Sociology Essay: Impact of Death Penalty on Social Order and Crime

This essay examines the complex relationship between social order and capital punishment, primarily focusing on the lens of strain theory within the field of sociology. It investigates how societal pressures, such as lack of income and education, can drive individuals towards criminal behavior. The essay challenges the idea that the death penalty necessarily creates social order, drawing on various studies and theories. It delves into the arguments of different scholars, including those who discuss the role of social control, differential social learning, and the influence of personal experiences on views regarding social order. The essay also considers functionalist perspectives on deviance and the impact of capital punishment, offering a comprehensive analysis of the topic and concluding with the implications for social order and justice.

Running head: SOCIAL ORDER
SOCIAL ORDER
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1SOCIAL ORDER
Introduction
Strain theory in sociology proposal that pressure derived from social factor related to lack
of income or absence of quality education and drives individuals to commit crime. The major
claim of the paper is “Death penalty or capital punishment does not necessarily create social
order.”
Discussion
Majority of studies of general strain theory are sympathetic of a direct association
between strain and deviant behaviour and an indirect connection through unconstructive
emotions as well as coping factors related to self-efficacy, strong social linkages. Moore Jr
(2016) has shed light on significant, constructive connection between strain and delinquency
while regulating social control and disparity association variables. On the other hand, authors
have found support for the association between strain and deviant behaviour while maintaining
social control and differential social learning variables.
Keuschnigg and Wolbring (2015) have discussed why few individuals react to strain with
deviant behaviour and others do not. Keuschnigg and Wolbring (2015) argued that criminal
coping tends to occur when individuals show lack of competence as well as resources which
results to elevated possibility of deviant behaviour resulting to capital punishment or death
penalty. Moreover, as per Merton’s strain theory; people tend to experience strain or
apprehension thus consequently leads certain individuals of the society to incline towards deviant
or immoral behaviour instead of conforming towards moral or ethical purposes or engaging in
legal institutional means. Furthermore to strain theory, functionalists stress theories
concentrating on illegitimate opportunity structure in society. However, according to Nivette,

2SOCIAL ORDER
Eisner and Ribeaud (2017), it is highly subjective that when someone in a state receives capital
punishment, but an individual who commits an equivalent crime in another state is given a life
sentence. Moreover, according to Skarbek (2014), association between victimization and
criminal using strain theory’s explanations of steadiness and change in offense over the life
course. Drawing relevance to strain theory, Keuschnigg and Wolbring (2015) have explained that
personality traits associated to strain theory cause individuals to commit several crimes over a
existence and issues which result individuals to committed limited delinquency.
As per the views of Moore Jr (2016), influential viewpoints in deterrence have thus been
associated to significant level of apprehension regarding the vulnerability of social order as well
as of civilisation of the population. However, Keuschnigg and Wolbring (2015) have claimed
that it is unattainable to understand the extent to which personal experiences of crime and
violence tend to shape the perspectives of individuals regarding the need to support social order.
Drawing relevance to these evidences, Skarbek (2014) has claimed that functionalists argue that
deviance is practical for the society due to its contribution to the social order. Such a contribution
leads to explain ethical limitations and upholding social harmony as well as initiating social
change.
Conclusion
Hence to conclude, societies have enormous prudence regrading situations credible to
seek the death penalty and situations to settle for a plea bargain. However, in majority of the
times, individuals who can only pay for a nominal defence are selected for the death penalty.

3SOCIAL ORDER
References
Burke, R.H., 2017. An introduction to criminological theory. Willan.
Keuschnigg, M. and Wolbring, T., 2015. Disorder, social capital, and norm violation: Three field
experiments on the broken windows thesis. Rationality and Society, 27(1), pp.96-126.
Moore Jr, B., 2016. Injustice: The Social Bases of Obedience and Revolt: The Social Bases of
Obedience and Revolt. Routledge.
Nivette, A., Eisner, M. and Ribeaud, D., 2017. Developmental predictors of violent extremist
attitudes: A test of general strain theory. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 54(6),
pp.755-790.
Skarbek, D., 2014. The social order of the underworld: How prison gangs govern the American
penal system. Oxford University Press.