When watching this short video and connecting it to social disorganization theory, I thought about how social disorganization theory deals with how you interact with others and how you want to fit in with the people around you. When we were talking about the four boys Dr. White said that half of them had older brothers that were in the older guys gang, so the younger brothers wanted to be like their older brothers and start a gang. Also when all the boys ever get to see is their brothers or anyone who is in that gang start doing some type of criminal act; they may think that this is how all society functions and what everyone does nowadays. I have seen this movie in its entirety and I remember at the beginning of the movie the four boys are up in a tree house and they are smoke cigarettes which is probably something they had to learn from their older siblings which the young boys might think makes them look cool and they probably believe they can join the gang if they imitate their brothers. Also when one of the boys had the gun at the end, it got me wondering where are his parents, why is this gun so easy for him to reach and is every house in this town like that. If parents do not keep things such as guns from their children, then if a four year old gets a hold of it they might shoot themselves or in the young boy's case they were willing to shoot someone over a dead body. I know that his parents might have been at work, but they need to have some sort of adult watching them in case they do something like this in the future and actually do kill someone. Illini123
It's true that younger kids lack vast knowledge and want to fit in with their peers especially older ones that they view as "higher". Choice theory fits better because it explains the fact that they made the CHOICE to become delinquents, both the older and younger kids. You can't look back on the rest of the movie because we were assigned to only analyze this portion of it. I would have to say the parents of the kid who has the gun are the biggest criminals here. They made the choice to allow their son to have easy access to their gun. They clearly did not use rational thinking to secure or just lock up the gun. So therefore they made the choice to allow him to do whatever he chooses with it and they will pay for any crimes he commits with it. All the kids in the movie are delinquents because they are fighters and hazards to society. Fireboy123
It is interesting to see the social pressure these older brothers can have over their younger siblings. Especially when they are engaging in delinquent activities that can seem enticing or exciting to younger kids. It is apparent from this film that both age groups are suffering from a poor attachment to their families and communities. Unfortunately with the involvement of deadly weapons on both sides it is going to be a criminal case in which both sides can face sizable convictions. Ghost123
I totally agree with you. Every younger sibling wants to be like their older sibling. I can relate to this one because being the youngest one out 4 kids, I wanted to be just like my older sister. I wanted to do everything that she did. And, I wanted the same thing that she wanted. So, I can see why they wanted to be rebels like their older brothers. But, with wanting to be followers there comes consequences to their actions. SO, i am pretty sure whatever the punishment the older boys got the young boys got.WS123
I agree that every younger sibling wants to be like and impress their older sibling. In the movie like you said most of the younger boys had an older brother that was in the older boy’s gang. So, the younger boys more than likely wanted to be like their older siblings and started that gang. They also more than likely learned all that deliquiate behavior from their older siblings. A child’s older sibling has a significant impact on what they choose to do in life. So, if the older sibling is doing delinquent acts and the younger sibling witnesses this, they will more than likely be doing deliquiate acts also. Trojan123
I can see the rational choice theory in action in the movie, "Stand by Me". The young kids knew what they were doing was illegal and the older kids did as well. It's more important to understand that the older kids knew what they were doing because they have had more time to self-reflect and decide if they will become delinquents. Now the younger kids probably aren't as "smart" to weigh their actions/decisions ahead of time. I think the younger kids were trying to impress the older ones into allowing them to join their clique and prove that they are tough. Choice theory says that people have the ability to decide whether or not to commit crimes, but most won't due to wanting to stay within society. This is true, but in this case I think the younger kids' society is revolved around trying to be like the older kids. Huge question that deviates from choice theory is how the hell did the little boy get a gun? He doesn't live in the ghetto because ghetto kids don't go out into the deep woods. So it must be his parents because clearly he didn't just happen to pick it up off the ground. That kid in particular is exactly what social control theory try’s to explain because he is quite deviant from his peers and society. Overall I think the young kids lack conformity to society and therefore they are very much so what we would use labeling theory to label as delinquents. It is questionable because I don’t really see how the kids would view shooting off a gun and hiding a body as more rewarding than not committing crimes. Maybe they think the reward is being able to prove themselves and scare off the older kids. It still would not be less costly for them to commit these crimes because the evidence for them to be thrown in jail is so readily available. Fireboy123
There definitely appears to be some form of peer pressure between the teenagers and the young boys. Both parties in this clip are in the wrong and due to their lack of attachment to one another and their society in general it is no surprise that this confrontation between the two groups escalated into an almost deadly encounter. Furthermore, I agree that these children lack a bond or conformity with their community since they are willing to engage in multiple delinquent acts and use a firearm in order to protect a dead body. It will take severe involvement of both the families and governmental institutions to help these children steer clear of the path they are going down. Ghost123
Yes they should have known what they were doing was illegal and yet they still wanted to do it. The older ones definitely have had to have some sort of run in with the law because if they were well behaved kids then they would not have threatened to kill the younger ones. This also goes for the young kids even though they may not be as old and may not have thought out what could actually happen if they do these acts, they should have some sense of knowledge and know what is right and what is not right. Illini123
I totally agree with you. All of the boys knew exactly what they were doing. So, whatever happens to them would be on them, if they were to get caught by the police. The young man with the gun knew that if he was to point it at the older group it would scare them. He had a choice to do that or not. No one made him go get a gun and make point it to the group. And, the older guys had a choice when they threaten the younger boys. And, the one boy had a knife and it was his choice to bring the knife out to scare the younger boys to giving them the dead body.WS123
I agree with you on this. The boys knew that it was illegal what they were doing. it would be there fault for sure if they got caught by the police. The kid pointing the gun at the older kid had a choice to pull the trigger or not. the older guy also had the choice to bully and threaten the younger kids with a pocketknife to make the young kids give them the body. Cavsfan123
Within the movie "Stand by Me" many correlations can be drawn from the social control theory and more specifically, Hirschi's social bond theory. At first in appears that the good guys, being the little kids in this scene, had won the day against the older siblings who looked to take advantage of the younger kids through the use of their older ages and their relationships to the boys. The teenagers appear to be partaking in several delinquent activities based on their attitudes and intimidation skills. This may be largely contributed to their lack of involvement in the community or with their families. This can be seen with the way the main antagonist threatens to kill one of the boys when they won't give up the body. Threatening to kill someone, especially a young kid, is not normal behavior learned or developed from basic social norms and can largely be attributed to delinquent tendencies and activities. This further proves the issue of commitment as well. If the teenagers committed more time to earning rewards and benefits the noble way they may be less likely to try to "cheat" their way to success. Since both the teenagers and the kids are committing delinquent acts it may be possible that this will cause a reciprocal reaction in which they may be driven to commit more delinquent acts in the future. The children are not innocent either. Through the situations their brothers have likely been through in life it can be no surprise that the situation has escalated to what we see in this clip. Due to a weak attachment with their brothers who, instead of showing them right from wrong, have engaged in delinquent activity. These kids have been brought and raised in a toxic situation in which the use of deadly weapons in a confrontation has become the most approachable method of communication between the two age groups. It is clear to say that if a young child has to raise a loaded Colt 1911 at an older child in order to protect what he thinks is his than their may be some family and community issues that need to be addressed. Ghost123
You are absolutely right that correlations can be put together with the social control theory. Since it talks about how kids want to fit in with society. Unfortunately their society just happens to be a negative one, that surrounds them with bad older influences. Which we know can leave a mark on impressionable youth who look up to their elders. It is kind of hard to make judgments on the youth in the short video because we do not know the year in which this takes place nor the age. So smoking and carrying a gun may actually be legal at this time. I would expect that the young kids are not entirely sure of what they are doing rather they want to show how bad they are to the older kids. It is questionable as to who taught the young kids to be so rebellious unless it in fact was their elders. Fireboy123
Some may think that they are the good guys, but if they are willing to shoot someone or if the older kids are willing to stab someone over a dead body then I do not think we really have a good side in that case. Yes if the older boys have done delinquent acts before it definitely shows in the way they were able to scare their little brothers and that they were willing to fight for nothing. I feel that these kids should have actually worked for their rewards and not cheated as you have said. Illini123
I agree with all of you on this. These kids were trying to fit in and trying to get the spot light on the news. i just could not beleve that siblings would hold knifes at each other let alone a nice looking 1911. The feeling in this movies almost makes you believe that they were willing to put some one in the ground over something so small as a little time on the news.Jeeper123
My topic that I have is Labeling Theory. I think that Labeling theory can be tied into the boys in the video because since they are young they can be automatically be assumed that they are delinquents. Even, though you don’t know them if you were to go in the woods and seen a big group of boys you would assume that they are up to no good. You would assume that just by how they are dressed. You could label them as being dirty because their clothes are filthy and their hands are dirty. You could also label them as criminals because the one had a gun. There's no telling where the young man git the gun from. But, if the police would have caught them they would have identified him as a criminal. They would not have seen it as him trying to protect him and his friends from the bigger boys who was trying to bully them. The older boys could have been identified as a criminal because he has a pocket knife. Yes, I would label them as a criminal because both groups were in the wrong, with the pocket knife and the gun. The older guys could have pretty sure been labeled as a bullied. Which, they really were bulling the littler boys even though they had brothers in the group of smaller kids. The other older guys could been seen as followers because they were just going off what the main guy was saying. They were playing follow the leader because they wouldn’t move unless the “leader” say move. All the names that could have been stuck with them, will only make them want to stick with it because they think it is cool. And, they are all at the age where being bad or disobeying is cool. WS123
