1. What is the relationship or connection between reintregrative shaming and restorative justice?
This does not require APA formatting but will require citations and references in APA formatting.
2. Discuss the impact of state intervention of offenders and how the labeling theory is applied of the Lilly Text.
3. Is labeling theory even a theory? Defend your answer.
4. According to Lilly,(2011) Labeling theory's second major proposition is that state intervention through the justice system causes stable or career criminality. It's first response according to Lilly,(2011) had no effects making the perspective irrelevant as a theory of criminal behavior. What I take from reading is that a lot of the labeling theory is based on a bias. Someone thinking that certain factors make it more likely that someone will commit crime even after serving time. But as the reading goes on it talks about how state intervention can be a criminogenic risk factor- something that contributes the continuing or criminal behavior. I believe that any risk factor can lead to a life of crime but also how someone actually handles their choices of which road they will take.
5. Labeling theory's second major proposition in the criminal justice system is state intervention (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball, 2011, pg. 149). As many critics have found that often criminal delinquency starts for people far before they have a criminal history and are place in the criminal justice system, but rather it starts from where an individual grows up and their surroundings. It is said that the state intervention really has no effect on individuals at all, because no matter how the state intervenes or what they do, criminals are more so influenced by social forces than the state itself (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball, 2011, pg. 149). This basically means that labeling theory placed by state intervention has no way to change whether an individual becomes a criminal or not, it only is a reaction to criminal involvement. Labeling theory can really only work in cases where an individual has something to lose because of the label, if it is merely just a slap on the wrist and has no effect on their daily lives, then most likely that state intervention has no real outcome. Overall, I think that labeling theory controlled by the state, does not always have a real benefit. It does not stop an individual from becoming a criminal and it only stops the criminal in cases where they actually have something to lose by commiting the crime. If the criminal feels they have nothing to lose by participating in a certain crime, than labeling theory will not work.
6. Labeling Theory as all theories go are opinions. Someone's thoughts on why or how something affects things in life. Are theories tested yes and so are facts but it's the result of a fact that makes it a fact. Theories try to explain why a person acts a certain way or what effects the reasons why people choose to live a life of crime or a crime free life. Labeling theory is trying to find out whether a label makes a person more apt to become a criminal if labeled a criminal or if they will not become one based on that label.
7. I think it is very difficult to say whether labeling theory is a theory or not. Some people might argue that it is merely an observation. Though, isn't that the idea of the word theory anyways? Every theory is basically an observation that experts made and experimented on to either prove itself or not. I think we have to look at the facts of the labeling theory, it was repeatedly discussed how that by putting a label on an individual it may influence them on whether to keep committing crimes or not. This theory was tested many times and continuously it was shown that by labeling an individual as a criminal the likelihood of their recidivism was much higher than individuals with no label placed on them (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball, 2011, pgs. 150-151). Therefore, I believe the facts point to the labeling theory being a theory because experts made an observation, experimented on it, and proved the theory correct.