General Sociology – Code of the Streets

In the article The Code of the Street by Elijah Anderson, he allows a glimpse of casual life through the eyes of two completely diametric worlds wrapped up within peerless universe. He comp bes course families to what he refers to as right on families. Although the meaning can take on different perceptions to the eye of the beholder, the author described it as a code of civility at one can of conduct regulated by the threat of violence.Within these most economically medicineged, criminal offense-related, and depressing neighborhoods, the rules of civil action discombobulate been severely weakened, and their stead of survival comen as this code of the street often holds m all their tell to survival. The book Essentials of sociology gives four different theories on why horror exists, they are the functionalist theory, the internationalist theory, conflict theory, and adjudge theory. The theory I believe best relates to Andersons article is the internationalist theory.The a uthor presented only two groups of spate which categorized their existence within the social contest among individuals and families of the neighborhood, the decent and the street. I thought that they were kind of ample terms and that maybe they shouldnt necessarily be categorized but they should be more than than of a description of people. Because there can be many decent people and they can still know the street. The internationalist theory fundamentalally implies that crime is learn from the things you observe in life and your fundamental interactions with people nigh you.The first place Anderson says people in impoverished areas learn crime is at a small era from the family. Children are always influence by their parents and Anderson says those street oriented adults with whom children come in conflict with including mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, boyfriends, cousins, neighbors, and friends-help them in forming this understanding by verbalizing the messages they are getting through experience watch your back. Protect yourself. get intot punk out. If individual messes with you got to pay them back. If someone dishes you got to straighten them out. many parents truly impose sanctions if a child is not sufficiently competitive. This shows that children can even be punished for not being aggressive enough, so they will have a tendency to be more violent and commit more crime Street families are overwhelmed with the demands of parenting which means kids to have to be able to take care of themselves more which leads to a dependence on the code of the streets and Anderson says families, who are more fully invested in the code of the streets than the decent people are, may aggressively socialize their children into it.This means children are taught to be aggressive from a little age so they can better take care of themselves and survive in their environment. Another cause Anderson gives of children growing up around violence in execrabl eer areas is many parents have financial problems caused by drug use which causes more violence and exposes the child to more crime. Another place Anderson says children are exposed to crime is in the streets. He says, Realities of inner city life are largely absorbed on the streets. sensation reason Anderson says children gravitate towards being in the streets is a lack of supervision at home or a home environment not fit for children. He notes that the children who hang out in the street are allowed to rip and run up and down the street which shows that from a young age these children are being taught they can do anything they want, and in poorer areas it only takes a matter of time before they stand out getting involved in crime.Also many kids may not be looking to commit any crimes but because they hang-out in the street they are perceived as criminals, and the eventually except the label and actually start committing crime. This concept is known as the labeling theory. It show s that it is not the act of being in the street that causes crime it is the way people react to people being in the streets that cause them to commit crimes. Another construction of life children in poorer areas observe and emulate is respect and reputation.When you dont have many carnal possession ones reputation is seen as all that one has. Anderson talks about how from a young age that a child to maintain his honor he must show he is not someone to be messed with or diced the article also talks about how in urban societies it is a basic requirement to show a certain disposition to violence meaning in order to take for up with you reputation you must show that you can be violent and commit crime, and if this is the way the mass of people living in these areas think there is no wonder there is so overmuch crime.The last reason Anderson gives that I believe gives children the impression they must commit crimes if they live in poor areas is the areas they live in themselves. Th ey are poorer areas so living is already a struggle, and kids see that crime is an clear way to get a lot for a little they can rob someone in two seconds and have money to eat with. An example Anderson gives of this state of mind is a boy have on a fashionable, expensive jacket, for example is vulnerable to attack by another who covets the jacket, and either cant afford to buy one or wants the added satisfaction of depriving someone else.Anderson also mentions how sometimes in these neighborhoods jurisprudence wont even show p and when kids see that there neighborhood is too flagitious for police it is easier to say I will become a part of it instead of becoming a victim. In conclusion I believe that the internationalist theory best describes Andersons article The Code of the Streets and alike it says in the book deviance is learned through interaction with others. Crime in particular is learned through experiences growing up at home, hanging out in the streets, trying to gain reputation, and experiences and interaction with where you live and the community you live in.