chapter 6
karinab123
Test5chapter6.pdf
Instead of looking to biological predispositions or psychological abnormalities to
explain negative behavior, some criminologists employ a more sociological approach.
In contrast to biological and psychological explanations for crime, these criminologists
focus on factors outside of individuals to explain criminal behavior. They begin with
the premise or assumption that our environment or social milieu influences our
actions. Societies are structured differently and cultures vary. As a result, crime rates
vary by place and over time. Moreover, there are patterns to criminal offending.
Different groups within a society have different rates of criminal offending and victim-
ization. Men are more likely than women to be both offenders and victims of homi-
cide throughout the world. Within the United States, southerners have higher rates of
homicide than northeasterners. African Americans and poor people are overrepre-
sented as both homicide offenders and homicide victims. Criminologists who tackle
the issue of homicide from a social or cultural perspective seek to explain these patterns
through studying correlates of homicide at an aggregate level or by investigating the
social histories of individual offenders and the context of criminal homicides.
This chapter includes a variety of criminological perspectives as they pertain to
explanations of homicide. Although this chapter focuses on cultural and social expla-
nations for homicide, the eighteenth-century classical school perspective as well as
deterrence theory are also included. These theories are in this chapter because they
are predecessors to more sociocultural views of crime and to the history of criminol-
ogy. In addition to the classical school perspective and deterrence theory, social
disorganization, differential association theory, social control theory, a general the-
ory of crime, and neutralization theory are also covered in this chapter. These theo-
ries were developed to explain juvenile delinquency or criminal behavior generally
rather than homicide specifically. Even so, these theories may be or have been used to
explain homicide offending or particular types of homicide offending.
83
Chapter 6
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL
EXPLANATIONS FOR
HOMICIDE
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 83
REVISED
84 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
Criminologists have also proposed theories or explanations to account for the
homicide patterns just discussed, such as the higher rates of homicide in the South.
In this chapter, only brief reviews of two of these theories are included because they
are explained more fully later in the text. The culture of violence and culture of
honor explanations for homicide help explain confrontational homicide, and as
such, these theories are expounded on more greatly in Chapter 7. However, other
explanations postulated to explain homicide patterns, including lifestyle and routine
activities theory, feminist perspectives on violence and masculinity, and sociological
perspectives on social stratification are included in this chapter. Finally, this chapter
explores what is known about the role of alcohol and drug use in homicidal behavior.
Note that as you read this chapter, what you are reading are overviews of each of the
theories and perspectives included, which ideally will serve as a simple refresher of
theories you learned in your criminology theory course. For those readers who are
not criminology majors, you may want to seek out more detailed examinations of
some of these theories.
CLASSICAL SCHOOL PERSPECTIVE
Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794) is usually considered the father of what is known as
the “classical perspective on criminology.” In setting forth his ideas for reform in the
Italian court system during the Enlightenment, Beccaria (1764/1986) argued that
people are rational and hedonistic and that they possess free will. In other words, he
believed that individuals make decisions about how they act. According to Beccaria,
individuals weigh the costs and benefits of potential actions including criminal
actions.
To joke around a bit, let’s say you are studying diligently for your psychology
midterm. As you are desperately trying to memorize what the hippocampus does, it
occurs to you that you see your psychology professor every morning as you drive to
school and if you ran over him, you would not have to take your exam. According
to the ideas of Beccaria, you are rational. Thus you are capable of exercising logic, so
you consider the consequences of running over your professor. Also according to
Beccaria, you are hedonistic. You are motivated by your desire for pleasure and you
attempt to avoid pain. Finally, you have free will—you can determine your own
actions. There is not some greater force or something in your genes or the chemicals
in your brain that leads you to act. You determine what you will do. So you decide
you will keep studying because although the psychology exam may be painful, the
pain you may experience if you kill your psychology professor will be far greater than
the pain of the exam. Furthermore, if you study, you may actually do well, and then
you will have the pleasure of telling your parents that you earned an A on your
psychology exam. For you, the costs of not studying or, even worse, killing your pro-
fessor is much greater than the pain you will experience from your parents’ disap-
pointment and the “strong arm of the law.”
It is no surprise that many U.S. students find Beccaria’s theory particularly
appealing. In the United States, individualism is valued, and we often explain behavior
in everyday situations at the individual level. Not surprising, then, criminologists
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 84
REVISED
Social Disorganization 85
today still find the premise of Beccaria’s explanation for human behavior attractive, as
seen in rational choice theory (Rasche, 1996). Rational choice theory also assumes that
people are rational and they consider the risks involved in their actions before acting.
Taking this a step further, however, rational choice theory, strongly associated with
deterrence theory, posits that laws may have a deterrent effect on human behavior
(Barkan, 1997). In other words, if the criminal justice system is set up in such a way
that a person who violates a law is likely to be caught and punished, people will be less
likely to commit crimes. After all, in their rational calculations they will decide that the
punishment for a certain behavior is not worth doing the behavior. We see this logic
reflected in some arguments for the death penalty, as discussed in Chapter 17.
SOCIAL DISORGANIZATION
Although not totally opposed to the idea of individual choice, social disorganization
theorists introduced the ideas that crime is more complicated than individuals mak-
ing choices. Taking a more sociological approach, early social disorganization theo-
rists at the University of Chicago realized that crime was more prevalent in urban
areas. Instead of assuming that something about the people who occupied the more
crime-prone areas led them to commit crimes, social disorganization theories look to
the structural causes for explaining crime. Studying crime in inner-city Chicago, in
particular, Shaw and McKay (1942) found that regardless of who lived in what they
called the “transitional zone” of the city; this zone had higher delinquency and crime
rates. Shaw and McKay studied the city of Chicago over time and were able to see
significant change in the population of the transitional zone. Importantly, they found
that regardless of whether those who lived in the zone were of English, German, Irish,
or African descent, this zone had the most delinquency. As a result, Shaw and McKay
concluded it was not the people so much as the structural conditions of the area in
which they lived that led to criminal behavior.
