In an attempt to explain individual and social crime and delinquency, Edwin Sutherland developed a scheme consisting of nine propositions. This theory claims that through interaction with others we learn our own values and motives to commit or not commit criminal behavior. Rather than a biological or psychological defect of the person, proposition 1 explains how crime is a learn behavior. …show more content…
For example, the ‘popular’ group in high school may drink underage by stealing alcohol from their parents. All the kids in the ‘popular’ group, according to Sutherland’s theory, will be doing this due to differential association by order of the nine propositions. However, this does not account of the outcast kid that is only friends with other non-criminal kids, whom decides one night to steal alcohol from his parents and drink alone. His intimate group did not rationalize this decision with him, in fact, they oppose it. So, why did he do …show more content…
As a result the theory proposes, in short, that social crime is committed by communication and rationalization, within intimate groups, about whether or not breaking the law is favorable or unfavorable. The law is violated when it becomes more favorable to break the law than unfavorable. Using our examples from above we can easily tie this into primary deviance. The child that steals the chocolate may not have known the unfavorable consequences of what he/she was doing, but the favorable aspect of having chocolate to eat weighed heavier than not taking it. However, now that he/she knows the consequences or unfavorables she will never do it again. When the adolescent came home drunk it was because the favorable of finally becoming part of the cool crowd outweighed the consequences of him/her parents’ disapproval. Finally, the regular smoker only starts smoking because it is a peer group decision found favorable after weighing the favorables and unfavorables. This is also why they don't fall into secondary deviance, because it is not labeled as a