代写 TAG标签
网站地图
返回首页

新西兰犯罪学作业:criminology

时间:2019-08-28 11:23来源:未知 作者:anne 点击:
本文试图解释社会过程的区别:学习理论和应变理论,以解决新西兰工作场所犯罪中的欺诈问题。
This article would like to explain the difference between social process: learning theory and strain theory to solve the issue of fraud in the respective of workplace crime in New Zealand . 
工作场所犯罪欺诈概念的定义是研究工作场所犯罪欺诈原因的逻辑起点,也是有效防止工作场所犯罪欺诈的前提(White、Haines和Asquith,2017)。在犯罪学意义上,有人将工作场所犯罪中的欺诈定义为“工作场所犯罪中的欺诈”,即“工作场所犯罪中的欺诈”是指为了社会越轨行为的私利而滥用公共权力,有人从刑法的角度对工作场所犯罪中的欺诈进行了定义,认为“工作场所犯罪中的欺诈”是指“工作场所犯罪中的欺诈”。AUD在工作场所犯罪是行为主体滥用公共权力或利用公共权力谋取私利,致使国家和人民利益遭受损失,并应依法受到刑事处罚的行为。“两种观点都有其合理性,但前者包括犯罪逻辑腐败的定义比后者更为广泛。基于前人对工作场所犯罪诈骗概念的合理界定,以及分析工作场所犯罪诈骗的社会原因的必要性,以下只是对工作场所犯罪诈骗类型的粗略划分。事实上,“没有刑法就没有犯罪”和“没有刑法就没有犯罪”,非刑法明确规定处罚行为不是犯罪,对犯罪原因的研究不能完全脱离法律规范。因此,工作场所犯罪中诈骗的定义应当在现行刑法的框架下进行。贪污贿赂罪的法律利益是清正廉洁的。这类犯罪的实施者往往受到贪婪、权力和金钱的交易以及公职人员的出卖的驱使。刑法规定了渎职罪,保护国家机关公共事务和人民信任的合法、公正、有效的执行。这些犯罪,无论是滥用职权、滥用职权、徇私舞弊,还是玩忽职守,都是利用公众权力,无视依法、公正、有效履行公务的职责,无视社会公共利益的行为。吃东西和人。因此,腐败犯罪应分为两类:腐败和贿赂以及新西兰的权力渎职。
The definition of the concept of fraud in workplace crime is the logical starting point to study the causes of fraud in workplace crime and the premise to effectively prevent fraud in workplace crime (White, Haines, & Asquith, 2017). In the sense of criminology, some people define fraud in workplace crime, that is, "' fraud in workplace crime 'refers to the abuse of public power for private interests of socially deviant behavior." Some people define fraud in workplace crime from the perspective of criminal law, holding that "fraud in workplace crime is the behavior subject's abuse or use public power for personal gain, resulting in the interests of the country and the people suffer losses, and should be subject to criminal punishment according to law." Both views have their plausibility, but the former includes criminological corruption and is more widely defined than the latter. Based on the "shoulder" that predecessors have made a reasonable definition of the concept of fraud in workplace crime, and the necessity of analyzing the social causes of fraud in workplace crime, the following is only a rough division of the types of fraud in workplace crime. In fact, "there is no crime without criminal law" and "there is no crime without criminal law." The non-criminal law explicitly stipulates that the behavior of punishment is not a crime, and the research on the cause of crime cannot be divorced entirely from legal norms. Therefore, the definition of fraud in workplace crime should be carried out in the context of the current criminal law. The legal interests of the crime of embezzlement and bribery are clean and incorruptible. The perpetrators of such crimes are often motivated by greed, the transaction of power and money, and the selling of their official duties. The criminal law stipulates the crime of malfeasance, which aims to protect the lawful, fair, effective execution of the public affairs of the state organs and the trust of the people. These crimes, whether abuse of position, abuse of power or abuse of power, malpractice for personal gain, or neglect of duty, are all ACTS of playing with the power of the public, ignoring the duties of performing official duties legally, justly and effectively, and ignoring the interests of the state and the people. Therefore, the crime of corruption should be divided into two types: venal corruption and bribery and power malfeasance in New Zealand.
 