Shaw and McKay (1942) found that the transitional zone with the high crime
rate had worse housing conditions than other areas. There were also higher rates of
poverty and fewer intact families and less of a sense of community in the transitional
zone than in other areas. They theorized that the zone was disorganized, leading to
unclear norms and a lack of structure that helped keep individuals in line. Shaw and
McKay’s work was criticized for relying on official data because they are likely to be
biased. If you think about this critique, it is quite logical. Police may look for crime
more frequently in inner-city urban areas, and thus the rates will be higher there.
Social disorganization theory was also criticized for failing to explain the fact that not
everyone who lives in disorganized areas commits crimes, whereas some who live in
nondisorganized areas do (Barkan, 1997).
Still, findings of recent homicide studies appear to support the basic ideas of
social disorganization theory. For example, Krivo and Peterson (2000) find that
greater economic disadvantage and low home ownership rates are correlated with
higher homicide rates in 124 U.S. cities. Although Krivo and Peterson note that these
factors operate somewhat differently for African American and white homicide rates
because of the extreme economic disadvantage experienced by many African
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 85
REVISED
86 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
BOX 6.1
Stress or Training?: Explaining Murder by Military Men
In the summer of 2002, four military men stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, killed their wives within a six-week period. The press who picked up on this story began to question whether the stress of combat was con- tributing to what appeared to be a rash of intimate partner homicide by soldiers. Three of the four soldiers had served in Afghanistan. However, according to news reports, officials at Fort Bragg indicated there was no “common thread among the cases” (Starr, 2002). Two of the soldiers allegedly shot their wives, another allegedly stabbed his wife, and the fourth strangled his wife. The military was considering ways to help those in the military deal with stress, and much of the talk around these cases dealt with the possible stress the soldiers faced as active duty soldiers (Starr, 2002). Stress is a likely culprit—at least a contributor. However, if we were to observe these cases through the lens of differential association, we might also conclude that something about the way these men are trained or about their learning in the military leads them to solve conflicts through violence. Still other theories might explain the pattern noted in the summer of 2002 as well as other data that suggest domestic violence is a problem for military families. Think about what other theories may explain domestic violence and intimate partner homicide by military men.
Americans in the United States, their research still indicates the importance of
structural factors for explaining homicide rates. Moreover, Krivo and Peterson are
building on a rich tradition of homicide research that finds correlations between
structural factors and homicide rates (e.g., Blau & Blau, 1982; Sampson, 1987;
Shihadeh & Steffensmeier, 1994; Williams, 1984).
DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION THEORY
Like social disorganization theory, Edwin Sutherland’s differential association theory
stands in sharp contrast to biological and psychological theories of crime. Influenced
by social disorganization theory, Sutherland also set out to explain why crime
was more common in poor areas (Barkan, 1997). However, Sutherland’s theory
(Sutherland & Cressey, 2006) could explain why not all people who lived in the inner
city committed crimes and why some who did not live in high crime areas still did
crime. Sutherland argued that crime is like everything else that humans do: We learn
to do it. Basically, we learn how to commit crime and why we would want to commit
crime from intimate others. Through family and peers we are exposed to ideas
about laws. We learn that laws, or certain laws, should be followed and other laws are
unimportant.
Differential association appears to explain some homicide better than other
types. Gang killings, for example, are likely learned. Within the context of a gang, one
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 86
REVISED
Social Control Theories 87
SOCIAL CONTROL THEORIES
Social control theorists make an assumption that is radically different from the theo-
rists discussed so far who think we must explain why people violate norms. Social con-
trol theorists assume people will commit crimes if left to their own devices, so to
speak. Basically, social control theorists argue that something must exist to prevent
people from doing crime. It may be a little farfetched—but maybe not—to think we
would all commit homicide if something did not prevent us. It is likely you have heard
someone express the sentiment that they were “mad enough to kill” or perhaps, even
you have said, “I could kill him” or “her” or “my mother”—you get the picture.
So, what is it, according to social control theorists, that prevents us from com-
mitting crime? Well, it is our connection to conventional others. Durkheim
(1893/1997), who you have probably heard about in your theory course, may have
been one of the first control theorists, and his concept of anomie is very relevant
here. According to Durkheim’s theory of anomie, with industrialization and the
increasing complexity and size of society, more deviance would be likely because
family and community ties would be weaker and thus individuals would have less to
lose if they did not conform. They would be less likely to have what Toby (1957)
called a stake in conformity. Thus we would see more crime when people are less con-
nected. In other words, you or I may be more likely to violate norms if we having
nothing to lose by doing so. If we are not afraid of losing a job or of losing our stand-
ing in society, we might more seriously consider stealing or killing.
At a very basic level, this theory seems to make some sense for homicide. Where is
homicide highest? Within the United States and other Western societies, homicides
rates are highest in urban areas. According to Durkheim’s ideas about anomie, we
would expect more homicide in urban areas where people are believed to be less con-
nected to other people. In smaller towns and rural areas, we may expect that individu-
als would be more likely to know others and may even be related to other people.
Following Durkheim’s ideas, then, it would make sense that there would be less law vio-
lation in nonurban areas, which is what we find: Homicide rates are lower in rural areas.
