Criminology Theory Application: Millers Vs. Howard

Introduction

The criminal justice system is a vital social, economic and political issue in the US. A considerable portion of the US budget is channeled towards enhancing the criminal justice system. There is also a rich relationship between the study of crime and variables that results in occurrence. The recent story and video published in the Washington Post of John and Michael Miller shooting Mr. Howard after an altercation caused by disposing of a mattress can be interpreted and understood based on the lens of social theories of criminology. This paper clarifies the actions of the Millers, Howard, Mrs. Box and Abilene Police using self- control, social learning, rational choice and conflict theory of criminology. The theories of criminology help shape the response to crime by analyzing propensity through motivators, physical evidence and the relationships between victim and offender.

Low Self-Control Theory

Communities are disorganized if they lack the appropriate education and control over the suppression of lawlessness. As a result, the maintenance of cohesive values becomes impossible as there is no conformity to the law (Hawdon & Ryan, 2009). Taking the case of Howard and the Millers, there is no organization which has implemented and encouraged residents to utilize conflict management mechanisms for basic matters such as waste disposal. Also, Hawdon and Ryan, (2009), establishes that the friends and family both formal and informal are the guides towards stopping violence and crimes within neighborhoods as they offer vital value sentiments, esteem and social support which is a precursor to basic social control and social order.

Both the Millers and Howard depicts various traits that show their lack of self-control. Self-control is the central aspect that discriminates the Millers and Howard and further detaches them from being law-abiding citizens. The non-verbal body language of the Millers highlights their shortsightedness resort to violence. Their insensitivity is also seen when they pull out guns in front of children - an act that further aggravates Mr. Howard. Mr. Howard keeps threatening the Milers, "I promise you, you're both dead. . . . I'm gonna kill you" (Thebault, 2018). Such threats show his impulsivity and risk-seeking behavior. The low level of self-control prevents him from considering his actions and how they will leave him vulnerable to the Millers who have deadly weapons. Both the Millers and Howard family could have preferred a much complex problem-solving solution rather than the obvious one which is to fight. The physicality of engaging in the violent exchange of words is what results in the shooting. If both parties were diligent and with self-control, then they could have managed to check their tempers and resort to amicable non-violent conflict resolution. The residents of the area could have also banded together and helped in averting such crimes committed in the neighborhood by acting as mediators through social support and conflict resolution systems.

Rational Choice of Theory

In their analysis of the support of Bayesian learning model of apparent risk formation, Matsueda, Kreager and Huizinga, (2006), associate criminal behavior with deterrence based on perceived arrest risk and punishment at both individual and institutional levels. According to the individual model of rational action, the Millers fail to consider the perceived of the crime (Matsueda, Kreager & Huizinga, 2006). John Miller fails to take into consideration the financial, social and legal implications the offense will have to both his family and Mr. Howard's. His son on the other hand also does not consider the structural opportunity costs he is facing at a young age. The possibility of spending his entire adulthood in prison is not taken into consideration considering Mr. Howard was not a direct threat to him. The objective opportunity of the crime is also perceived. The Millers believe Mr. Howards is violating their right to property. They are standing their ground and motivated to commit the crime as Howard forms a suitable target by provoking them (Matsueda, Kreager & Huizinga, 2006). Mrs. Kara Box also fails to offer guidance to Mr. Howard who continues to threaten the Millers. However, the crime involving the two men supports Matsueda, Kreager and Huizinga's (2006) that male impulsivity is a precursor to violent behaviors.

Regarding rational institutional choices, Abilene Police arresting the Millers for the second time after release and increasing their bail shows a shift from judicial to legislative and as a result punishment for the crime is subject to politics as the police clamor to be seen tough on the offense (Matsueda, Kreager & Huizinga, 2006). Despite increasing cases if gun violence and advocacy for gun control, administrators in Abilene seem to interpret and soften the law to fit particular circumstances. Therefore, there is a need for more effective intervention policies as the reason for increasing the bail of the Millers is based on fear of public outcry and political ideology rather than empirically based punitive reasoning.

Conflict Theory

According to the conflict theory the modeling of the society is based on competing interests that strive for dominance to enact social structures that possess individual benefits (Petrocelli, Piquero & Smith, 2003). Economic stratification is seen as a critical factor in identifying and controlling groups considered threatening and volatile by the dominant group (Petrocelli, Piquero & Smith, 2003). The cost implications of disposing of a box spring mattress between shared by Howard and Miller's plot is the main reason for the altercation.