According to the strain theory, when the actor cannot obtain social status and material wealth through legal means, he will be upset, angry and other nervous emotions, which will lead to the anomie state of the actor, so the criminal method is adopted to achieve his purpose (Lu et.,al, 2014). Sociologist Robert Merton takes anomie as the core concept to explain the causes of crime. In his article social structure and anomie, he discusses the anomie theory and develops his strain theory by Durkheim's anomie theory. Merton argues that many of an individual's desires are not necessarily "natural" but "culturally induced." Also, the culture of any society established some worthy goal, strive for and encourage every social member, in New Zealand's unique culture under the influence, get wealth is the most important goal of everyone, when social members can reach the goal by institutional means, won't produce strain  and deviant behavior, but not all people can get through legal means to obtain the material wealth, and thus lead to "institutional means being in a serious strain " (Mette et.,al, 2018). According to the differences between individual stress relief and social adaptation under stress, Merton is divided into five types, namely conformity, innovation, formalism, retreat, and rebellion. However, all five types of adaptation do not necessarily lead to criminal behavior. The theory of social learning holds that crime is the result of the actor's learning of the norms, values, and behaviors related to crime. The criminologist Edwin Sutherland has made significant contributions to the development of social process: learning theory. In his masterpiece the principles of criminology, he put forward the famous different contact theory, which takes different communication as the core to explain the causes of crime in New Zealand. The theory suggests that criminal behavior is learned through interaction with others in communication (McTernan, Dollard, & LaMontagne, 2013).The sources can be analyzed that:
 
  all sources are academic journals and books; 
 
  they are trustful and reliable.
 
The environment affects one's character and behavior. In the activity groups of different families, schools, professions, etc., people are 
 
  influenced by the group culture imperceptibly, and at the same time, they are also in the unconscious learning of others' behavior. 
 
  Individual behavior comes from imitation. 
 
  The theory of social learning focuses on the interaction between criminals and their friends, negates the heredity of criminal behavior, and emphasizes the external and social interaction and learning of crime. 
 
When a person is making a choice of behavior, if the subjective or internal explanation of agreeing with the violation of the law exceeds the explanation of opposing the violation of the law, then he will learn his illegal side by taking the offender as an example, and then step into the mire of the violation of the law, and even go to the road of no return to the crime. The strain theory pays more attention to the criminal's pursuit and the realization of the goal, as well as the individual's adaptation under strain. Social process: learning theory aims at explaining the influence of others on criminals and their learning of others' illegal behaviors (Spector, Yang, & Zhou, 2015). To separate the two cannot adequately analyze the social causes of fraud in workplace crime, but only to combine the two organically can adequately explain the social causes of fraud in workplace crime, and can fully explore the social causes of fraud in workplace crime from the individual of the criminal and the group he is in.
 
The strain theory and social process: learning theory respectively explains the social reason of crime from the Angle of the way of relieving the strain of the criminal and the influence of the group on the criminal individual (Smith, 2012). However, the two theories have their limitations in analyzing the social causes of fraud in workplace crime. Although both theories explain the causes of crime from objective and external perspectives, they focus on different aspects. The explanatory power of the strain theory or social process: learning theory alone is not convincing, nor can they independently explain the social causes of the occurrence of two types of fraud in workplace crimes without any sense of violation. Strain theory by revealing acquire wealth goals and achieve the goal of institutional means of strain, from the type itself objectively answered the criminal committed of the cause of the embezzlement and bribery, but difficult to explain "collapse" corrupt crime influence each other and study of the professional group, and its causes of type play politics of malfeasance of explanatory power also has limitations (Consiglio et.,al, 2013). So the theory "can address some of the transgressions that are called crimes or offenses, but not all of them."


推荐内容
  • 英国作业
  • 美国作业
  • 加拿大作业
  • 英国essay
  • 澳洲essay
  • 美国essay
  • 加拿大essay
  • MBA Essay
  • Essay格式范文
  • 澳洲代写assignment
  • 代写英国assignment
  • Assignment格式
  • 如何写assignment
  • case study
  • literature review
  • Research Proposal
  • Summary范文
  • Reference格式
  • presentation
  • report格式
  • PEST分析法
  • Admission Essay
  • Personal Statement
  • Motivation Letter
  • Application Letter
  • recommendation letter