Travis Hirschi is the criminologist most associated with control theory. Hirschi
(1969) proposed what is commonly referred to as social bond theory in his 1969
book Causes of Delinquency. According to social bond theory, the more we are
learns the value of violence and homicide for protecting one’s territory or settling a
score. There are many examples to be found of homicides that are the result of a gang
initiation, which supports the idea that youth are learning to commit homicides
from other youth. Take the tragic case that occurred in the Montbello High School
cafeteria in January 2005. Seventeen-year-old Contrell Townsend died as the result of
a fight. Townsend allegedly attacked 16-year-old Marcus Richardson as part of a gang
initiation rite; however, Townsend ended up dead and Richardson was charged with
second-degree murder (Pandratz, 2005). Also, as discussed in other chapters, studies
of children who have killed, men and women who have killed their intimate partners,
and even serial killers have found that exposure to violence during their childhood is
common. This does not prove differential association theory, but it gives some
credence to the idea that we learn violence.
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 87
REVISED
88 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
connected to conventional others in society, the less likely we will commit delinquent
acts. Furthermore, our bonds to society are formed through our socialization—
especially socialization by parents and teachers. Hirschi, whose theory may be
expanded to explain crimes as well as delinquency, explained that four major bonds
connect individuals to society. The first bond of attachment reflects how close you are
to conventional individuals. Involvement, the second bond, refers to how much time
you spend doing legitimate activities. Commitment is like Toby’s idea of stake in con-
formity. It is a measure of how dedicated you are to accomplishing your goals by
following legitimate routes. In other words, are you willing to work hard in school
and at a job? Finally, if you have a strong belief, you think the laws and norms of
society make sense and should be upheld.
If any of these bonds are weak, delinquency or crime is likely. When these bonds
are strong, violation of laws is less likely. Even though Hirschi (1969) proposed this
theory to explain delinquency, social bond theory can be and has been used to
explain all types of norm violation including crime. Using social bond theory to
explain homicide, we would expect that individuals who are not bonded to others
would be most likely to commit homicide. This certainly would work to explain
some murders, and if you think about it, you have probably seen applications of this
theory or ideas related to this theory.
When we know someone has committed murder, we look to their past. Was the
person abused as a child? Is he or she a loner? If the answer to either of these ques-
tions is yes, we are less surprised than if the answer is no. When a murderer is married
and has a good job, we are shocked. We look for something to explain the behavior.
In these cases, we are using logic similar to the social bond theory. We expect that
people who are doing well in society, who have something to lose by killing another,
are less likely to kill. Sometimes this theory works, and sometimes it does not. Dennis
Rader, the BTK killer, had a job and was connected to his church community, but he
still killed. It seems he killed despite what appeared to be strong bonds from the out-
side. In contrast, Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber, had separated himself from
others in society, and it would appear he had weak social bonds and thus his behav-
ior would be more understandable from a social bond perspective.
A GENERAL THEORY OF CRIME
About 20 years after he postulated social bond theory, Travis Hirschi joined forces
with Michael Gottfredson (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990) to propose the idea that it is
a combination of low self-control and opportunity that leads to criminal behavior.
Low self-control, according to Gottfredson and Hirschi, is the result of poor or absent
parenting. With poor parenting, children do not learn to set goals and work for what
they want, and they never learn to control their temper. As a result, they are impulsive
and act without much thought as to how it will affect others. In terms of our focus on
homicide in this text, Hirschi and Gottfredson’s theory could explain spur-of-the-
moment murders, but as with most theories, it may not explain all homicide. For
example, a passion murder in which a man kills his wife for being in bed with another
man could be explained with a general theory of crime. Likewise, we could use a
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 88
REVISED
Neutralization Theory 89
Technique Corresponding Quote
Denial of Responsibility: “It is not my fault”
Denial of Injury “No harm is done”
Denial of a Victim “They deserved it”
Condemnation of the Condemners “They do it too or do worse”
Appeal to Higher Loyalties “I had to do it for my family/wife/brothers”
general theory of crime to explain a killing by a young man who kills on the spur of
the moment when a cashier does not hand over the cash during a robbery. A very care-
fully planned homicide in which a woman poisons her husband over time for the
insurance money is more difficult to explain with the general theory of crime.
NEUTRALIZATION THEORY
Sykes and Matza (1957) originally proposed neutralization or drift theory to explain
juvenile delinquency. When interviewing delinquent youths, Sykes and Matza found
that the youths understood and knew the rules. In other words, they were not “all
bad,” but instead they drifted into and out of delinquent behavior. Sykes and Matza
explained that the youth and others who partake in illegal or deviant behavior
learned how to explain their situations in such a way that the delinquent or illegal act
was justified. These explanations are called techniques of neutralizations.
Note that, according to Sykes and Matza, the transgressor employs these tech-
niques of neutralization before the person violates the rules. Further, there are five
typical techniques. The techniques are noted in the left column here, and in the right
column is a quote that reflects the corresponding technique.
To commit a delinquent act, Sykes and Matza explained that an individual would
only have to employ one of the techniques of neutralization.
When I teach this theory in my course on social deviance, students do quite
well in explaining how this theory may work for committing homicide. For exam-
ple, using the denial of responsibility technique, a young woman may decide to kill
her stepfather because he has abused her and her younger sister. She might think it
is not her fault but his. He has essentially asked for his own death. A serial killer
who seeks out prostitutes to kill may believe he is not causing any harm. In fact, he
may believe he is making society better. He would be using the denial of injury.
