r types of crime or for legitimate work. (Sullivan 117-118). Hirchis theory that definitions favorable to crime outweigh definitions unfavorable to crime caused the youths to commit crimes is supported by the fact that most of these youths learned early that crime was much more profitable that legitimate employment. The reverse is also true, as evidenced in the story of Zap Andrews, in which definitions unfavorable to crime prevented him from committing a certain type of crime: I ripped of a lady and she seen my face, and then, one day I tried to rap to her daughter, only I didnt know it was her daughter. Next thing you know we really started getting friendly and she said, I want you to meet my mother. She knew it was me right off the top. She pulled me over to the side and said, I know what you donedo you still do that? I said, No, I stopped that now. (Sullivan 153). According to Sullivan this was an abrupt turning point for Zap Andrews.(Sullivan 154). Zap Andrewsbegan to steer clear of theft.(Sullivan 154). In this particular case, definitions unfavorable to crime created a learned behavior in Zap Andrews. The study of the three neighborhoods shows that definitions favorable to crime are much higher in Projectville than in Hamilton Park. For example, youths in Projectville were paid to burn down a building, while in Hamilton Park the juveniles were arrested for the same crime. In Projectville, even the police will buy stolen goods. The study discussed in the text clearly shows that crime in Hamilton Park is much lower than in either Projectville or La Barriada. The reasons for this are clearly explained by Sutherlands two learning theories, his differential social organization theory and his differential association theory. The other theories, Shaw and McKays social disorganization and Hirschis social control theory, do have some merits, but do not apply as clearly to the neighborhoods in the study. Clearly, Sutherland...