I completely agree with what you have to say about labeling theory and having it being involved with the clip. If anyone the younger boys or the older ones the first thing that would come across their mind was that they are up to no good. If anyone seen a child like you said that was dirty and possibly carrying a knife or if they see the gun, or even them smoking. They would automatically be labeled by that person. Also, though if they do find the body and turn it in. they could either be labeled as heroes or criminals. Trojan123
This scene expressed a lot of labeling from the vulgar language to just rude manner expressed by the boys. Even as a viewer of the scene there were probably people who were in their head labeling the boys based on appearance and attitude. But the labeling will only take affect if the person you are labeling accepts the label. This scene does express the labeling done by the older brother and siblings to be effecting their actions. They all have this bad boy persona even though the younger boys do seem frightening by what they did. Sunshine123
I had the topic of rational choice theory. In the movie Stand by Me choice theory is a factor in most of the clip. The children in the film did choose to try to find the body and knew that’s what they were going to do. The same applies for the older kids. There is a difference between them though. The younger group of children are more likely to just jump up and do something when they decide that they are going to do that specific thing. The older kids might as well but they should know better that they were going to set off and do was illegal. Also, the smaller children for sure knew that what they were doing was illegal in ways. But the difference is that the older kids should know better and should have been able to reflect of what they were doing more because they are more matured than the young children. Another factor relating choice theory that happened in the clip was when the kid decided to stand his group and not leave. The young one had the choice to leave or stay there and possibly get beat up. He chose to stand his ground and get a possible beating. Then the other kid came out shooting in the air with the pistol and threating to kill the older kid if him and his whole crew did not leave. All of what I just explained all relates to choice theory. Both sets of children, the older ones and younger ones, all made those choices and that is where it made theme end up. Both sides could have easily chose a different path or done something different and the outcome would have been very much different. But they had that choice and their actions depicted the future. Trojan123
I agree with you but, even though the older boys should know better they will not act like it. I feel like they want to portray this hard bad ass image. So, they will not show that they know right from wrong. They would want to try to stay like they know what they are doing is right. They definitely knew what they were doing. Just how from the older boys was going to hurt the younger one for mocking him. I also agree to the young boy staying there and standing their ground to keep the body, I don't see anything wrong with that,he just wanted to seem as tough as the older boys. WS123
I also agree. Not all their choices were overall based on the legality of what they were doing but small choices that the younger kids could rationalize based on their protection of their friends. Most of their choices though were bad choices that if caught a few of them would be arrested. The switchblade first of all is illegal in most states so just carrying it is a bad choice made even before the start of the clip, but even that doesn’t compare to taking the gun, discharging it, and threatening people with it. Another failed choice was searching by themselves for a dead body without any responsible adult on land they don’t own. They are effectively trespassing with weapons looking for dead bodies. But for the younger kids a few good choices were made like defending each other and running away from a situation that possibly injure or get them in trouble. -M24Ninja123
My topic that I will be working on is the Labelling theory. Labeling theory can be seen in the video because the boys in the video are young and they can be shown that they are doing delinquent acts that would easily apply them to the labelling theory. If you stumble across kids in the woods, you automatically think they are doing something illegal because the likelihood of running into the kids in the woods playing football and having fun is very unlikely. You could label them just by the way they are covered in filth and how they're clothes are. Another reason to label them is because the one kid has a firearm. If they were caught by law enforcement doing these activities they would have been prosecuted as a criminal because the police wouldn't have understood the situation like the boys would have. The older boys could have been prosecuted as an adult because of the pocket knife. In my opinion, I would label them as a criminal because the boys all had weapons on them. The older kids would have been labelled for bullying too. They were bullying the little kids by saying they were going to beat them up if they didn't give them the body. The older guys would be labelled as followers because they were following the main guys every command or moves and creating more trouble. They are all at the age of life where doing delinquent acts would make you look cool and make you more friends by doing delinquent acts. The labeling theory can be applied in a lot of situations in this video and also other delinquent situations kids and juveniles do. Cavsfan123
I agree that these kids could be labeled many different names because of the things they were doing in the clip. If they were to be caught, I definitely think they would be tried in adult court because of all of the criminal and delinquent acts they were committing, especially discharging and holding a firearm. They were also hiding a dead body for some unknown reason. -PizzaLover123
I agree, they are definitely going to be label by their delinquent acts. Them having a gun and a knife fighting over a dead body is not a good look. In the video it doesn’t look like a big deal with them having those things, but they could be charged with so many things and including their older brothers. I also agree, they are going to get in more trouble because if they’re so brave to pull out knives and guns just imagine if they were in a worse situation how bad it would end. – babyblue123
Although these kids are not labeled yet, and may not get labeled at any point, their delinquent behavior may lead to them being labeled, whether it be formally or informally. If that label sticks, and it is a negative one, their behavior may get drastically worse and they may spiral out of control. However, if dealt with properly, these kids could turn their lives around and leave the gang and go down a path that is much more promising. gh_blackhawks123
After watching this short clip, I think social control and social bond theory could relate to these juveniles in one way or another. The four main social bonds called attachment, involvement, belief and commitment can be described during this scene and probably throughout the whole film. It’s clear that by the way these teenagers act, they do not have a strong bond with their community or people around them otherwise they would not complete the acts shown in the scene. Their bonds are weakened within these groups and it’s clear that they do not follow any set of rules but only live by their own rules. I don’t know if maybe they are completing these delinquent acts because they don’t have respect for their community or surroundings or maybe they don’t have a solid connection and bond with their parents. It’s even possibility that their households could be ran poorly depending on if they came from an abusive home or they are living in poverty. It looks as if their peers or so called “friends” have the most influence on one another’s behaviors. I think a major key factor and the greatest influence of how someone will act is by whom they surround themselves with. This is where the attachment part comes in from the social bond theory. If these kids don’t have a good role model to look up to then they are more than likely to commit delinquency acts with their peers and it will continue to get worse as they get older. Travis Hirschi explains that it really depends on what kind of relationship you have with these social bonds. If you have a weak relationship with these social bonds then you are at a higher risk to commit criminal activities or present delinquent behaviors if you are a child. -PizzaLover123
I totally agree, those kids are going through the wrong path. They are going to commit more delinquent acts if they don’t get it together. What makes it worse is that their older siblings are doing the same things so it makes it harder for them to do the right thing because they’re not on the right path either. they are so used to seeing it in their environment so they think it’s a good thing to do. Their parents should really help them do the right thing and be there for them because it will definably get their live together -babyblue123
When watching this video, I could defiantly relate it to social deodorization. In the Shaw and Mckay theory they said different things about zones. In the video it looks like those boys were in a bad neighborhood because they were all in gangs. The younger boys in the video where in a gang and the older boys were in a gang as well. What even tops it off is, some of the boys in the older gangs were the younger gang brother. The little boys were looking up to their brothers and decided that they should start a gang just like them. They may have learned this behavior from their environment. They had to learn their behavior from other delinquents acts all around. Shaw and Mckay studied the areas not the people. The young gang found the body that their brothers were trying to find and when they went to go find the young boys they threaten them to give up the body but they didn’t want to give it up and it went on and on. That’s when the delinquent act started because the young boys pulled out the gun and was pointing it around towards the big brothers saying to leave them alone and saying he will shoot and the leader of the older gang points out a knife threatening them back. It just shows how much different acts goes on and what happens in that type of neighborhood they live in. A member in my group also mentions that in the beginning of the movie they were in a tree house smoking a cigarette. There probably were always surrounded by that type of act. Maybe they have learned that type of behavior from their older siblings too. This video just helps show how people around you or even your neighborhood can affect your behavior. -babyblue123
As we have learned in class, criminal behavior has to be learned or taught. The only way those boys would have known to defend themselves in that manner was from the older brothers that they were defending themselves against. They grew up with them and considering the brothers were already delinquents, it sets the exact example that the younger boys would need to be able to know how to act that way. Had they not been exposed to those boys and their crimes, they might have just decided to walk away under the assumption that finding a dead body isn’t worth being threatened by a gang of delinquents. So in all, I do agree that there is a lot of social disorganization in even just this one clip alone. SomethingProfound123
That is avery good point in bringing up shaw and Mckay's theory. The boys only role models were in a gang or dead which leads them down a delinquent path. If the boys had brothers that did not break the law and act out the outcome for them would have been much different. the theory that stood out to me the most was the Trait theory. The boys and their brothers were delinquent so that just goes to show that there are characteristics that all of the boys possess that makes them more likely to commit. KLICK123
I agree that this video definitely represents social disorganization theory. These kids do represent a lifestyle that is surrounded by gang activity and juvenile delinquency, and that disorganization contributes to the behavior that they participate in. You make a good point that one of the younger juveniles was probably influenced by his older brother, whether it was purposeful or subconsciously, because his older brother was a part of the older gang. gh_blackhawks123