Those who commit hate crime murders may employ the denial of victim tech-
nique. They may kill others who they believe deserve to be killed, and thus they do
not see the victim as a victim. A terrorist who kills may use the condemnation of
condemner technique to commit murder. Terrorists may believe a government has
done what they believe to be horrible acts, and thus they kill citizens of that partic-
ular country. The terrorists are acting under the belief that those who will con-
demn them (the leaders of the country whose citizens they have attacked) are no
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 89
REVISED
90 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
BOX 6.2
College Students Kill Their Professors
In this chapter, I jokingly use an example in which you might consider murdering your professor. This is certainly no laughing matter to faculty colleagues, students, friends, and families of professors who were mur- dered by their students. Although a student killing his or her professor is more infrequent than high school and middle school students killing their teachers, it appears that graduate students are more likely to kill their professors than undergraduates. An article in the Detroit Free Press in 1998 relayed three incidents in which graduate students killed at least one professor:
■ A student who received a failing grade on his master’s thesis killed the three professors who served on his committee at San Diego State in 1996.
■ A postdoctoral student at the University of Iowa who was angry about not winning a dissertation award shot three of his professors and two other people in 1991.
■ Wlodzimierz Dedecjus, who was a graduate student at Wayne State University, killed Dr. Andrzej Olbrot, his doctoral adviser, in 1998. Dedecjus had done poorly in an independent study course he took with Olbrot.
better and in all likelihood worse than the terrorists themselves. Finally, the appeal
to higher loyalty technique may be used by someone who kills someone who has
hurt a member of his or her family. A gang member who kills to protect the gang’s
turf may be using the appeal to higher loyalty technique as well. I have included
just one or two examples for each technique. See if you can imagine other examples
for each technique.
MURDER AS RIGHTEOUS SLAUGHTER
In his 1990 book Seductions of Crime, Jack Katz proposes an explanation for murder
that seems in line with Sykes and Matza’s techniques of neutralization. Katz argues
that often when the killers and victims know one another, killers justify the crime
in their own mind. They believe they are preserving what is good. This may explain a
case like that of Joshua Torres, who killed Richard Tunley. According to police investi-
gators, Torres allegedly walked in on 50-year-old Tunley as he was beginning to molest
Torres’s 2-year-old daughter sexually. Torres then killed Tunley (McGurk & Geller,
2004). In other situations, such as a husband who kills his wife who is cheating, we
Source: Anonymous (1999); Walsh-Sarnecki (1998); Zeman, Walsh-Sarnecki, and
Helms (1998).
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 90
REVISED
Race and Homicide: The Culture of Violence 91
may be less sympathetic in agreeing with the offender’s justification. Still, Katz (1990)
makes the point that in the spur of the moment the killer believes he or she is justified
in killing another. Using a phenomenological approach, Katz explains that the killer
interprets the situation at hand as one in which the potential victim is doing some-
thing the killer cannot ignore. According to Katz, the killer turns personal humiliation
into rage (Greek, 2005; Katz, 1990). Like those offenders who use the neutralization
technique that Sykes and Matza call denial of responsibility, Katz argues that killers see
themselves pushed by forces greater than themselves (Greek, 2005).
CORRELATES OF HOMICIDE
General theories of crime may or may not be helpful for explaining homicide in the
United States. Furthermore, the theories may be better for explaining one type of
homicide or another. Chapters 7 through 12 are dedicated to six types of homicide.
In many of these chapters, theories relevant to the particular types of homicide are
discussed. Within these chapters, important correlates of the specific types of homi-
cide are also noted. In this chapter, however, several factors that may be pertinent to
the development of or refinement of homicide theories are now discussed.
Homicide researchers know that anyone can be a homicide victim. However, as
discussed in Chapter 4, the odds of being a murder victim are higher for some people
and lower for others. Race, sex, social class, and where we live can affect our chances
of being a murder offender or victim. Official statistics indicate that rates of homi-
cide victimization and offending are highest among African Americans, southerners,
men, lower-class individuals, and people who live in the United States (relative to
other industrial nations). As a result, some criminologists have attempted to explain
why factors such as race, region, sex, and social class are correlated with homicide. In
the next few sections, explanations for these correlations are addressed. Lastly, the
issue of relatively high homicide rates in the United States is discussed.
RACE AND HOMICIDE: THE CULTURE OF VIOLENCE
Writing approximately 30 years before Katz wrote about homicide as righteous
slaughter, Marvin Wolfgang was a pioneer in the study of homicide. Wolfgang (1958)
studied hundreds of cases of homicide in Philadelphia. He found that many of these
cases involved young African American men who were involved in confrontations
that ended in the death of one of them. Writing with Enrique Ferracuti in their book
The Subculture of Violence, Wolfgang thus proposed a theory to explain the high
number of homicides involving African American men. Wolfgang and Ferracuti pos-
tulated that a subculture of violence exists among African Americans. Those who
grew up in this subculture learned that violence is an appropriate response in many
situations. In fact, violence is required whenever one is challenged. A person, espe-
cially a young man, who backed down from a challenge or ignored a slight, would be
violating the norms of the subculture of violence. Thus Wolfgang and Ferracuti
(1967) explained that high homicide rates among young African American men were
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 91
REVISED
92 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
REGION AND HOMICIDE: SOUTHERN
SUBCULTURE OF VIOLENCE
Similar to Wolfgang and Ferracuti’s subculture of violence theory, some scholars
have argued that a southern subculture of honor among southern white men oper-
ates much like the subculture of violence among African Americans (Gastil, 1971;
Nisbet & Cohen, 1996). Analogous to the subculture of violence explanation of
higher levels of homicide among African Americans, the southern culture of honor
was developed to explain higher rates of homicide in the southern United States.
