Jeff Ferrell had this view of crime back in 1995:

Criminal behavior is, more often than not, subcultural behavior. From the interactionist criminology of the Chicago School and Edwin Sutherland to the subcultural theories of Cohen, Cloward and Ohlin, and others, criminologists have long acknowledged that actions and identities labelled “criminal” are typically generated within the boundaries of deviant and criminal subcultures. In this sense, much of what we take to be crime is essentially collective behavior; whether carried out by one person or many, particular criminal acts are often organized within and instigated by subcultural groups. Though the boundaries may remain ill-defined, and the membership may shift in gross numbers and level of commitment, these subcultures constitute definitive human associations for those who participate in them. Biker, hustler, Blood and Crip, pimp and prostitute—all name subcultural networks as much as individual identities. (p. 26)

Instructions

In your main post:

• Explain your understanding of Ferrel’s statement, “Criminal behavior is, more often than not, subcultural behavior.”
• Describe your reaction to this statement. Does it fit with your own personal opinion or perspective about what crime is? Explain why or why not.