When watching the stand by me video, I can one hundred percent relate it to rational choice theory. In the video the kids knew exactly what they were doing was illegal, and as well as the older kids. It is really important to know that the older kids had more time to decide these decisions to become delinquents. On the other hand I do think the kids don't realize what they are getting themselves into making all these irrational choices. The younger kids are trying to impress the older kids, for example the one kid in the video had a gun and could be trying to impress the older kid, saying and showing that he is tough and isn't afraid of killing someone. Choice theory states that that people have the ability to make the decision if they want to commit a crime or not. 10/10 of time most kids want to grow up in society. Kids that chose to commit crimes have a different background in case for example. Younger kids with siblings that are older than them is one reason they may commit crimes, younger kids tend to look up to there older brother or sister. Overall in the video I watched a learned a lot of things about how it relates to rational choice theory. I think that the kids could be looking up to there older brother that is in his own gang, they could have also been not thinking about the consequences of what they were doing, could have been thinking to see what the big reward could be. My opinion about the kid having a gun and possibly shooting someone, is that it probably would not be rewarding for him, he just wants to be able to show the big kids he isn’t scared and scare them away from the body. Choice theory is all about choices people make in their lifetime. Some may be good, some may bad. But in end it’s all up to you to decide you way of life. You can spend it being in the system and being known as a delinquent or you can live a life in society and not locked up behind bars.Smile123
I agree that there was a lot of choice theory that could have been applied to that small scene, but I do think that maybe there was more behind their choices than just impressing their older siblings. The fact that the entire situation was over who got to keep the dead body, to me, suggests that the choices were slightly out of greed and partially vindictive towards each other. Granted, I can agree that standing up to the older sibling could have played a part, but I think it was more driven by who got the most out of the situation and the kids just weren’t all that willing to give up without a fight, meaning their decisions could have also stemmed from pride as well. SomethingProfound123
The first thing you think when you watch the ending scene of stand by me isn’t, “hey, that little kid would be waived to adult court for that!”. No, you’re probably thinking like the rest of everyone who is watching the movie. “Man, that’s one brave little kid! What a gutsy move pulling a gun on that teenager. I would have done the same thing.” Well, while all those statements can be very true, so is the first one. That kid could most indefinitely be waived to adult court for pulling that gun out. For one, that gun, I’m sure, doesn’t belong to him and it could be considered theft. That’s not the worst part of it though. Secondly, the fact that he pointed it at another person and threatened them means that it is now considered an adult action and would be waived to adult court. Especially if he had fired that gun and possibly killed or serious wounded the other person. He would most definitely then be trailed with first degree murder charges, if he successfully killed the boy, or he could be charged with attempted murder had he only wounded him and the other person was alive and able to testify against him. Now the time setting of the movie, I cannot recall, but considering the way they were dressed and some of the way they talked would suggest a period where juvenile punishment was starting to become a more regular thing. Granted, the kid had a dirty mouth, but it isn’t necessarily illegal to cuss like a sailor when you’re that age, just morally wrong, at least I think. So, within that ending scene, all I really saw that could possibly be qualified to waive that kid to adult court would have been him being in possession of the gun and the possibility of firing it. Thankfully he didn’t though as that act would potentially ruin the rest of his life. However, that isn’t foreseen in the movie, just an observation. SomethingProfound123
People often overlook the fact that many things portrayed in movies could be seen as illegal acts, especially when those acts are being done by children. Many children often do stupid things however the stupid things they do don't often require a transfer to adult court. I would definitely agree with you in the case of the individual who had the gun and was threatening the other guy with it. He would most definitely be waived to adult court if he would have been caught by a police officer while doing those acts. Pack123
It is crazy to think about a kid that young going to adult court for what he did. He seems so young and innocent but this type of behavior that he is displaying is only going to get worse thought-out his life if something isn’t done about it now. What he need is to get himself into programs that help fix his issues and lead him to better choices. Of course when watching this scene, you aren’t going to think about how this is going to effect him in life for firing a gun but it is important to think about. Sunshine123
There are many different illegal acts going on in this short scene such as teens and younger children carrying weapons and interfering with a murder crime scene and I suppose suspected gang activity as well. But you are right when you say the young boy would probably be tried as an adult in court for having that gun and pulling it out on Ace. Unfortunately, although Ace was the one to pull his knife first I'm not sure his consequences would be quite so severe. First off, he is older so they may see him as more mature, maybe even mature enough to handle his weapon. Second, seeing as his weapon of choice was only a pocket knife so they may see it as less of a threat as opposed to a whole loaded gun.White789
Its unbelievable to see how some kids at such a young age can do these crimes. This scene shows many crimes being done all by children which is even more shocking. When everyone thinks about a crime being committed they automatically assume it was an adult who did the crime. Hopefully this movie opens some eyes to some people to show them that not all crime is done by adults children do crimes also and they can be serious crimes like murder and others children don't just do petty crimes. Don't just automatically assume adults are doing all the crimes, not all of our children are cute an innocent some are delinquents. NDIrish123.
While watching this clip from the movie, one can point out many illegal things that are going on between the two groups of kids. For starters the fact that the older kids are in a gang and even the younger kids are in a gang of their own so to speak, it shows how kids back in those days hung out. Nowadays these juveniles would be probably be arrested and waived to adult court for their involvement with a gang. Another issue that one could easily identify is the fact that one of the younger kids had a gun on him. This gun probably did not belong to him either, which adds an extra bit of worry to the mix. To add insult to injury he also fired the gun which does not help, he would more than likely be waived to adult court for having a firearm and also for firing the gun. As far as crimes warranting a waiver to adult court go, these two offenses would be the only ones that would be of great importance to the officers or the judge involved in the case if the boys were to be arrested for the offenses. However it is a movie and the movie is set in a time frame where parents and adults did not really care what their children were doing, all they really cared about was knowing where their kid were at and half the time they did not even know that information. Pack123
The movie Stand By me is a great example of Juvenile delinquency. The characters of the movie all come from rough homes or at least uncomfortable holes which lead their older brothers to become delinquents and form a gang. The main characters get involved in a lot of delinquent behavior throughout the movie while they walk to go find the missing boy. The theory that could be used very well for this movie would be the choice theory. These boys come from rough homes but they make the choices to lie to their parents, to steal the gun from one of their dads, and to jump the junk yard fence. They chose to commit these acts because they thought their choices were going to be beneficial. The Trait theory could also be used with this movie, for many of the boys they have a older sibling that is delinquent as well so the trait theory could say that there's characteristics that makes these boys more likely to be delinquent. Yes a lot of the delinquent acts were minor and petty but them walking around with a gun could very easily get them waived into adult court. That was the last thing on their mind while walking through the woods to go look for this missing boy that they new was dead. The motive behind doing all of this is so that they would be put on the news and be looked at as heroes for find the missing person. In their minds they had no intent on being delinquent which is what leads them, into trouble at the last scene when they run into the older brothers and get into a standoff. One of the main character pulls out a gun and fires it into the air, then proceeds to aim in at ace until they older boys leave. This movie is very helpful in tying things we learn in class to real life. KLICK123
There is a lot going on in this scene of the movie. There are two “gangs” involved, one of a group of older juveniles, and a group of young kids probably 12-13 years old, would is a crime all on its own for being involved in gang activity. I don’t know if these young kids would for sure be waived to adult court for being in a gang, but that is definitely a possibility. This scene portrays the younger group of juveniles “protecting” a dead body because there is a reward for whoever finds the body. This is not a crime on its own, but potential criminal activity begins to arise when the older group of juveniles show up to hassle the younger group, and they want the reward for finding the body as well. As this is happening, the older kids get more assertive, and one of the younger juveniles comes into the scene with a gun, trying to get the old kids to back off. The juvenile would most likely be waived to adult court for the possession of a firearm, and especially for potentially endangering others with said firearm. The situation for the young juvenile would get a lot worse if he fires the weapon, whether it be at someone or simply in the air. If he shoots the older kid, his situation is a heck of a lot worse, and the chances that he gets waived to adult court are extremely high, with a handful of charges racked up against him. gh_blackhawks123
I have seen the movie 'Stand by Me' a couple times before in the past, but it has been quite some time. This ending scene from that movie is just really intense and there is a lot going on. All these boys are worked up over this dead body and they are all threatening each other and talking up a pretty big game. I feel that social disorganization theory played a big part in not only this scene but the entire movie. Social organization theory states that criminal activity and violent behavior is more likely to occur in areas where social institutions are unable to control and direct groups of individuals. Maybe it was the area all of this took place in or maybe it was the time period, in my opinion I feel it is both along with some other factors, but these children of all different ages were definitely just running around unsupervised doing their own thing. Ace, one of the older boys, was carrying a knife, one of the younger boys was carrying a loaded gun, and while this nothing too serious happened in this scene, it was very apparent that it could have. There was also promise from Ace that the boys would get what is coming to them. To be exact and give a little bit more input and reasoning on my suspected causes for these types of behavior, I feel that these boys are living in a small-town scenery quite a few years back and are children of lower class folk. Parents were definitely a lot more lenient on their kids way back in the day, my mother has told me about her days as a child, and in small towns they were even more lenient because everyone is under the impression that there is not much to get into in smaller towns and rural areas. I feel that social class has a lot to do with these behaviors because it has been said that children of the lower class are statistically proven to be more violent and are usually involved in more criminal activity than those raised in higher class communities.White789