The dominant groups are responsible for labeling the dangerous who are usually the minority threatening (Petrocelli, Piquero & Smith, 2003). The Millers become a threat to the interests of the criminal justice group in Abilene after the release of the video. Therefore, the second arrest is enforcement made by the society after the Millers being labeled as dangerous by the media. The arrest can be correctly referred to as a matter of protecting the interests of particular groups rather than upholding the law. Thus the process of law enforcement, in this case, is based on substituting of conventional norms and goals of policies in a manner that maximizes the organization's rewards and minimizes their strain.

Social Learning Theory

The theory is based on the learning of social norms as guided by the balance between various variables that favor certain deviant behaviors. These variables are identified as a differential association, reinforcement, definitions and modeling (Chappell & Piquero, 2004). The differential association is the key factors justifying the transmission of a subculture of crime (Chappell & Piquero, 2004). The beliefs, practices, values, and definitions of acceptable behavior are shared through peer influence. In the case of the Millers, peer influence moves beyond same age group to incorporate his parent whom he associates with frequently. The deviance from crime by Michael Miller of is justified by his father's actions of using unnecessary force (unjustified killing) as a way of subduing Aaron Howard. Michael follows the model provided by the father. Definitions are one's beliefs and attitudes that make them warrant an act to be good or bad (Chappell & Piquero, 2004). The definition of excessive force by the Millers is not significantly associated with what is rationally considered to be an extra force. The Millers continue to shoot Howard after being rendered harmless the first two shots. The Millers, therefore, recognize that there is a need for one to utilize as much force as possible if violated.

Reinforcement is the anticipated punishment or reward of an individual's actions (Chappell & Piquero, 2004). Both the Millers and Howard show different types of reinforcement. Differential reinforcement is depicted by Michael's need for approval and seems to seek the support of his father through continued association. His attitude and definitions of what is wrong and right are therefore learned through association with the father. Mr. Howard also considers that throwing the mattress in the alley is a minor violation that should not attract consequences such as pulling out a gun by the Millers. The society needs to recognize that attitudes that accompany crimes are continually being nurtured by the salient subculture reinforced by family members and close acquaintances. Efforts to override such attitudes and definitions are crucial to preventing senseless crimes such as the shooting of Mr. Howard by the Millers.

The Undeniable Video Evidence

The central park film features the five youth of Latino and black origin who were convicted for raping of the jogger at central park. The confessions of the alleged criminals were the ironclad proof of their guilt (Burns, 2012). However, during a conversation with a fellow inmate (Korey Wise) the five are found not-guilty as Wise DNA evidence, and confession id found consistent with the crime. The main lesson relating to the case of Millers and Howard is that videotapes are undeniable evidence in most cases and the police in their efforts to get the bad guy they tend to stick to the most plausible series of events.

Common sense in the criminal justice system should not be the guide sole criminal convictions. Common sense supported with factual evidence should form the fundamental basis of the prosecution for the murder of Mr. Howard. The Miller's mental health records and the possibility of substance use should be examined in addition to their criminal history to determine whether they were in their right mind when bringing guns to the confrontation with Mr. Howard. Mr. Howard's incriminating threats to the Millers should not be the critical justification for being shot. The police should also investigate verbal threats by the Millers which are not captured by the recording.

Conclusion

Self-control, social learning, rational choice and conflict theories of criminology helps shape the response to crime by analyzing propensity through motivators, physical evidence and the relationships between victim and offender. The lack of self-control coupled by irrational thing are the main factors that guided the actions of both the Millers and Howard. Michael Miller applies involvement in the crime is seen as an act motivated by social learning variables reinforced by the relationship with his father. Also, the uncertainty in determining the punishment of the Millers by Abilene police shows the role played by conflicting interests groups. The public and media play the role of a dominant group whose interests are adhered after the release of the "compelling" video evidence. Punishment is therefore painted as a political rather than a rational judicial choice.

References

Burns, K., (2012). The Central Park Five. IMDb. Retrieved from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2380247/ [Accessed 29th November 2018]

Chappell, A. T., & Piquero, A. R. (2004). Applying social learning theory to police misconduct. Deviant Behavior, 25(2), 89-108.

Hawdon, J., & Ryan, J. (2009). Social capital, social control, and changes in victimization rates. Crime & delinquency, 55(4), 526-549.

Matsueda, R. L., Kreager, D. A., & Huizinga, D. (2006). Deterring delinquents: A rational choice model of theft and violence. American sociological review, 71(1), 95-122.

Petrocelli, M., Piquero, A. R., & Smith, M. R. (2003). Conflict theory and racial profiling: An empirical analysis of police traffic stop data. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31(1), 1-11.

Thebault, R. (2018). Men who allegedly shot neighbor in mattress dispute arrested - again - after video surfaces. Th...