In five pages this paper describes theft as an example of a 'lazy' or defective character and not influenced by external environment. Five sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: CC6_KStheft.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
explanations for theft over the years. Before the 1960s, the thief likely would be characterized as having some kind of character flaw, or perhaps be granted a partial excuse
of not having been raised well. By the late 1960s, the era of free love and flower children, many observers of human behavior began assigning blame to "society."
That society was a nameless, faceless thing filled with ghettos and unemployment, and its influences were so strong that it could make otherwise sane and reasonable individuals commit robbery, murder
strangers or live lives consumed with drugs. Having society to blame was highly convenient - its culpability resolved the individual from having to take any kind of responsibility for
his own actions. Other Views Today, the desire to continue to blame "society" is still strong, particularly when the local and most meaningful
society is an urban one where unemployment is high and per capita income is low. This view likely will only intensify as the nature of business continues to change.
Americas welfare system - intended to give a hand up to those who needed help temporarily - created the scenario in which there were some families who knew no
other kind of existence. Welfare to Work programs solved much of that. Though there is more work to do in getting able-bodied people back to work, the situation
is much better than it was a decade ago. Author Steven Muller (1997) believes that this point is one of great distinction between
Americans and Europeans, indeed the rest of the developed world. We are not yet so socially "advanced" that we are willing and eager to see growth in many government