After watching this video, there are a few examples of how this connects to social disorganization theory. One of the examples is how the younger gang of kids may have been influenced by the older group of kids of being in a gang and getting into mischief. In other words, like in our notes, they are the "victims" of social disorganization theory, or the "delinquency trend". Even more so, one of the kids in the older kids gang is the older brother of one of the kids in the younger gang. So this doesn't only effect the younger brother on behavior from outside domestic behavior, but also from inside his own house growing up with his older delinquent brother. It's almost as if the younger brother is being set up for a delinquent career as his older brother has took it upon himself to do so as well. Now even though his older brother is a "risk factor" for his delinquent life, there is a possibility that these younger kids may not take up the criminal life. This would be the result of positive "buffers" that we have discussed in class. The kids may take this situation into future consideration by saying to themselves that the situation was a lesson learned of what not to be when the grow up. So from a social disorganization theory point of view, this situation would teach the kids a lesson for the future by showing the kids that they don't want to be like those older kids when they grow up, and that they would rather stick up for what is right in a real world situation. Arthur123
Seeing these young teens fighting over a dead body really leads to questions as to what would be an appropriate punishment for them. The older teens are trying to get the kids to leave and let them get the credit for finding the dead body but the younger teens do not want that to happen. Weapons were taken out during their argument making a threat against each other. Since the younger boy pulls out a gun and is threatening to kill the older teen if they try to take the credit for the dead body. Not only did he pull out the gun but he did fire it to scare the teens. If the boy was caught doing what he did or the older teen explains to the cops this situation the young man could have been taken to adult court. Sending a child like this to an environment like adult court is just going to be detrimental to him. While in jail he could experience new ways to be a criminal and new ways to make bad decisions. Not only that but he isn’t going to grow and learn how to correct his decisions. Same with the older teen who took a knife out. They already have developed bad habits and are already getting themselves into trouble. They need to go through rehabilitation in order to get a better understand of their actions. The boy who fired the gun is young enough to get his life back on the right track. He is just dealing with pressure from his peers and how he grew up. He doesn’t know any different and wants to impress his friends. He needs to get help instead of spending his youth in jail not getting help. He would benefit more from getting help anyways. Sunshine 123
After seeing this movie, I thought of the social bond theory with how the kids in both groups or gangs were. One group was with 15 to 16 years old and the other was the older gang’s younger siblings so I thought of attachment because they were trying to be like them and have a support group of friends. Then I thought of commitment because they were all pretty persistent that they would get to turn in the body they found. The little boys were looking up to their brothers and decided that they should start a gang just like them. They may have learned this behavior from their environment. They had to learn their behavior from other delinquents acts all around. It’s even possibility that their households could be ran poorly depending on if they came from an abusive home or they are living in poverty. It looks as if their peers or so called “friends” have the most influence on one another’s behaviors. I think a major key factor and the greatest influence of how someone will act is by whom they surround themselves with. Jeep123
With my topic being labeling theory I see it placed in the movie directly and indirectly. Yes most people just by watching the movie label these kids as delinquent do to what they are doing. They are fighting over a dead body. Also one kid has a firearm and is willing to shoot and kill someone which kids for one shouldn't have the mentality and two should not have a firearm in their possession. Another way you could label these kids is by the way they are talking with all the foul language. But what I wonder about is how and if they were labelled before this time in their life. What pushed them to this part in there life? What made these kids join these "gangs" and fight over a dead body. If they were labelled before this they could have taken the label and became the label because they thought society viewed them that way. Yes anyone can label anybody but it can do some damage if they accept it and become the label. I would like to know what forced the kids to become the kids that they are now in the movie. What were some factors or labels that were placed on them. If we find that and see exactly what has happened throughout their whole life we can probably find the turning point when the kid started to become a delinquent and you could watch it intensify over the time of their life. I think if we do that in the criminal justice world we could police these kids better and learn how to prevent the future kids from becoming a delinquent. We could also lear how to fix these kids problems and what event actually changed their life to make them become a delinquent. NDIrish123.
After watching a short clip of the movie called " Stand By Me" I instantly thought of all the illegal things goings on between these children. Not one on these children are even close to being adults but they are committing crimes that could very easily have them waived to adult criminal court instead of going through the juvenile system. These kids are involved in gang related activities and also have weapons. Both the younger kids and the older kids are also threatening the lives of other by wanting to kill each other. The extremely sad part of this particular scene and/or movie is the these children are siblings to one another and the young is learning from their older siblings. We as human beings are not born to know how to do or act in this manner, it is taught to us. These extremely young kids are learning from their older brothers that it is okay to act this way and treat others that way. These children think it is "cool" to participate in these kinds of activities. I don’t recall the entire movie but I am assuming that the gun did not belong to any of those children which would be another crime. These children know that it is wrong to kill or murder someone but how do we stop these young children from getting into the adult court system so early? They are old enough to know right from wrong and they are old enough to know that their actions are completely illegal. I do not think that the children would have any chance of not getting waived in to adult criminal court. These juveniles have also been in trouble with the law before so them getting a second chance is more than likely slim to none. UofM123
In this i'm talking about the label theory and what I saw happening in the movie. While watching this movie I could tell that their parents really must've not have cared for what their children were feeling or getting into. At the beginning of the movie the boys are in a tree house smoking and playing cards. Maybe if they had better discipline or support that would've never been happening. These kids are very young. The cussing recklessly could've resulted them to getting put into JDC. In the movie there is a character named Chris. Due to his families history he is known for being a "bad boy". That describes something that we learned in the Labeling theory topic in class. People probably didn't know chris personally but, due to the acts of family members they would talk about him not even knowing what his personality is actually like. An example of labeling the boy Then Teddy Duchamp's was funny but why did his father burn his ear with an iron? Was it because he was even labeled by his father for being dumb? I feel that Teddy's character was degraded (which means someone telling you what you really are and you start to believe it) into thinking that he wasn't worth anything because when they went on their adventure, it seemed like he was just ready to end it all. Until Chris, the "bad boy" stopped him. Chris was a victim of future labeling people really didn't think that he would amount to anything because of what his brother did. Also, Vern Tassio I feel that he just was a little boy who was just misunderstood. He had bright ideas and probably just needed a little job to buy him the things that he wants. Gordie seems like a smart kid. His parents just probably feel that He was just hanging out with the wrong people. Which is labeling because they didn't take the time to learn or get to know the boys. Couldnt the boys actually get in trouble just going off that far? Without their parents supervising them? His older brother died and after that it's like his mother just neglects him and his father wants Gordie to be like him so bad. Chris's brother takes Gordie's hat (which was given to him by his brother) which could be why Gordie is ready to shoot him at the end. The boys are going on a trip and they are looking for a missing body in hope of recieving a cash award at the end. They stop in the woods and have a gun. They could get in trouble for that. Now, in a USA article it says that parents could actually get n trouble for that. While they are in the woods, Gordie starts having a nightmare. He misses his brother and Chris is the one who is uo trying to calming him down. The boys are going on an adventure to find a young mans body. They told there parents that they were going to stay at a friends just in case they were wondering but by the looks of it, the parents didn't care. As they are on a hunt the boys actually open up more to each other. I feel that if the boys older brothers were good characters, they probably wouldn't be roaming around the city. Maybe because of how they are hearing about their brothers, they feel that that is how they're destined to act. The older brothers and the other boys were also on a hunt. And because they were being labeled, why not just be on a hunt and clown around with each other. At the end of the movie the body is found by the younger boys and the older boys. They arrive at the same time and actually the older characters example, Chris's brother is taunting the boys. Gordie isn't having that. He pulled out a gun and pointed it at him. I don't even think Gordie pulled the gun out for the rewards of the body, but how they were being treated. I feel that rather than judging or typing these kids people should just talk to them and hear them out. At the end of the story I feel that the boys maybe didn't take the body because they are already known for there acts around town maybe. okurrr007
When watching this short video and connecting it to social disorganization theory, I thought about how social disorganization theory deals with how you interact with others and how you want to fit in with the people around you. When we were talking about the four boys Dr. White said that half of them had older brothers that were in the older guys gang, so the younger brothers wanted to be like their older brothers and start a gang. Also when all the boys ever get to see is their brothers or anyone who is in that gang start doing some type of criminal act; they may think that this is how all society functions and what everyone does nowadays. I have seen this movie in its entirety and I remember at the beginning of the movie the four boys are up in a tree house and they are smoke cigarettes which is probably something they had to learn from their older siblings which the young boys might think makes them look cool and they probably believe they can join the gang if they imitate their brothers. Also when one of the boys had the gun at the end, it got me wondering where are his parents, why is this gun so easy for him to reach and is every house in this town like that. If parents do not keep things such as guns from their children, then if a four year old gets a hold of it they might shoot themselves or in the young boy's case they were willing to shoot someone over a dead body. I know that his parents might have been at work, but they need to have some sort of adult watching them in case they do something like this in the future and actually do kill someone.
