“Crime” is not a phenomenon that can be defined according to any objective set of criteria. Instead, what a particular state, legal regime, ruling class or collection of dominant social forces defines as “crime” in any specific society or historical period will reflect the political, economic and cultural interests of such forces. By extension, the interests of competing political, economic or cultural forces will be relegated to the status of “crime” and subject to repression,persecution and attempted subjugation. Those activities of an economic, cultural or martial nature that are categorized as “crime” by a particular system of power and subjugation will be those which advance the interests of the subjugated and undermine the interests of dominant forces. Conventional theories of criminology typically regard crime as the product of either “moral” failing on the part of persons labeled as “criminal,” genetic or biological predispositions towards criminality possessed by such persons, “social injustice” or“abuse” to which the criminal has previously been subjected, or some combination of these. (Agnew and Cullen, 2006) All of these theories for the most part regard the “criminal as deviant” perspective offered by established interests as inherently legitimate, though they may differ in their assessments concerning the matter of how such “deviants” should be handled. The principal weakness of such theories is their failure to differentiate the problem of anti-social or predatory individual behavior<span> per se</span><span> from the matter of “crime” as a political, legal, economic and cultural construct. All human groups, from organized religions to outlaw motorcycle clubs, typically maintain norms that disallow random or unprovoked aggression by individuals against other individuals within the group, and a system of penalties for violating group norms. Even states that have practiced genocide or aggressive war have simultaneously maintained legal prohibitions against “common” crimes. Clearly, this discredits the common view of the state’s apparatus of repression and control (so-called “criminal justice systems”) as having the protection of the lives, safety and property of innocents as its primary purpose.</span>
I can help!!!! Comment on my recent question “HERE YOU GO”
BECAUSE WE'RE AWESOME
but no seriously I couple were because the land was good for farming and there were lots of wildlife hunting and middle of the map and good arctecture
Answer:
Explanation:
An accident is an unfortunate incident you can get into. for example, in an accident between a truck and a car is unexpected and can cause harm to the person involved and in risky behaviors there’s always a chance To get caught in the accident.
The environment often reflects or reinforces genetic differences; that is, certain genetic and environmental influences tend to act in the same direction. This tendency is called Genotype-environment correlation.
<h3>
Genotype-environment correlation</h3>
- When a person chooses surroundings based on traits that are impacted by genetics, genetic-environment correlation arises. For instance, highly intelligent students may choose classes that are harder, which broadens their knowledge even more.
- Research on environmental risk and protective factors has significant challenges because of the gene-environment interaction. Numerous studies in the social sciences have demonstrated that different surroundings are related to psychological characteristics, i.e., that exposure to a particular environment element is related to a particular behavior.
- These connections, however, do not imply that being exposed to that environment truly causes the feature. Every statistics curriculum in the social sciences teaches the fundamental principle that correlation does not inevitably imply causation.
To learn more about gene-environment interaction refer to:
brainly.com/question/14443482
#SPJ4