According to the southern subculture of violence theory, white men have learned
that backing down is weak and unmanly. As a result, any affront to a southern man
must be answered with violence. Thus, as with young men in Philadelphia, men in
the South are expected to retaliate if insulted. These retaliations are often violent as
required by the norms of the southern subculture, and thus homicide is more com-
mon in the South than in other areas of the country.
LIFESTYLE AND ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY
The fact that the odds of being a murder victim are higher for some people and lower
for others may be explained by lifestyle and routine activities theory. Because these
theories both presuppose that the lifestyles and habits of both victims and offenders
affect whether they will be involved in crime, the two are often discussed as one the-
ory (Barkan, 1997). Lifestyle theory focuses on how the lifestyle of an individual may
place him or her more at risk for becoming a victim. During the 1980s, for example,
many homicide victims were believed to be young men involved in gangs and drug
sales. Their involvement in the illegal drug trade increased their risk of homicide.
Similarly, according to routine activity theory, the routine behavior of individu-
als may increase or decrease their risk of murder (Cohen & Felson, 1979). Routine
activity theory suggests that three elements are required for crime: a motivated
offender; the availability of a suitable target; and the absence of effective guardians.
Using routine activity theory, we can explain murder at both the macro and micro
levels (Miethe & Regoeczi, 2004). Younger women as opposed to older women, for
example, may be more likely to be raped and murdered because those motivated to
do such crime are young men. Because younger women spend more time with
younger men, we would expect them to be victimized at higher rates than older
women (Mustaine, 1997; Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1999). Likewise, we might be able
to explain higher numbers of homicide in certain neighborhoods because the neigh-
borhoods are lacking in effective guardians. As such, stranger murders would be less
likely in high-rise condominiums with security systems and security guards than in
poorly maintained crime-infested high-rise public housing units like those that
existed in Chicago’s infamous Cabrini-Green public housing development.
to be expected. Because violence was a norm, homicide was likely. (See Chapter 7 for
critiques of the subculture of violence theory.)
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 92
REVISED
Social Stratification and Homicide 93
MEN AND VIOLENCE: FEMINIST PERSPECTIVES
ON MASCULINITY
Although feminist criminologists began to address the issue of gender in criminological
research in the 1970s, it was not until the 1990s that criminologists really began to
explore the connection between masculinity and violence (Brookman, 2000). With
regard to homicide, one fact that appears to be true throughout time and across the
world is that males are far more likely than females to commit homicide. This is a fact
that has been taken for granted, and thus it has been largely ignored in theories of homi-
cide offending. Although we know that all men do not murder and some women have
murdered, the fact that nearly 9 out of 10 people who murder are men is important.
To understand “the links between men’s use of violence and their perceptions
and understandings of the functions that violence serves,” Brookman (2000: 1) inter-
viewed 20 men who had killed or violently assaulted other men. She found that the
men used violence as a way to control others and to boost their masculine identity. It
was important to these men for others to perceive them as tough because to be mas-
culine is to be tough. Brookman (2000) is careful to note that some men are quicker
to use violence than others. Moreover, drawing from Messerschmidt’s (1993) work
on masculinity and violence, Brookman points out that men’s use of violence is likely
related to the positions they hold in society. In other words, men who have alterna-
tive means to control others may not perceive the need to use violence. Either way,
however, masculinity and control seem to be linked. Thus Brookman suggests there is
a subculture of masculinity, and this subculture (discussed in Chapter 7) sometimes
requires men to be violent.
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION AND HOMICIDE
Much research suggests a link between crime and economic conditions. With regard
to homicide, data suggest that poor people in the United States and throughout the
world are more likely to be found among homicide offenders and victims than are
individuals in higher economic categories. As discussed by Shaw and McKay and
other criminologists in the social disorganization tradition, crime rates, especially
violent crime rates, tend to be higher in communities where people are economically
disadvantaged. The reality of living a day-to-day existence in poverty is believed to be
extremely stressful. For some people, the stress of living on the edge can push them to
the brink, and thus violence may result. Additionally, growing up in an area where
violence is common and where positive role models may be overshadowed by nega-
tive role models may help foster criminal ways among youngsters.
Along these lines, in his book The Truly Disadvantaged, William Julius Wilson
(1987) made the argument that high levels of concentrated disadvantage and poverty
generate high levels of crime including homicide (Krivo & Peterson, 1996). Further, this
relationship is not simply a one-to-one relationship, but that communities with many
people living in poverty are likely to have exponentially greater rates of homicide than
those communities that are not saturated with poverty. Krivo and Peterson (1996)
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 93
REVISED
94 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
BOX 6.3
Violence in the United States
Violence has always been an important part of U.S. history. Writing about American violence, Richard Maxwell Brown (1979) writes that this violence has been both negative and positive. Negative aspects include crime, polit- ical assassinations, and racial conflict. However, some of the most positive events in U.S. history have been very bloody. Beginning with U.S. indepen- dence, violence has led to what we see as important and valuable. The extremely bloody civil war preserved the nation and freed slaves. He ends his article by saying,
Violence is clearly rejected by us as a part of the American value system, but so great has been our involvement with violence over the long sweep of our history that violence has truly become part of our unacknowledged (or underground) value structure. (Brown, 1979: 41)
What evidence is there that the United States values violence? What evidence is there that violence is not a value in the United States? Do you think violence as a value is related to homicide in the United States? Do you think there is a culture of violence or subculture of violence in the United States today?
examined neighborhood violent crime rates in Columbus, Ohio, where there are
both black and white high poverty neighborhoods. Their findings support Wilson’s
ideas. They found that “extremely high disadvantaged communities have qualita-
tively higher levels of crime than less disadvantaged areas, and that this pattern holds
for both black and white communities” (Krivo & Peterson, 1996: 640).
