saints and roughnecks
... Saints are higher social class then the Roughnecks. The economic structure is that the Saints have more money and can afford cars; the Roughnecks don’t have as much money and don’t have a car readily available for their use. The legal structure is that the Roughnecks are targeted more by the legal system than the Saints are. The educational structure is the high school in which the boys attend; the Saints receive better grades even though they don’t do as much work just because the teachers know that the can perform at an high level so they give them good grades. The conflict theory is used to show the conflict occurring in the article. One conflict that occurs is between the Roughnecks and the teachers. The roughnecks talk back to the teacher and the one threaten a teacher. Another one is between the Roughnecks and then community. The community sees the Roughnecks as trouble makers even though they do nothing more then the Saints. Another one is between the Roughnecks and the police. The conflict here is because the cops hassle the Roughnecks because they think the Roughnecks are always up to no good. One other conflict that occurs is between the Saints and the police. The conflict here is because the Saints drink and drive, then the vandalize things. 3. Author and his/her Methods of Study The author of this article is a well know writer by the name of William J. Chambliss. He is a Professor of sociology at The George Washington University in Washington D.C. He is the author and editor of over fifteen books in the field of sociology of law, criminology, and sociological theory including, “Law, Order and Power” (with Robert Seidman), “On The Take: From Petty Thieves to Presidents”, “Boxman: A Professional Thief’s Journey” (with Harry King), “Making Law” (with Marjorie Zatz) and “Exploring Criminology”. He is a past president of the American Society of Criminology (1989-1990) and the Society for the Study of Social Problems (1992-1993). He has received numerous awards including the Lifetime Achievement Award from then American Sociological Society’s Criminology Section and the Bruce Smith Sr. Award for Outstanding Contributions to Criminal Justice from the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences. He has served on the President’s Crime Commission and has been a consultant to the New Jersey State Supreme Court. He is currently a fellow of the American Society of Criminology. To conduct his research William J. Chambliss followed both groups, the Saints and the Roughnecks for two years. He observed their every move including the principal daily routine to escape from class, their violent lives on the streets and even found out the boys lives after school. Even on the weekends the two groups were heavily watched. He also observed how the two groups were treated by the school system, the community and the police. During his observations William J. Chambliss recorded what he saw and then later compared the similarities and differences between both groups’ action and the way the community reacted toward them. As you can see by the attachment I have included William J. Chambliss is very qualified to write an article on this subject. He has many publications on similar topics and is greatly accomplished in this field of study. 4. Focus on Readings The article is centered on how groups are labeled because of their class standings and how this label they receive affects them. Most of the sections are on the behavior of the Saints and the Roughnecks. The article keeps emphasizing the point that both the Saints and the Roughnecks participate in about the same amount mischief but they are looked and treated differently upon by the community, school, and police. The meat of the article is on the behavior of the two groups, the Saints and the Roughnecks. The last part then focuses the effects of this on the groups’ members later in life. 5. Conclusion The author concluded that differential treatment of the two gangs resulted in part because one gang was indefinitely more visible than the other. The Saints had access to automobiles and were able to remove themselves from the sight of the community. Lacking transportation, the Roughnecks were forced to meet in the center of town. This made them extremely visible to the community. The other reason for this treatment was the demeanor of the boys. The Saints were always polite to the teachers and police officers no matter what the situation was. As where, the Roughnecks would always talk back and make rude comments. The author concludes that the reason behind the differential of the jobs the boys have after school is because of reinforcement. The community saw the Roughnecks as boys in trouble, and they went along with that perception. Since the Roughnecks were seen as troublemakers they selected friends that went along with this self-image. As time went on this self-image became more entrenched in the Roughnecks lives that they were more likely to act this way. The more they acted this way the more the community agreed that they were trouble makers. On the other side, the Saints were seen as bright student and they were going to make something of their lives. The Saints did as many bad things as the Roughnecks did but the community saw the Saints as good boys, and the Saints believed this. The Saints believed their mischief was just a way to have fun and it wasn’t hurting anyone. The community also believed this. It was reinforced that they were bright students and they would make something of there life and go to college, and that’s what all but one of the boys did. 6. Review of Literature in the Text On page 146, William Chambliss says “When sanctions are imposed, the most severe sanctions will be imposed on the persons in the lowest social class.” In contrast to what William Chambliss said (Bernstein, Kelly, and Doyle) reply with “Some studies have found few or no links between the class level of criminal offenders and the sentences received or between unemployment and incarceration”, other studies have found the relationship to be substantial (Lizotte, 1978). On page 148 in our text the author is agreeing with Chambliss by saying that there were a number of factors which contribute to the differential treatment given to the two groups. This whole article and Chambliss’s conclusion all resolve around social stratification. Social Stratification is the structure ranking of individuals and groups; their grading into hierarchical layers or strata. Our text also explains the labeling theory on page 146, which can also relate to the article and author. Labeling theorists are interested in the process by which some individuals come to be tagged as “deviants,” begin to think of themselves as deviants. Second, labeling theorists point out that we all engage in deviate behavior by violating some norms. Labeling theorists call these actions primary deviance, which is behavior that violates social norms but usually goes unnoticed by agents...