Introduction
Many elements, such as social institutions and responses to deviance, contribute to the complexity of criminal activity. Applying Social Reaction Theory and Social Structure Theory (also known as Labeling Theory) provides a thorough framework for analyzing the dynamics at work in the case of One Goh, the culprit engaged in the fatal school shooting event.
Topic; Crime
Seven people lost their lives in a mass shooting at Oakland, California’s Oikos University on April 2, 2012, carried out by One Goh. Reportedly, the perpetrator had a grudge against the school administration because of their treatment of the victim. The intricacy of criminal conduct and the need for all-encompassing theories to analyze its causes are highlighted by this unfortunate incident.
According to Social Structure Theory, economic and social systems shape people’s opportunities and decisions in life, which in turn leads to criminal conduct. This theory provides a valuable framework to examine One Goh’s past as an immigrant dealing with economic hardship. Frustration and animosity may have grown from the stress brought on by cultural displacement and economic disadvantages (Sabermajidi et al.,2020). According to Social Structure Theory, Goh may have felt even more helpless because of the barriers he faced to accessing economic and educational possibilities. According to this idea, criminal conduct may be shaped by socioeconomic inequality and restricted opportunities for upward mobility. However, it doesn’t go far enough in describing why some people do not turn to crime when confronted with comparable systemic limitations.
According to Social Structure Theory, the systems in place in a society affect people’s opportunities and decisions, leading to criminal behavior. A multi-faceted web of societal influences led to One Goh’s illegal conduct, as seen in his past. Acculturation, linguistic hurdles, and feelings of loneliness were some of the difficulties that Goh, a South Korean immigrant, encountered (Sabermajidi et al.,2020). Cultural discord, educational gaps, and economic problems characterized the social framework he had to negotiate. All these things made people feel even more alienated and frustrated. According to this idea, Goh’s unlawful behavior was an attempt to alleviate the stress of being on the outside looking in. His criminal behavior developed out of his frustration at an effort to exert control over his environment, stemming from his incapacity to conform to the established social order.
A distinct approach is taken by Social Reaction Theory, also known as Labeling Theory, which emphasizes how society reacts to people who are deemed aberrant. The labeling process became important when trying to make sense of how Goh’s illegal activity escalated (McLean et al., 2020). Many people felt strongly about what Goh did at Oikos University—his rapid categorization as a mass killer set off a chain reaction of events. Goh’s public image and future dealings with the criminal justice system were influenced by this classification, which had legal ramifications. According to the Labeling Theory, this social response might lead to an accurate prediction. Some people may absorb the stigma of being a criminal, which may lead to more antisocial conduct. Many believe that Goh’s criminal character was reinforced by the media coverage of his crimes and the judicial ramifications he faced. Still, not all of Goh’s wrongdoing can be explained by Labeling Theory. It sheds light on how society reacts, but it could ignore the structural factors that influenced Goh’s criminal tendencies in the first place. The emphasis moves from the structural components to the social response to an individual’s behavior. One Goh may have turned to criminal activity to gain acceptance and control after feeling alone and unfairly treated. Maybe he felt more like an outsider because of all the bad connotations associated with being an immigrant or having run-ins with the authorities. According to Labeling Theory, criminal conduct may be worsened by how society reacts to it. Some people may absorb the stigma of being a criminal, leading to a vicious cycle of self-fulfillment. Nevertheless, it fails to thoroughly elucidate the original reasons underlying Goh’s behavior or tackle the possible impact of prior mental health concerns.
Analysis
A more complete picture of the One Goh disaster emerges from merging Social Structure Theory and Labeling Theory. It shows how social norms shaped Goh’s tendency toward illegal activity and how the following labeling procedures reinforced and extended this deviation.
Economic hardship, cultural estrangement, and individual dissatisfaction all contributed to the criminal climate in Goh’s social system. As a result of the stress he felt from not fitting in, he decided to pursue a rebellious life (Solakoglu & Yuksek, 2020). The intersection of Goh’s socioeconomic status with stress may have prompted him to commit criminal acts, according to Social Structure Theory. As a child of immigrants and a poor man, he may have felt pressure to succeed economically or to fit in socially, both of which are culturally expected outcomes. According to social structure theory, this strain may be a forerunner to criminal action as a way to adapt to or escape from the obstacles given by social systems.
