|
Abstract
|
Research using the routine activities perspective has relied on official crime statistics, victimization surveys, and demographic variables for data. Findings from this work indicates that the degree of exposure that individuals experience following certain lifestyle patterns increases property and personal crime victimization. A qualitative study of a delinquent street group reveals that the routine activities approach is insufficient in explaining how interactions escalate to violence. Instead it points to the need to expand the routine activities approach to include a choice component and integrate it with a subcultural approach. Subcultural norms influence actors' routine activities that, in turn, influence exposure to victimization and shape the behavioral choices available to members in response to victimization. Subcultures, routines, and choices also influence offending patterns. Subcultural values affect the choice of victims, and third parties appear to influence the "rules of the game," and the amount of violence that takes place. Third parties offer subcultural support for violence, serving as allies, and helping to instigate conflict at the same time as serving as capable guardians to reduce victimization.
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The intent of this article by Kennedy and Baron was to identify the theoretical approaches which best described how conflict styles mediated the exposure to high-risk situations, especially in the context of violent gangs.
METHODOLOGY:
The authors employed a non-experimental, qualitative design by examining a Subculture Theory to the escalation of street violence, which differed from the more common Routine Activities Theory. The routine activities approach proposed that degree of exposure, given certain lifestyle patterns, increased property and personal crime victimization. The subculture approach proposed that violent behaviors stemmed from subcultural normative systems which supported and encouraged violence. The authors examined a group of 35 punk rockers (21 males; 14 females), known for their violent behavior, in a mid-size city in Western Canada for 60 days. The punk rockers ranged in age from 14 to 29, with a mean age of 17. Entrance into the group was obtained by a researcher dressed in punk attire who approached five members and asked for their consent to observe and to interview them and their fellow gang members. Data was collected in three sites within the gang turf through unstructured interviews and observational field notes.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
The gang members were identified by the researcher as libertarian, as there was no single coherent ideology which bound them together. Most did not view the gang as violent, although the gang participated in an average of two violent episodes each week, and most argued that their violence emerged from unfortunate circumstances; the majority of members claimed they had not been involved in any violent activities prior to joining the gang. The researcher noted that during day-to-day activities, gang members were tolerant of a large amount of verbal harassment without responding violently, but when pushed to extremes they refused to be humiliated and retaliated to gain the upper hand. The explanation for this pattern seemed to be a combination of the subcultural norms theory and the routine activities theory, because their violence was due partly to their group norms and partly to the environmental circumstances. When gang members sought income through rolling (mugging), they targeted people who were lower status in the eyes of the gang members, implying that the choice of victim was guided by the subcultural norms of the group. They also sought members of other gangs as targets, again with the subcultural norms of their group as a guide. The presence of a third party, or more than one gang member, tended to increase violent responses to aggressive acts against them, because neither member wanted to be viewed as less than hard-core. Again, the author identified these patterns as a combination of subcultural norms theory and routine activities theory, because group norms were guiding behavior as well as environmental circumstances. Patterns of victimization among these members were also guided by a combination of these two theories, because third parties decreased the efforts to compromise when gang members were attacked, and because gang members usually became victims when they were alone or in dangerous circumstances. Group norms also influenced the consumption of drugs and alcohol, and even provided circumstances under which it was acceptable to engage in violence while under the influence (special concerts or parties). However, there were many times when intoxication in other settings did not lead to aggressive behavior. In sum, the author concluded that a routine activities theory with a choice component and a subcultural theory were complementary explanations of the gang's violent behavior. These theories tended to apply to most gang activities, though varying in degree of explanatory power depending upon the circumstances.
AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS:
Because routine activities theory and subcultural theory each lacked the power to provide a comprehensive description of conflict styles and high-risk situations, the author argued that the combination of these theories should be used more frequently as a tool of inquiry.
(CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
KW - Countries Other Than USA
KW - Canada
KW - Gang
KW - Adult Gang
KW - Adult Violence
KW - Adult Offender
KW - Juvenile Gang
KW - Juvenile Offender
KW - Juvenile Violence
KW - Subculture of Violence
KW - Gang Violence
KW - Group Violence
KW - Group Behavior
KW - Violence Causes
KW - Routine Activities |