ReplyDeleteIllini123
It's true that younger kids lack vast knowledge and want to fit in with their peers especially older ones that they view as "higher". Choice theory fits better because it explains the fact that they made the CHOICE to become delinquents, both the older and younger kids. You can't look back on the rest of the movie because we were assigned to only analyze this portion of it. I would have to say the parents of the kid who has the gun are the biggest criminals here. They made the choice to allow their son to have easy access to their gun. They clearly did not use rational thinking to secure or just lock up the gun. So therefore they made the choice to allow him to do whatever he chooses with it and they will pay for any crimes he commits with it. All the kids in the movie are delinquents because they are fighters and hazards to society. Fireboy123
DeleteIt is interesting to see the social pressure these older brothers can have over their younger siblings. Especially when they are engaging in delinquent activities that can seem enticing or exciting to younger kids. It is apparent from this film that both age groups are suffering from a poor attachment to their families and communities. Unfortunately with the involvement of deadly weapons on both sides it is going to be a criminal case in which both sides can face sizable convictions. Ghost123
DeleteI totally agree with you. Every younger sibling wants to be like their older sibling. I can relate to this one because being the youngest one out 4 kids, I wanted to be just like my older sister. I wanted to do everything that she did. And, I wanted the same thing that she wanted. So, I can see why they wanted to be rebels like their older brothers. But, with wanting to be followers there comes consequences to their actions. SO, i am pretty sure whatever the punishment the older boys got the young boys got.WS123
DeleteI agree that every younger sibling wants to be like and impress their older sibling. In the movie like you said most of the younger boys had an older brother that was in the older boy’s gang. So, the younger boys more than likely wanted to be like their older siblings and started that gang. They also more than likely learned all that deliquiate behavior from their older siblings. A child’s older sibling has a significant impact on what they choose to do in life. So, if the older sibling is doing delinquent acts and the younger sibling witnesses this, they will more than likely be doing deliquiate acts also. Trojan123
DeleteI can see the rational choice theory in action in the movie, "Stand by Me". The young kids knew what they were doing was illegal and the older kids did as well. It's more important to understand that the older kids knew what they were doing because they have had more time to self-reflect and decide if they will become delinquents. Now the younger kids probably aren't as "smart" to weigh their actions/decisions ahead of time. I think the younger kids were trying to impress the older ones into allowing them to join their clique and prove that they are tough. Choice theory says that people have the ability to decide whether or not to commit crimes, but most won't due to wanting to stay within society. This is true, but in this case I think the younger kids' society is revolved around trying to be like the older kids. Huge question that deviates from choice theory is how the hell did the little boy get a gun? He doesn't live in the ghetto because ghetto kids don't go out into the deep woods. So it must be his parents because clearly he didn't just happen to pick it up off the ground. That kid in particular is exactly what social control theory try’s to explain because he is quite deviant from his peers and society. Overall I think the young kids lack conformity to society and therefore they are very much so what we would use labeling theory to label as delinquents. It is questionable because I don’t really see how the kids would view shooting off a gun and hiding a body as more rewarding than not committing crimes. Maybe they think the reward is being able to prove themselves and scare off the older kids. It still would not be less costly for them to commit these crimes because the evidence for them to be thrown in jail is so readily available. Fireboy123
ReplyDeleteThere definitely appears to be some form of peer pressure between the teenagers and the young boys. Both parties in this clip are in the wrong and due to their lack of attachment to one another and their society in general it is no surprise that this confrontation between the two groups escalated into an almost deadly encounter. Furthermore, I agree that these children lack a bond or conformity with their community since they are willing to engage in multiple delinquent acts and use a firearm in order to protect a dead body. It will take severe involvement of both the families and governmental institutions to help these children steer clear of the path they are going down. Ghost123
DeleteYes they should have known what they were doing was illegal and yet they still wanted to do it. The older ones definitely have had to have some sort of run in with the law because if they were well behaved kids then they would not have threatened to kill the younger ones. This also goes for the young kids even though they may not be as old and may not have thought out what could actually happen if they do these acts, they should have some sense of knowledge and know what is right and what is not right.
DeleteIllini123
I totally agree with you. All of the boys knew exactly what they were doing. So, whatever happens to them would be on them, if they were to get caught by the police. The young man with the gun knew that if he was to point it at the older group it would scare them. He had a choice to do that or not. No one made him go get a gun and make point it to the group. And, the older guys had a choice when they threaten the younger boys. And, the one boy had a knife and it was his choice to bring the knife out to scare the younger boys to giving them the dead body.WS123
DeleteI agree with you on this. The boys knew that it was illegal what they were doing. it would be there fault for sure if they got caught by the police. The kid pointing the gun at the older kid had a choice to pull the trigger or not. the older guy also had the choice to bully and threaten the younger kids with a pocketknife to make the young kids give them the body. Cavsfan123
DeleteWithin the movie "Stand by Me" many correlations can be drawn from the social control theory and more specifically, Hirschi's social bond theory. At first in appears that the good guys, being the little kids in this scene, had won the day against the older siblings who looked to take advantage of the younger kids through the use of their older ages and their relationships to the boys. The teenagers appear to be partaking in several delinquent activities based on their attitudes and intimidation skills. This may be largely contributed to their lack of involvement in the community or with their families. This can be seen with the way the main antagonist threatens to kill one of the boys when they won't give up the body. Threatening to kill someone, especially a young kid, is not normal behavior learned or developed from basic social norms and can largely be attributed to delinquent tendencies and activities. This further proves the issue of commitment as well. If the teenagers committed more time to earning rewards and benefits the noble way they may be less likely to try to "cheat" their way to success. Since both the teenagers and the kids are committing delinquent acts it may be possible that this will cause a reciprocal reaction in which they may be driven to commit more delinquent acts in the future. The children are not innocent either. Through the situations their brothers have likely been through in life it can be no surprise that the situation has escalated to what we see in this clip. Due to a weak attachment with their brothers who, instead of showing them right from wrong, have engaged in delinquent activity. These kids have been brought and raised in a toxic situation in which the use of deadly weapons in a confrontation has become the most approachable method of communication between the two age groups. It is clear to say that if a young child has to raise a loaded Colt 1911 at an older child in order to protect what he thinks is his than their may be some family and community issues that need to be addressed. Ghost123
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely right that correlations can be put together with the social control theory. Since it talks about how kids want to fit in with society. Unfortunately their society just happens to be a negative one, that surrounds them with bad older influences. Which we know can leave a mark on impressionable youth who look up to their elders. It is kind of hard to make judgments on the youth in the short video because we do not know the year in which this takes place nor the age. So smoking and carrying a gun may actually be legal at this time. I would expect that the young kids are not entirely sure of what they are doing rather they want to show how bad they are to the older kids. It is questionable as to who taught the young kids to be so rebellious unless it in fact was their elders. Fireboy123
DeleteSome may think that they are the good guys, but if they are willing to shoot someone or if the older kids are willing to stab someone over a dead body then I do not think we really have a good side in that case. Yes if the older boys have done delinquent acts before it definitely shows in the way they were able to scare their little brothers and that they were willing to fight for nothing. I feel that these kids should have actually worked for their rewards and not cheated as you have said.