WHY DO WE KILL SO OFTEN IN THE UNITED STATES?
Despite the great amounts of wealth overall in the United States, those of us who live
in the United States are at much higher risk for homicide than those who live in
many other countries. As noted in Chapter 4 and seen in Table 6.1, the United States
has one of the highest homicide rates in the world. In his textbook Criminology,
Steven Barkan (1997) poses and gives possible answers to the question “Why is the
United States more violent than other industrial nations?” (1997: 261). The first
answer he discusses involves economic stratification. Barkan notes that studies indi-
cate that countries with high income inequality have higher rates of homicide. In the
United States we see great disparities between those at the top and those at the bot-
tom of the economic ladder. Second, many people in the United States own guns, and
assaults with guns may more likely end in death. Third, like the subcultural argu-
ments postulated to explain high rates of homicide in the South and high rates of
homicide among young African American men, some argue that we have a history
and culture of violence in the United States.
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 94
REVISED
The Role of Alcohol and Drug Use in Homicidal Behavior 95
BOX 6.4
Methamphetamine and Homicide
Toxicology reports during the first six months of 2005 indicated that a third of the 115 Phoenix homicide victims had ingested methampheta- mines sometime near their death. Methamphetamines in the blood sys- tems of murder victims is just one indication of what reporter Paul Rubin (2005) reported Phoenix police officers knew about homicide in their city. According to a report by Rubin, Phoenix police were seeing an increase in homicides linked to methamphetamines at the middle of the first decade of the twenty-first century. The police noted that alcohol was still very prevalent among both offenders and victims, and they still handled a case involving crack cocaine now and then as well as cases where no drugs or alcohol influences could be found. Police in Maricopa County, Arizona, however, were seeing increasing use of methamphetamines linked to all types of crime including homicide (Rubin, 2005).
THE ROLE OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG USE
IN HOMICIDAL BEHAVIOR
According to Parker and Auerhahn (1999), the role of alcohol and drug use in homi-
cidal behavior has not been widely studied. Nevertheless, evidence suggests a strong
relationship between homicide and alcohol or illegal drug use (Carcach & Conroy,
2001; Collins & Messerschmidt, 1993; Fagan, 1990). The evidence tends to show that
over half of homicides involve offenders or victims that are under the influence of
drugs or alcohol at the time of the homicide incident. However, note that alcohol is
more frequently involved than illegal drugs (Parker & Auerhahn, 1999). The reason
TABLE 6.1 Number of Homicides (2000) and Average Homicide Rate (1999–2001) for Six
Highest Homicide Countries
Country
Number of Homicides,
2000
Average Homicide Rate per 100,000
population, 1999–2001
1. South Africa 21,683 55.86
2. Russia 31,829 22.05
3. Lithuania 398 10.62
4. Estonia 143 10.61
5. Latvia 150 6.47
6. U.S.A. 15,586 5.56
Source: Barclay and Tavares (2003).
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 95
REVISED
96 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
for the connection is not altogether clear, and theories are still being developed to
explain the relationship. Nevertheless, Parker and Auerhahn (1999: 188) report that
alcohol appears to be “a causal agent, albeit one among many, in the genesis of homi-
cide.” With regard to illicit drugs, Parker and Auerhahn (1999) report that the
research does not yet explain the causal relationship, if any, between drugs and homi-
cide. It could be that the connection between drug use and homicide is part of a gen-
erally violent lifestyle that may be explained by other theories. Although it could be
that some combination of biological and environmental effects mix in the presence
of illicit drugs to contribute to homicide.
SUMMARY
Most of the theories in this chapter postulate an explanation for crime that looks to
structural or cultural explanations. The theories were presented somewhat chrono-
logically beginning with the classical school perspective. Classical school criminolo-
gists began to see crime not as a result of biological or psychological abnormalities
but as a consequence of a person’s choice. As criminologists continued to study
crime, they found that there were patterns to who was choosing to do crime and
who was not. This observation led to social disorganization theory, which posits a
link between environment and criminal offending. In time, Edwin Sutherland
explained that the mechanisms by which we learn to commit crime is the same as
how we learn anything. Social control theorist turned the questions about crime
offending upside down by asking not why individuals do crime, but why don’t we all
do crime? Hirschi, a social control theorist, argued that bonds to society prevent us
from doing crime. Later, however, with Gottfredson, Hirschi suggested that individ-
uals with low self-control and opportunity are most likely to commit crimes. Similar
to control theorists, Sykes and Matza argued that even if we know the rules or
norms, we sometime cross over the line. To cross the line, we use what they called
techniques of neutralizations. These techniques allow offenders to justify their
criminal acts before they do them. More recently, Jack Katz proposed the idea of
righteous slaughter in which he postulates that some homicide offenders feel justi-
fied in killing another.
Following brief overviews of the major sociocultural explanations for crime
and their application to homicide, common correlates of homicide including race,
sex, social class and region as well as some of the theories postulated to explain these
connections, including subcultural theories, were reviewed. Feminist explanations
for masculine violence and William Julius Wilson’s ideas about the truly disadvan-
taged as applied to homicide and class were also included in this chapter.
Explanations for the high rates of homicide in the United States as compared to
other industrial nations were noted. And finally, at the end of the chapter, a discus-
sion on the unknown role of drugs and alcohol in homicidal behavior is included.
In Chapter 7 and succeeding chapters, different types of homicide are reviewed. In
some of these chapters, additional theories postulated to explain these particular
types of homicide are included, and in other chapters, theories discussed in this
chapter are expanded.
