100%(6)6 out of 6 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 7 - 9 out of 12 pages.
applied to the difference in incarceration rates of Germany and US. Germany is more formal rational, with the decision makers following rules and procedures in decision making rather than allowing public opinion to sway the way the law is enforced. c. capital punishment (LaChance lecture and Kaplan): Durkheims ideaof collective conscience and rationalization are evident in our studies of capital punishment. over the years, capital punishment has becomeincreasingly private, amoral and rationalized which minimizes the moral point that executions make to society- that some crimes are so heinous that they require offenders to die and that people must take responsibility for their actions. However inmates last words and last meal requests reinforce our collective conscience of responsibility for behavior. d. the prosecution of hate crimes/ the CeCe McDonald case--> Marx’s critique of rights in capitalism: hate crimes legislation is a “freedom from” certain types of violence, but cannot undo the inequalities that pattern these types of violence e. Brown v Board (Rosenberg)-> Durkheims idea of a collective conscience was shown in this case, because it was decided due to societies call for civil rights. f. Judge Judy and the Peoples Court (Kohm): Webers ideas of
domination and types of judicial decision making. Judy is charismatic and substantively irrationel, in which the law is raw material molded bythe judge who is the authority. Peoples Court is legally-rationally dominated and formally-rationally decided, that is the judge is a vesselthrough which law governs and the law is a constraining force that must be followed. 2.How does law fit into Emile Durkheim’s larger social theory? 3.What are the weaknesses of Durkheims approach to law? What about Durkheim’s theory is still relevant to contemporary researchers?