DeleteIllini123
I agree with all of you on this. These kids were trying to fit in and trying to get the spot light on the news. i just could not beleve that siblings would hold knifes at each other let alone a nice looking 1911. The feeling in this movies almost makes you believe that they were willing to put some one in the ground over something so small as a little time on the news.Jeeper123
DeleteMy topic that I have is Labeling Theory. I think that Labeling theory can be tied into the boys in the video because since they are young they can be automatically be assumed that they are delinquents. Even, though you don’t know them if you were to go in the woods and seen a big group of boys you would assume that they are up to no good. You would assume that just by how they are dressed. You could label them as being dirty because their clothes are filthy and their hands are dirty. You could also label them as criminals because the one had a gun. There's no telling where the young man git the gun from. But, if the police would have caught them they would have identified him as a criminal. They would not have seen it as him trying to protect him and his friends from the bigger boys who was trying to bully them. The older boys could have been identified as a criminal because he has a pocket knife. Yes, I would label them as a criminal because both groups were in the wrong, with the pocket knife and the gun. The older guys could have pretty sure been labeled as a bullied. Which, they really were bulling the littler boys even though they had brothers in the group of smaller kids. The other older guys could been seen as followers because they were just going off what the main guy was saying. They were playing follow the leader because they wouldn’t move unless the “leader” say move. All the names that could have been stuck with them, will only make them want to stick with it because they think it is cool. And, they are all at the age where being bad or disobeying is cool. WS123
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with what you have to say about labeling theory and having it being involved with the clip. If anyone the younger boys or the older ones the first thing that would come across their mind was that they are up to no good. If anyone seen a child like you said that was dirty and possibly carrying a knife or if they see the gun, or even them smoking. They would automatically be labeled by that person. Also, though if they do find the body and turn it in. they could either be labeled as heroes or criminals. Trojan123
DeleteThis scene expressed a lot of labeling from the vulgar language to just rude manner expressed by the boys. Even as a viewer of the scene there were probably people who were in their head labeling the boys based on appearance and attitude. But the labeling will only take affect if the person you are labeling accepts the label. This scene does express the labeling done by the older brother and siblings to be effecting their actions. They all have this bad boy persona even though the younger boys do seem frightening by what they did. Sunshine123
DeleteI had the topic of rational choice theory. In the movie Stand by Me choice theory is a factor in most of the clip. The children in the film did choose to try to find the body and knew that’s what they were going to do. The same applies for the older kids. There is a difference between them though. The younger group of children are more likely to just jump up and do something when they decide that they are going to do that specific thing. The older kids might as well but they should know better that they were going to set off and do was illegal. Also, the smaller children for sure knew that what they were doing was illegal in ways. But the difference is that the older kids should know better and should have been able to reflect of what they were doing more because they are more matured than the young children. Another factor relating choice theory that happened in the clip was when the kid decided to stand his group and not leave. The young one had the choice to leave or stay there and possibly get beat up. He chose to stand his ground and get a possible beating. Then the other kid came out shooting in the air with the pistol and threating to kill the older kid if him and his whole crew did not leave. All of what I just explained all relates to choice theory. Both sets of children, the older ones and younger ones, all made those choices and that is where it made theme end up. Both sides could have easily chose a different path or done something different and the outcome would have been very much different. But they had that choice and their actions depicted the future. Trojan123
ReplyDeleteI agree with you but, even though the older boys should know better they will not act like it. I feel like they want to portray this hard bad ass image. So, they will not show that they know right from wrong. They would want to try to stay like they know what they are doing is right. They definitely knew what they were doing. Just how from the older boys was going to hurt the younger one for mocking him. I also agree to the young boy staying there and standing their ground to keep the body, I don't see anything wrong with that,he just wanted to seem as tough as the older boys. WS123
DeleteI also agree. Not all their choices were overall based on the legality of what they were doing but small choices that the younger kids could rationalize based on their protection of their friends. Most of their choices though were bad choices that if caught a few of them would be arrested. The switchblade first of all is illegal in most states so just carrying it is a bad choice made even before the start of the clip, but even that doesn’t compare to taking the gun, discharging it, and threatening people with it. Another failed choice was searching by themselves for a dead body without any responsible adult on land they don’t own. They are effectively trespassing with weapons looking for dead bodies. But for the younger kids a few good choices were made like defending each other and running away from a situation that possibly injure or get them in trouble. -M24Ninja123
DeleteMy topic that I will be working on is the Labelling theory. Labeling theory can be seen in the video because the boys in the video are young and they can be shown that they are doing delinquent acts that would easily apply them to the labelling theory. If you stumble across kids in the woods, you automatically think they are doing something illegal because the likelihood of running into the kids in the woods playing football and having fun is very unlikely. You could label them just by the way they are covered in filth and how they're clothes are. Another reason to label them is because the one kid has a firearm. If they were caught by law enforcement doing these activities they would have been prosecuted as a criminal because the police wouldn't have understood the situation like the boys would have. The older boys could have been prosecuted as an adult because of the pocket knife. In my opinion, I would label them as a criminal because the boys all had weapons on them. The older kids would have been labelled for bullying too. They were bullying the little kids by saying they were going to beat them up if they didn't give them the body. The older guys would be labelled as followers because they were following the main guys every command or moves and creating more trouble. They are all at the age of life where doing delinquent acts would make you look cool and make you more friends by doing delinquent acts. The labeling theory can be applied in a lot of situations in this video and also other delinquent situations kids and juveniles do. Cavsfan123
ReplyDeleteI agree that these kids could be labeled many different names because of the things they were doing in the clip. If they were to be caught, I definitely think they would be tried in adult court because of all of the criminal and delinquent acts they were committing, especially discharging and holding a firearm. They were also hiding a dead body for some unknown reason.
Delete-PizzaLover123
I agree, they are definitely going to be label by their delinquent acts. Them having a gun and a knife fighting over a dead body is not a good look. In the video it doesn’t look like a big deal with them having those things, but they could be charged with so many things and including their older brothers. I also agree, they are going to get in more trouble because if they’re so brave to pull out knives and guns just imagine if they were in a worse situation how bad it would end. – babyblue123
DeleteAlthough these kids are not labeled yet, and may not get labeled at any point, their delinquent behavior may lead to them being labeled, whether it be formally or informally. If that label sticks, and it is a negative one, their behavior may get drastically worse and they may spiral out of control. However, if dealt with properly, these kids could turn their lives around and leave the gang and go down a path that is much more promising. gh_blackhawks123
DeleteAfter watching this short clip, I think social control and social bond theory could relate to these juveniles in one way or another. The four main social bonds called attachment, involvement, belief and commitment can be described during this scene and probably throughout the whole film. It’s clear that by the way these teenagers act, they do not have a strong bond with their community or people around them otherwise they would not complete the acts shown in the scene. Their bonds are weakened within these groups and it’s clear that they do not follow any set of rules but only live by their own rules. I don’t know if maybe they are completing these delinquent acts because they don’t have respect for their community or surroundings or maybe they don’t have a solid connection and bond with their parents. It’s even possibility that their households could be ran poorly depending on if they came from an abusive home or they are living in poverty. It looks as if their peers or so called “friends” have the most influence on one another’s behaviors. I think a major key factor and the greatest influence of how someone will act is by whom they surround themselves with. This is where the attachment part comes in from the social bond theory. If these kids don’t have a good role model to look up to then they are more than likely to commit delinquency acts with their peers and it will continue to get worse as they get older. Travis Hirschi explains that it really depends on what kind of relationship you have with these social bonds. If you have a weak relationship with these social bonds then you are at a higher risk to commit criminal activities or present delinquent behaviors if you are a child.
ReplyDelete-PizzaLover123
I totally agree, those kids are going through the wrong path. They are going to commit more delinquent acts if they don’t get it together. What makes it worse is that their older siblings are doing the same things so it makes it harder for them to do the right thing because they’re not on the right path either. they are so used to seeing it in their environment so they think it’s a good thing to do. Their parents should really help them do the right thing and be there for them because it will definably get their live together -babyblue123
DeleteWhen watching this video, I could defiantly relate it to social deodorization. In the Shaw and Mckay theory they said different things about zones. In the video it looks like those boys were in a bad neighborhood because they were all in gangs. The younger boys in the video where in a gang and the older boys were in a gang as well. What even tops it off is, some of the boys in the older gangs were the younger gang brother. The little boys were looking up to their brothers and decided that they should start a gang just like them. They may have learned this behavior from their environment. They had to learn their behavior from other delinquents acts all around. Shaw and Mckay studied the areas not the people. The young gang found the body that their brothers were trying to find and when they went to go find the young boys they threaten them to give up the body but they didn’t want to give it up and it went on and on. That’s when the delinquent act started because the young boys pulled out the gun and was pointing it around towards the big brothers saying to leave them alone and saying he will shoot and the leader of the older gang points out a knife threatening them back. It just shows how much different acts goes on and what happens in that type of neighborhood they live in. A member in my group also mentions that in the beginning of the movie they were in a tree house smoking a cigarette. There probably were always surrounded by that type of act. Maybe they have learned that type of behavior from their older siblings too. This video just helps show how people around you or even your neighborhood can affect your behavior. -babyblue123
ReplyDeleteAs we have learned in class, criminal behavior has to be learned or taught. The only way those boys would have known to defend themselves in that manner was from the older brothers that they were defending themselves against. They grew up with them and considering the brothers were already delinquents, it sets the exact example that the younger boys would need to be able to know how to act that way. Had they not been exposed to those boys and their crimes, they might have just decided to walk away under the assumption that finding a dead body isn’t worth being threatened by a gang of delinquents. So in all, I do agree that there is a lot of social disorganization in even just this one clip alone. SomethingProfound123
DeleteThat is avery good point in bringing up shaw and Mckay's theory. The boys only role models were in a gang or dead which leads them down a delinquent path. If the boys had brothers that did not break the law and act out the outcome for them would have been much different. the theory that stood out to me the most was the Trait theory. The boys and their brothers were delinquent so that just goes to show that there are characteristics that all of the boys possess that makes them more likely to commit.
