Thus, the influence of general culture in some categories of crime is most direct and conspicuous.Sutherland founded his theory of differential association of criminal behaviour on social disorganisation.It must, however, be noted that if reliance is placed on free will’ concept of criminality, it will mean that every individual is free to act as he likes and under these circumstances, prevention of crime will be rather impossible.
The concept that crime occurs due to exploitation of the poor by the rich finally led to the evolution of the theory of radical criminology in the western world.
An appraisal of divergent views on crime and criminals brings us to the conclusion that each one of these theories explains only a few types of crime while it does not have an answer for certain other kinds of crime.
Healy and Sheldon’s views give no explanation for the incidence of white collar crimes which are otherwise satisfactorily answered by W.
A Bonder’s economic theory and the theory of differential association propounded by Sutherland.
For the authorities in power, the cultural norms are usually reflected in laws framed for the society and social norms are the enforcement of those laws.
These social norms represent the actual behavioural patterns of the subjects.
It may, therefore, be inferred that the cultural theory of crime being tentative and founded on social value considerations, can answer every behaviour whether criminal or non-criminal, and offer a satisfactory explanation for all crimes.
It has been generally accepted that every criminal is a product of his own personality as also his peculiar social experiences of the general culture.
This implies the acceptance of laws of ’cause and effect’ in human behaviour and denial of the free will theory of the classical school.
The view that crime is a result of the interaction of multiple factors seems to be more logical to explain the crime causation.