The statement "A criminal is 'born' and not made" suggests the idea that a person's birth decides whether they will be a criminal without any other deciding factors. It takes away the idea that environmental factors have anything to do with a criminal's life path. In this essay there will be different views and opinions on crime from a Marxist and functionalist approach. It will look at the biological factors of crime and how they affect people, including different studies and then how these are demonstrated in the media. Crime is an action or activity that violates the law established by government legislation, it is the violation of any law that may result in injury to one or more members of the public. Committing a crime can result in two common forms of punishment such as fines or a prison sentence. Deviance can be behavior that does not violate an official law but is considered not normal, it is normally when someone deviates from the social norm especially in a social or sexual way and in most cases will result in nothing more than disapproval from others other members of society. We say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay First, the Marxism approach is a very early look at crime, first developed by Bonger in 1916 and expanded by writers like Chambliss in 1975. This group of people believes that crime is a response to capitalism and that capitalism itself is a crime. Marxism states that crime is decided by the upper class to benefit them and keep the majority under control, they refer to crime and deviance as an answer to fight against the upper class, however they state that the common person does not know that that is what they are doing doing. (Stephen Moore 2016). This view is a very partial look at the so-called class warfare in society, the idea that the upper class wants to corner the middle class and that the rules are different for each class. It involves the idea that crime is punished more severely in the middle class while the upper class can get away with more serious crimes. The next view is functionalism; it's a series of theories, none of which have hard evidence or research to support them. They come from a man named Durkheim and he believes that crime is an essential part of society. He theorizes that crime is an important and healthy part of society and a driving force for social change. He states that the only time it becomes a problem for society is when crime rates are unusually high or too low. His theories suggest that a high level of crime and deviance leads to chaos, while a low level of crime and deviance leads to no change. Although this theory can be considered more accurate than the point of view of Marxism, it is also highly questionable as not all crimes and deviances can be used for social change, like rape, it is never possible to justify it to a victim and also murder is never a less evil, so to speak, to say that crime is healthy may be insensitive and unjustified. The biological approach to crime is a view that narrowly suggests that crime can be explained by looking at genes, hormones, and chemicals in the body. The main assumptions of the biological approach are that any number of biological and biochemical factors inherited from birth can lead to committing a crime, such as genetics, neurotransmitters, and hormones (Newburn 2007). Crime can be shared through genetics, many studies have been conducted in recent decades to test the impact of the factorsbiological in criminals one of the best known are twin studies one of the most sophisticated versions of these studies was conducted in Denmark by Karl O Christiansen in 1974 he took 3,586 pairs of twins between the years 1881 and 1910 and monitored them. Through his research he discovered that 50% of MZ (monozygotic) twins would both be criminals if one of the twins took part in criminal activity while in DZ (dizygotic) twins only 20% would both participate in criminal activity.crime if the twins were involved 'other twin' (Newburn 2007, page 135). While these results on the surface defiantly show some correlation with the birth of crime argument, there are also many variables that may conflict, for example because they both grew up together, so their social life may have made them both criminals or one twin's influence could impact the other rather than simply being in their genes. Christiansen himself admitted that this study was inconclusive as it was impossible to exclude other factors, furthermore if the crime was 100% committed and caused by biology then these results should show that in the MZ twin if one is criminal both should always be criminals like them they share exactly the same genes. Another biological factor to consider is hormones: testosterone is often assumed to cause greater aggression and violent activity, which explains why there are more male than female criminals. There has been research that found a correlation between high testosterone levels and violent crime. The research involved over 4,000 army men and found that there is a link between testosterone and criminal offending, however when they controlled this experiment and took social factors into account the numbers dropped significantly. Other research has also linked elevated, abnormal levels of testosterone in male sex offenders, although other variables are often involved. These studies and research confirm that there is a relationship with some biological factors on the probability of becoming a criminal, however this does not prove that all criminals are made as if this were the case, the results should demonstrate that social and environmental factors worked. do not alter the likelihood of males with high testosterone becoming criminals, as if it were simply in the hormone that you would not be able to alter it socially. The news and media like to portray the crime as if it was mostly born and not committed to support the above claim, most of the articles are about chemical solutions like these, two separate examples of chemical castration, a case of a man who had violent fantasies of rape and murder volunteered to be chemically castrated and another where there is talk in Russia and other places that it is mandatory for convicted pedophiles to be chemically castrated, they do it because it reduces the chance of them reoffending. The fact that it reduces the possibility of relapse shows a strong argument in support of the argument born in this debate, however it is not a complete confirmation that it is all biological as it only reduces the possibility of relapse without completely eradicating it, proving it even after supposedly hormones since some are gone, nature is still there to do it again. On the other hand there are some stories that support the educational side of this debate, such as Bethan Bell's article in which she concludes that most child murderers are created by a negative childhood, abandonment and even fear , the evidence here shows that education is an important part, if not the main reason, why children become.