However, according to Social Reaction Theory, a person’s criminal trajectory is heavily influenced by how society reacts to them. Perhaps Goh’s sensations of unfairness were exacerbated by his experiences of exclusion and the stigmatization he endured, prompting him to seek retribution via his criminal behavior. Goh’s stated goals are consistent with the theory’s central tenet that social responses shape criminal identity.
Though it sheds light on the possible social causes of Goh’s criminal conduct, Social Structure Theory fails to consider human agency or deal with the part that free will plays in criminal acts. More importantly, it fails to address why people confronted with comparable systemic limitations may choose not to act violently (McLean et al., 2020).Conversely, although Social Reaction Theory sheds light on the effects of social reactions, it cannot explain why Goh did what he did in the first place. Further restricting its applicability to the study of criminal conduct, it fails to account for the possible impact of mental health problems.
An essential part of Goh’s criminal story is the labeling procedure that followed the massacre at Oikos University. The term “mass murderer” had a reinforcing effect on his criminal persona due to the negative public view and legal ramifications it conjured up. The social response to Goh’s acts, according to Labeling Theory, had a role in his continued criminal behavior (Solakoglu & Yuksek, 2020). It must be understood, however, that these ideas are not autonomous. Many social structures and labeling processes interact in Goh’s situation, and many theories provide light on various aspects of his criminal conduct. Labeling Theory offers insight into the effects and persistence of deviance due to social responses, while Social Structure Theory elucidates the origins.
These theoretical frameworks, Social Structure Theory and Social Reaction/Labeling Theory, add to our comprehension of the One Goh instance (McLean et al., 2020). As a whole, Social Structure Theory sheds light on the larger social forces at work in Goh’s criminal conduct, while Social Reaction Theory and Labeling Theory investigate the personal effects of stigmatization. Through the integration of various ideas, a more thorough study may be conducted, considering both society structures and individual experiences.
Conclusion
A powerful example of how to use Social Reaction Theory/Labeling Theory and Social Structure Theory to understand criminal conduct is the One Goh case. The complex causes leading up to the sad occurrence may be better understood by delving into the socio-economic constraints and stigmatization that Goh endured. To have a more complete picture of criminal behavior, it’s important to combine different viewpoints and admit that each theory has its limits. The complexity of criminal cases necessitates an interdisciplinary approach that helps us understand the interaction between social institutions and human experiences. The influence of social inequality and structures on criminal conduct is a central tenet of social structure theory. The stress that may have prompted Goh to act may have sprung from his immigrant status, his financial difficulties, and his cultural alienation. But this hypothesis doesn’t do a good job of explaining how Goh’s mental health and personal autonomy may have had a role in his decisions. However, public responses and media depictions may have contributed to the formation of Goh’s criminal persona, as shown by Social Reaction Theory, which focuses on the effects of social labeling. But this hypothesis can’t explain what initially pushed Goh over the edge to do these things. Finally, both ideas must be considered together in order to fully grasp the One Goh instance. While Goh’s activities may have been shaped by broader social forces, the social reaction to his acts may be better understood through the lens of social structure theory. Taken as a whole, these hypotheses provide light on the complex web of causes that led to the unlawful actions in the One Goh case.
References
McLean, K., Wolfe, S. E., Rojek, J., Alpert, G. P., & Smith, M. R. (2020). Randomized controlled trial of social interaction police training. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 805-832.
Sabermajidi, N., Valaei, N., Balaji, M. S., & Goh, S. K. (2020). Measuring brand-related content in social media: a socialization theory perspective. Information Technology & People, 33(4), 1281-1302.
Solakoglu, O., & Yuksek, D. A. (2020). Delinquency among Turkish adolescents: Testing Akers’ social structure and social learning theory. International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology, 64(5), 539-563.
write