Neiler

Cheers. I Have his theories boxed if, its using other theorists to criticise his work. I have used Marx and the pathological model but struggling from there. I personally could criticise it to fuck but cant really do that, have to use others...

As for nature v nurture argument, I know he argues crime is inevitable for society but have yet to find anything solid on him saying people are born criminals etc - although I suppose saying crime is inevitable is sort of saying so...

he was a bit mental when it came to crime mate shouldnt be to hard, he saw crime as a normality and usefull way of releaseing social tenions form what i remember. It would be a good crituqe to look at the social implications of soceity, removing responibility form the indicidual etc and the context he was wirting in Marx, Captialism, anarchy etc. He had some definitive ideas on law and punishment and some intresting if not out dated ideas on suuicide would be intresting comparing and critiuqeing them, but might be more work. Intresting point is it the indvidual crimianl chooses to break the law through choice, genetics, instincts or is it society who makes the Crimanl through poverty, circumstances, expeirenceid integrate that into his theroy.


Sorry that prob no help at all.

Ah, will let you off. Have to critically assess his contribution to punishment. Well clued up on his contribution and have that sorted, but the critical bit is throwing me. Thought you could have helped me out

Masters in social science ay? Know much about Durkheim!?

YouTube - Manuel Fernandes

Well better than Fellaini.

I think you have got this all wrong lads. when we get taken over by one of these oil billionaires and the two Americans running RS have to sell the ground to raise money why don't we just buy it and let them move out to Kirby. Stranger things have happened.

ye it is sad

Many thanks for that mate, no problem you knowing, sad isn't it