DeleteKLICK123
I agree that this video definitely represents social disorganization theory. These kids do represent a lifestyle that is surrounded by gang activity and juvenile delinquency, and that disorganization contributes to the behavior that they participate in. You make a good point that one of the younger juveniles was probably influenced by his older brother, whether it was purposeful or subconsciously, because his older brother was a part of the older gang. gh_blackhawks123
DeleteWhen watching the stand by me video, I can one hundred percent relate it to rational choice theory. In the video the kids knew exactly what they were doing was illegal, and as well as the older kids. It is really important to know that the older kids had more time to decide these decisions to become delinquents. On the other hand I do think the kids don't realize what they are getting themselves into making all these irrational choices. The younger kids are trying to impress the older kids, for example the one kid in the video had a gun and could be trying to impress the older kid, saying and showing that he is tough and isn't afraid of killing someone. Choice theory states that that people have the ability to make the decision if they want to commit a crime or not. 10/10 of time most kids want to grow up in society. Kids that chose to commit crimes have a different background in case for example. Younger kids with siblings that are older than them is one reason they may commit crimes, younger kids tend to look up to there older brother or sister. Overall in the video I watched a learned a lot of things about how it relates to rational choice theory. I think that the kids could be looking up to there older brother that is in his own gang, they could have also been not thinking about the consequences of what they were doing, could have been thinking to see what the big reward could be. My opinion about the kid having a gun and possibly shooting someone, is that it probably would not be rewarding for him, he just wants to be able to show the big kids he isn’t scared and scare them away from the body. Choice theory is all about choices people make in their lifetime. Some may be good, some may bad. But in end it’s all up to you to decide you way of life. You can spend it being in the system and being known as a delinquent or you can live a life in society and not locked up behind bars.Smile123
ReplyDeleteI agree that there was a lot of choice theory that could have been applied to that small scene, but I do think that maybe there was more behind their choices than just impressing their older siblings. The fact that the entire situation was over who got to keep the dead body, to me, suggests that the choices were slightly out of greed and partially vindictive towards each other. Granted, I can agree that standing up to the older sibling could have played a part, but I think it was more driven by who got the most out of the situation and the kids just weren’t all that willing to give up without a fight, meaning their decisions could have also stemmed from pride as well. SomethingProfound123
DeleteThe first thing you think when you watch the ending scene of stand by me isn’t, “hey, that little kid would be waived to adult court for that!”. No, you’re probably thinking like the rest of everyone who is watching the movie. “Man, that’s one brave little kid! What a gutsy move pulling a gun on that teenager. I would have done the same thing.” Well, while all those statements can be very true, so is the first one. That kid could most indefinitely be waived to adult court for pulling that gun out. For one, that gun, I’m sure, doesn’t belong to him and it could be considered theft. That’s not the worst part of it though. Secondly, the fact that he pointed it at another person and threatened them means that it is now considered an adult action and would be waived to adult court. Especially if he had fired that gun and possibly killed or serious wounded the other person. He would most definitely then be trailed with first degree murder charges, if he successfully killed the boy, or he could be charged with attempted murder had he only wounded him and the other person was alive and able to testify against him. Now the time setting of the movie, I cannot recall, but considering the way they were dressed and some of the way they talked would suggest a period where juvenile punishment was starting to become a more regular thing. Granted, the kid had a dirty mouth, but it isn’t necessarily illegal to cuss like a sailor when you’re that age, just morally wrong, at least I think. So, within that ending scene, all I really saw that could possibly be qualified to waive that kid to adult court would have been him being in possession of the gun and the possibility of firing it. Thankfully he didn’t though as that act would potentially ruin the rest of his life. However, that isn’t foreseen in the movie, just an observation. SomethingProfound123
ReplyDeletePeople often overlook the fact that many things portrayed in movies could be seen as illegal acts, especially when those acts are being done by children. Many children often do stupid things however the stupid things they do don't often require a transfer to adult court. I would definitely agree with you in the case of the individual who had the gun and was threatening the other guy with it. He would most definitely be waived to adult court if he would have been caught by a police officer while doing those acts. Pack123
DeleteIt is crazy to think about a kid that young going to adult court for what he did. He seems so young and innocent but this type of behavior that he is displaying is only going to get worse thought-out his life if something isn’t done about it now. What he need is to get himself into programs that help fix his issues and lead him to better choices. Of course when watching this scene, you aren’t going to think about how this is going to effect him in life for firing a gun but it is important to think about. Sunshine123
DeleteThere are many different illegal acts going on in this short scene such as teens and younger children carrying weapons and interfering with a murder crime scene and I suppose suspected gang activity as well. But you are right when you say the young boy would probably be tried as an adult in court for having that gun and pulling it out on Ace. Unfortunately, although Ace was the one to pull his knife first I'm not sure his consequences would be quite so severe. First off, he is older so they may see him as more mature, maybe even mature enough to handle his weapon. Second, seeing as his weapon of choice was only a pocket knife so they may see it as less of a threat as opposed to a whole loaded gun.White789
DeleteIts unbelievable to see how some kids at such a young age can do these crimes. This scene shows many crimes being done all by children which is even more shocking. When everyone thinks about a crime being committed they automatically assume it was an adult who did the crime. Hopefully this movie opens some eyes to some people to show them that not all crime is done by adults children do crimes also and they can be serious crimes like murder and others children don't just do petty crimes. Don't just automatically assume adults are doing all the crimes, not all of our children are cute an innocent some are delinquents. NDIrish123.
DeleteWhile watching this clip from the movie, one can point out many illegal things that are going on between the two groups of kids. For starters the fact that the older kids are in a gang and even the younger kids are in a gang of their own so to speak, it shows how kids back in those days hung out. Nowadays these juveniles would be probably be arrested and waived to adult court for their involvement with a gang. Another issue that one could easily identify is the fact that one of the younger kids had a gun on him. This gun probably did not belong to him either, which adds an extra bit of worry to the mix. To add insult to injury he also fired the gun which does not help, he would more than likely be waived to adult court for having a firearm and also for firing the gun. As far as crimes warranting a waiver to adult court go, these two offenses would be the only ones that would be of great importance to the officers or the judge involved in the case if the boys were to be arrested for the offenses. However it is a movie and the movie is set in a time frame where parents and adults did not really care what their children were doing, all they really cared about was knowing where their kid were at and half the time they did not even know that information. Pack123
ReplyDeleteThe movie Stand By me is a great example of Juvenile delinquency. The characters of the movie all come from rough homes or at least uncomfortable holes which lead their older brothers to become delinquents and form a gang. The main characters get involved in a lot of delinquent behavior throughout the movie while they walk to go find the missing boy. The theory that could be used very well for this movie would be the choice theory. These boys come from rough homes but they make the choices to lie to their parents, to steal the gun from one of their dads, and to jump the junk yard fence. They chose to commit these acts because they thought their choices were going to be beneficial. The Trait theory could also be used with this movie, for many of the boys they have a older sibling that is delinquent as well so the trait theory could say that there's characteristics that makes these boys more likely to be delinquent. Yes a lot of the delinquent acts were minor and petty but them walking around with a gun could very easily get them waived into adult court. That was the last thing on their mind while walking through the woods to go look for this missing boy that they new was dead. The motive behind doing all of this is so that they would be put on the news and be looked at as heroes for find the missing person. In their minds they had no intent on being delinquent which is what leads them, into trouble at the last scene when they run into the older brothers and get into a standoff. One of the main character pulls out a gun and fires it into the air, then proceeds to aim in at ace until they older boys leave. This movie is very helpful in tying things we learn in class to real life.
ReplyDeleteKLICK123
There is a lot going on in this scene of the movie. There are two “gangs” involved, one of a group of older juveniles, and a group of young kids probably 12-13 years old, would is a crime all on its own for being involved in gang activity. I don’t know if these young kids would for sure be waived to adult court for being in a gang, but that is definitely a possibility. This scene portrays the younger group of juveniles “protecting” a dead body because there is a reward for whoever finds the body. This is not a crime on its own, but potential criminal activity begins to arise when the older group of juveniles show up to hassle the younger group, and they want the reward for finding the body as well. As this is happening, the older kids get more assertive, and one of the younger juveniles comes into the scene with a gun, trying to get the old kids to back off. The juvenile would most likely be waived to adult court for the possession of a firearm, and especially for potentially endangering others with said firearm. The situation for the young juvenile would get a lot worse if he fires the weapon, whether it be at someone or simply in the air. If he shoots the older kid, his situation is a heck of a lot worse, and the chances that he gets waived to adult court are extremely high, with a handful of charges racked up against him. gh_blackhawks123
ReplyDeleteI have seen the movie 'Stand by Me' a couple times before in the past, but it has been quite some time. This ending scene from that movie is just really intense and there is a lot going on. All these boys are worked up over this dead body and they are all threatening each other and talking up a pretty big game. I feel that social disorganization theory played a big part in not only this scene but the entire movie. Social organization theory states that criminal activity and violent behavior is more likely to occur in areas where social institutions are unable to control and direct groups of individuals. Maybe it was the area all of this took place in or maybe it was the time period, in my opinion I feel it is both along with some other factors, but these children of all different ages were definitely just running around unsupervised doing their own thing. Ace, one of the older boys, was carrying a knife, one of the younger boys was carrying a loaded gun, and while this nothing too serious happened in this scene, it was very apparent that it could have. There was also promise from Ace that the boys would get what is coming to them.