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 96
REVISED
References 97
CHAPTER QUESTIONS
1. How are explanations for homicide in this chapter different from biological and
psychological explanations for homicide?
2. How would Beccaria or another person using a classical perspective explain
homicide?
3. Why does the transitional zone have the most crime according to social disorga-
nization theorists?
4. Differential association theory postulates that crime is learned. Give an example
of how homicide might be learned.
5. What do social control theorists ask with regard to crime?
6. List and explain Hirschi’s four social bonds.
7. Can you imagine a case where all four social bonds are strong but a homicide
still occurs? Explain.
8. How well do you think a general theory of crime explains homicide in the
United States? Explain.
9. Give one example of homicide that might fit each of the techniques of
neutralization.
10. What is meant by “murder as righteous slaughter”?
11. List at least three correlates of homicide discussed in this chapter.
12. Compare the subculture of violence and the subculture of honor.
13. According to lifestyle theory, why might women working in prostitution be
overrepresented in homicide statistics?
14. What three criteria are necessary according to routine activity for crime to occur?
15. How are masculinity and homicide linked, according to feminists?
16. Discuss why homicide in the United States is relatively high compared to many
other nations.
17. What theories in this or previous chapters might explain the high rates of homi-
cide in the United States?
18. Which has a higher correlation with homicide, alcohol or illicit drugs?
REFERENCES
Anonymous. 1999. “Wayne State Professor Gunned Down in Class.” Chronicle of Higher
Education, 45(18): A8.
Barclay, Gordon, and Cynthia Tavares. 2003. International Comparisons of Criminal Justice
Statistics 2001. London: Home Office.
Barkan, Steven. 1997. Criminology: A Sociological Understanding. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Beccaria, Cesare. 1986. On Crimes and Punishments. Translated by David Young. Indianapolis:
Hackett. (Original work published 1764)
Blau, Judith R., and Peter M. Blau. 1982. “The Cost of Inequality, Metropolitan Structure, and
Violent Crime.” American Sociological Review, 47: 114–125.
Brookman, Fiona. 2000. “Dying for Control: Men, Murder and Sub-Lethal Violence.” In
George Mair and Roger Tarling, eds., British Criminology Conference: Selected Proceedings.
Vol. 3. Accessed online at http://www.britsoccrim.org/volume3/002.pdf
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 97
REVISED
98 The Murder Book: Examining Homicide
Brown, Richard Maxwell. 1979. “Historical Patterns of American Violence.” In Hugh Davis
Graham and Ted Robert Gurr, eds., Violence in America: Historical and Comparative
Perspectives. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Carcach, Carlos, and Rowena Conroy. 2001. “Alcohol and Homicide in Australia: A Routine
Activity.” Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Cohen, Larry, and Marcus Felson. 1979. “Social Change and Crime Rates.” American
Sociological Review, 44: 588–608.
Collins, Pamela M., and James J. Messerschmidt. 1993. “Epidemiology and Alcohol-Related
Violence.” Alcohol Health and Research World, 17: 93–100.
Durkheim, Emile. 1997. Division of Labor in Society. New York: Free Press. (Original work pub-
lished 1893)
Fagan, Jeffrey. 1990. “Intoxication and Aggression,” in M. Tonry and J.Q. Wilson, eds., Drugs
and Crime. Volume 13: Crime and Justice, A Review of Research (pp. 241–320).
Gastil, Raymond D. 1971. “Homicide and a Regional Culture of Violence.” American
Sociological Review, 36: 412–427.
Gottfredson, Michael R., and Travis Hirschi. 1990. A General Theory of Crime. Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
Greek, Cecil. 2005. Seduction 1 Web page. Last updated November 22, 2005. Retrieved April 7,
2006, from http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/week12.htm
Hirschi, Travis. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Katz, Jack. 1990. Seductions of Crime. New York: Basic Books.
Krivo, Lauren J., and Ruth D. Peterson. 1996. “Extremely Disadvantaged Neighborhoods and
Urban Crime.” Social Forces, 75: 619–650.
Krivo, Lauren J., and Ruth D. Peterson. 2000. “The Structural Context of Homicide:
Accounting for Racial Differences in Process.” American Sociological Review, 65: 547–559.
McGurk, Joe, and Andy Geller. 2004, January 28. “NYPD: Dad Executes Paroled Sex Offender.”
New York Post. Retrieved April 7, 2006, from http://www.officer.com/article/article.jsp?
id=9016&siteSection=1
Meithe, Terance D., and Wendy C. Regoeczi. 2004. Rethinking Homicide: Exploring the Structure
and Process Underlying Deadly Situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Messerschmidt, James W. 1993. Masculinities and Crime: Critique and Reconceptuatlization of
Theory: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Mustaine, Elizabeth E. 1997. “Victimization Risks and Routine Activities: A Theoretical
Examination Using a Gender-Specific and Domain Specific Model.” American Journal of
Criminal Justice, 22: 41–70.
Mustaine, Elizabeth E., and Richard Tewksbury. 1999. “A Routine Activities Theory
Explanation for Women’s Stalking Victimizations.” Violence Against Women, 5: 43–62.
Nisbet, Richard E., and Dov Cohen. 1996. Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the
South. Boulder: Westview Press.
Pankratz, Howard. 2005, March 24. “Fatal Montbello Fight Described as Gang Rite.” Denver
Post, p. B-01.
