralist way of life is byits nature migratory.
When pastoralists have disputes with theirneighbors, they can move to a new area to avoid it. This option isusually not available to sedentary fishermen who make their living alongrivers and bays and farmers in areas where it is no longer possible topractice.When personal conflicts occur with their neighbors, they must stay and dealwith them. Since these societies usually do not have police and judgesto step in to arbitrate or prosecute criminals, the usual method for dealingwith disputes and crimes within the community is to use gossip, public ridicule, and social ostracism. Ifthis fails to bring relief,is often the next solution. Because it is possible to cast spellsor employ other forms of magic in secret, it can be used to get revengewithout being found out.
Contoh Law As A Tool Of Social Control Examples
The fact that anyone potentially can use itat any time to harm a neighbor makes the threat of witchcraft a usefultool for keeping people from committing crimes or taking advantage of eachother. The belief that witchcraft actually works and the fear that it might be used against you is oftenenough to prevent deviation from the social norms. Anothercommon method for dealing with crime within these societies is to shift theblame to people in other communities or even other societies. By accusing outsiders ratherthan a neighbor, the local community is not forced to deal with apotentially divisive conflict. This can be a safe way out of a tensesituation. Community unity is maintained.Legal ConcernsIn Large-scale SocietiesIn large-scale advanced agricultural andindustrial nations, social control is more difficult because theirpopulations are larger, more dense, and usually more diverse culturally,socially, and economically.
The entire population rarely shares the samenorms and those that are shared are not equally well internalized byeveryone.Subsequently, informal controls on behavior such as gossip and ostracism arenot as effective except within families and small, close-knit sub-groups. Laws have to become formalized and specialinstitutions are created to enforce them.
Typically, these are police,courts, lawyers, and jails. Property protecting laws are veryimportant in these large-scale societies.