ReplyDeleteTo be exact and give a little bit more input and reasoning on my suspected causes for these types of behavior, I feel that these boys are living in a small-town scenery quite a few years back and are children of lower class folk. Parents were definitely a lot more lenient on their kids way back in the day, my mother has told me about her days as a child, and in small towns they were even more lenient because everyone is under the impression that there is not much to get into in smaller towns and rural areas. I feel that social class has a lot to do with these behaviors because it has been said that children of the lower class are statistically proven to be more violent and are usually involved in more criminal activity than those raised in higher class communities.White789
After watching this video, there are a few examples of how this connects to social disorganization theory. One of the examples is how the younger gang of kids may have been influenced by the older group of kids of being in a gang and getting into mischief. In other words, like in our notes, they are the "victims" of social disorganization theory, or the "delinquency trend". Even more so, one of the kids in the older kids gang is the older brother of one of the kids in the younger gang. So this doesn't only effect the younger brother on behavior from outside domestic behavior, but also from inside his own house growing up with his older delinquent brother. It's almost as if the younger brother is being set up for a delinquent career as his older brother has took it upon himself to do so as well. Now even though his older brother is a "risk factor" for his delinquent life, there is a possibility that these younger kids may not take up the criminal life. This would be the result of positive "buffers" that we have discussed in class. The kids may take this situation into future consideration by saying to themselves that the situation was a lesson learned of what not to be when the grow up. So from a social disorganization theory point of view, this situation would teach the kids a lesson for the future by showing the kids that they don't want to be like those older kids when they grow up, and that they would rather stick up for what is right in a real world situation. Arthur123
ReplyDeleteSeeing these young teens fighting over a dead body really leads to questions as to what would be an appropriate punishment for them. The older teens are trying to get the kids to leave and let them get the credit for finding the dead body but the younger teens do not want that to happen. Weapons were taken out during their argument making a threat against each other. Since the younger boy pulls out a gun and is threatening to kill the older teen if they try to take the credit for the dead body. Not only did he pull out the gun but he did fire it to scare the teens. If the boy was caught doing what he did or the older teen explains to the cops this situation the young man could have been taken to adult court. Sending a child like this to an environment like adult court is just going to be detrimental to him. While in jail he could experience new ways to be a criminal and new ways to make bad decisions. Not only that but he isn’t going to grow and learn how to correct his decisions. Same with the older teen who took a knife out. They already have developed bad habits and are already getting themselves into trouble. They need to go through rehabilitation in order to get a better understand of their actions. The boy who fired the gun is young enough to get his life back on the right track. He is just dealing with pressure from his peers and how he grew up. He doesn’t know any different and wants to impress his friends. He needs to get help instead of spending his youth in jail not getting help. He would benefit more from getting help anyways. Sunshine 123
ReplyDeleteAfter seeing this movie, I thought of the social bond theory with how the kids in both groups or gangs were. One group was with 15 to 16 years old and the other was the older gang’s younger siblings so I thought of attachment because they were trying to be like them and have a support group of friends. Then I thought of commitment because they were all pretty persistent that they would get to turn in the body they found. The little boys were looking up to their brothers and decided that they should start a gang just like them. They may have learned this behavior from their environment. They had to learn their behavior from other delinquents acts all around. It’s even possibility that their households could be ran poorly depending on if they came from an abusive home or they are living in poverty. It looks as if their peers or so called “friends” have the most influence on one another’s behaviors. I think a major key factor and the greatest influence of how someone will act is by whom they surround themselves with.
ReplyDeleteJeep123
With my topic being labeling theory I see it placed in the movie directly and indirectly. Yes most people just by watching the movie label these kids as delinquent do to what they are doing. They are fighting over a dead body. Also one kid has a firearm and is willing to shoot and kill someone which kids for one shouldn't have the mentality and two should not have a firearm in their possession. Another way you could label these kids is by the way they are talking with all the foul language. But what I wonder about is how and if they were labelled before this time in their life. What pushed them to this part in there life? What made these kids join these "gangs" and fight over a dead body. If they were labelled before this they could have taken the label and became the label because they thought society viewed them that way. Yes anyone can label anybody but it can do some damage if they accept it and become the label. I would like to know what forced the kids to become the kids that they are now in the movie. What were some factors or labels that were placed on them. If we find that and see exactly what has happened throughout their whole life we can probably find the turning point when the kid started to become a delinquent and you could watch it intensify over the time of their life. I think if we do that in the criminal justice world we could police these kids better and learn how to prevent the future kids from becoming a delinquent. We could also lear how to fix these kids problems and what event actually changed their life to make them become a delinquent. NDIrish123.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching a short clip of the movie called " Stand By Me" I instantly thought of all the illegal things goings on between these children. Not one on these children are even close to being adults but they are committing crimes that could very easily have them waived to adult criminal court instead of going through the juvenile system. These kids are involved in gang related activities and also have weapons. Both the younger kids and the older kids are also threatening the lives of other by wanting to kill each other. The extremely sad part of this particular scene and/or movie is the these children are siblings to one another and the young is learning from their older siblings. We as human beings are not born to know how to do or act in this manner, it is taught to us. These extremely young kids are learning from their older brothers that it is okay to act this way and treat others that way. These children think it is "cool" to participate in these kinds of activities. I don’t recall the entire movie but I am assuming that the gun did not belong to any of those children which would be another crime. These children know that it is wrong to kill or murder someone but how do we stop these young children from getting into the adult court system so early? They are old enough to know right from wrong and they are old enough to know that their actions are completely illegal. I do not think that the children would have any chance of not getting waived in to adult criminal court. These juveniles have also been in trouble with the law before so them getting a second chance is more than likely slim to none. UofM123
ReplyDeleteIn this i'm talking about the label theory and what I saw happening in the movie. While watching this movie I could tell that their parents really must've not have cared for what their children were feeling or getting into. At the beginning of the movie the boys are in a tree house smoking and playing cards. Maybe if they had better discipline or support that would've never been happening. These kids are very young. The cussing recklessly could've resulted them to getting put into JDC. In the movie there is a character named Chris. Due to his families history he is known for being a "bad boy". That describes something that we learned in the Labeling theory topic in class. People probably didn't know chris personally but, due to the acts of family members they would talk about him not even knowing what his personality is actually like. An example of labeling the boy Then Teddy Duchamp's was funny but why did his father burn his ear with an iron? Was it because he was even labeled by his father for being dumb? I feel that Teddy's character was degraded (which means someone telling you what you really are and you start to believe it) into thinking that he wasn't worth anything because when they went on their adventure, it seemed like he was just ready to end it all. Until Chris, the "bad boy" stopped him. Chris was a victim of future labeling people really didn't think that he would amount to anything because of what his brother did. Also, Vern Tassio I feel that he just was a little boy who was just misunderstood. He had bright ideas and probably just needed a little job to buy him the things that he wants. Gordie seems like a smart kid. His parents just probably feel that He was just hanging out with the wrong people. Which is labeling because they didn't take the time to learn or get to know the boys. Couldnt the boys actually get in trouble just going off that far? Without their parents supervising them? His older brother died and after that it's like his mother just neglects him and his father wants Gordie to be like him so bad. Chris's brother takes Gordie's hat (which was given to him by his brother) which could be why Gordie is ready to shoot him at the end. The boys are going on a trip and they are looking for a missing body in hope of recieving a cash award at the end. They stop in the woods and have a gun. They could get in trouble for that. Now, in a USA article it says that parents could actually get n trouble for that. While they are in the woods, Gordie starts having a nightmare. He misses his brother and Chris is the one who is uo trying to calming him down. The boys are going on an adventure to find a young mans body. They told there parents that they were going to stay at a friends just in case they were wondering but by the looks of it, the parents didn't care. As they are on a hunt the boys actually open up more to each other. I feel that if the boys older brothers were good characters, they probably wouldn't be roaming around the city. Maybe because of how they are hearing about their brothers, they feel that that is how they're destined to act. The older brothers and the other boys were also on a hunt. And because they were being labeled, why not just be on a hunt and clown around with each other. At the end of the movie the body is found by the younger boys and the older boys. They arrive at the same time and actually the older characters example, Chris's brother is taunting the boys. Gordie isn't having that. He pulled out a gun and pointed it at him. I don't even think Gordie pulled the gun out for the rewards of the body, but how they were being treated. I feel that rather than judging or typing these kids people should just talk to them and hear them out. At the end of the story I feel that the boys maybe didn't take the body because they are already known for there acts around town maybe. okurrr007
ReplyDelete