Parker, Robert Nash, and Kathleen Auerhahn. 1999. “Drugs, Alcohol, and Homicide: Issues in
Theory and Research.” In M. Dwayne Smith and Margaret A. Zahn, eds., Homicide: A
Sourcebook of Social Research (pp. 176–219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rasche, Chris E. 1996.“Theorizing About Homicide: A Presentation on the Theories Explaining
Homicide and Other Crime.” In Pamela K. Lattimore and Cynthia A. Nahabedian, ed.,
Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes, Proceedings of the 1996 Meeting of the Homicide
Research Working Group (pp. 23–34). Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.
Rubin, Paul. 2005, November 3. “Meth Fatalities: Methamphetamine Is Number-One with a
Bullet When It Comes to Violent Death in Phoenix.” Phoenix New Times. Retrieved April 21,
2006. http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2005-11-03/news/meth-fatalities/
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 98
REVISED
References 99
Sampson, Robert J. 1987. “Urban Black Violence: The Effect of Male Joblessness and Family
Dissolution.” American Journal of Sociology, 93: 348–382.
Shaw, Clifford and Henry D. McKay. 1942. Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago:
Univ. Press.
Shihadeh, Edward S., and Darrel J. Steffensmeier. 1994. “Economic Inequality, Family
Disruption, and Urban Black Violence: Cities as Units of Stratification and Social Control.”
Social Forces, 73(1): 729–751.
Starr, Barbara. 2002, July 22. “Fort Bragg Killings Raise Alarm About Stress: No Connection
Established to Assailants’ Afghanistan Duty.” CNN.com. Retrieved April 22, 2006, from
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/07/26/army.wives/
Sutherland, Edwin, and Donald R. Cressey. 2000. “Differential Association Theory.” In Patricia
and Peter Adler, eds., Constructions of Deviance: Social Power, Context, and Interaction
(pp. 69–71). Belmont CA: Thomson.
Sykes, Gresham, and Matza, David. 1957. “Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of
Delinquency.” American Sociological Review, 22(6): 664–670.
Toby, Jackson. 1957. “Social Disorganization and Stake in Conformity.” Journal of Criminal
Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 48: 12–17.
Walsh-Sarnecki, Peggy. 1998, December 12. “Instructors, Students Try to Gain Perspective
After Murder.” Detroit Free Press, p. 5a.
Williams, Kirk R. 1984. “Economic Sources of Homicide: Re-estimating the Effect of Poverty
and Inequality.” American Sociological Review, 49: 283–289.
Wilson, William Julius. 1987. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Underclass and Public Policy.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wolfgang, Marvin. 1958. Patterns in Criminal Homicide. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania.
Wolfgang, Marvin, and Franco Ferracuti. 1967. The Subculture of Violence. London: Social
Science Paperbacks.
Zeman, David, Peggy Walsh-Sarnecki, and Matt Helms. 1998, December 12. “Grad Student
Faces Charges in Slaying of WSU Professor.” Detroit Free Press, p. 1a.
M06_DAVI4013_01_SE_C06.QXD 8/30/07 5:42 AM Page 99
REVISED
<< /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Error /CompatibilityLevel 1.4 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /CMYK /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments true /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 300 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /CHS <FEFF4f7f75288fd94e9b8bbe5b9a521b5efa7684002000410064006f006200650020005000440046002065876863900275284e8e9ad88d2891cf76845370524d53705237300260a853ef4ee54f7f75280020004100630072006f0062006100740020548c002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e003000204ee553ca66f49ad87248672c676562535f00521b5efa768400200050004400460020658768633002> /CHT <FEFF4f7f752890194e9b8a2d7f6e5efa7acb7684002000410064006f006200650020005000440046002065874ef69069752865bc9ad854c18cea76845370524d5370523786557406300260a853ef4ee54f7f75280020004100630072006f0062006100740020548c002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e003000204ee553ca66f49ad87248672c4f86958b555f5df25efa7acb76840020005000440046002065874ef63002> /DAN <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> /DEU <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> /ESP <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> /FRA <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> /ITA <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> /JPN <FEFF9ad854c18cea306a30d730ea30d730ec30b951fa529b7528002000410064006f0062006500200050004400460020658766f8306e4f5c6210306b4f7f75283057307e305930023053306e8a2d5b9a30674f5c62103055308c305f0020005000440046002030d530a130a430eb306f3001004100630072006f0062006100740020304a30883073002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e003000204ee5964d3067958b304f30533068304c3067304d307e305930023053306e8a2d5b9a306b306f30d530a930f330c8306e57cb30818fbc307f304c5fc59808306730593002> /KOR <FEFFc7740020c124c815c7440020c0acc6a9d558c5ec0020ace0d488c9c80020c2dcd5d80020c778c1c4c5d00020ac00c7a50020c801d569d55c002000410064006f0062006500200050004400460020bb38c11cb97c0020c791c131d569b2c8b2e4002e0020c774b807ac8c0020c791c131b41c00200050004400460020bb38c11cb2940020004100630072006f0062006100740020bc0f002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e00300020c774c0c1c5d0c11c0020c5f40020c2180020c788c2b5b2c8b2e4002e> /NLD (Gebruik deze instellingen om Adobe PDF-documenten te maken die zijn geoptimaliseerd voor prepress-afdrukken van hoge kwaliteit. De gemaakte PDF-documenten kunnen worden geopend met Acrobat en Adobe Reader 5.0 en hoger.) /NOR <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> /PTB <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> /SUO <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> /SVE <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> /ENU (Use these settings to create Adobe PDF documents best suited for high-quality prepress printing. Created PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Adobe Reader 5.0 and later.) >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AddBleedMarks false /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks false /AddPageInfo false /AddRegMarks false /ConvertColors /ConvertToCMYK /DestinationProfileName () /DestinationProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /PresetSelector /MediumResolution >> /FormElements false /GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles false /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice
