Every order is original, expert-done, and screened for AI — full report on request.See how it works

Assignment questions
Criminal justiceDiscussion postDeviance and social control

Deviance and criminality: different justice treatment?

A discussion arguing whether deviant behaviour, which violates social norms and societal rules, should be treated differently from criminal behaviour, which breaks formal criminal laws, within the criminal justice system, and whether there should be different arrest, adjudication and punishment for the two types of offender, with the rationale supported.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 13, 2026

01

Jurisdiction before process

The prompt supplies its own definitions and they contain the answer to half the question, so read them rather than replacing them with your own. Deviance violates social norms; criminality breaks formal criminal laws. On those definitions, purely deviant behaviour is by definition not criminal, so the criminal justice system has no jurisdiction over it at all, and the interesting question is not whether it should be punished differently but whether it should be inside the system in the first place. That reframing is what separates a strong post here. A weaker one treats deviance as minor crime and argues for lighter sentences, which misreads the categories. Take a position on jurisdiction first, then on process, and say which you are answering at each point. Say plainly in your opening which of the two questions you are answering and in what order. The reframing is the strongest move available here.

The two categories overlap in ways worth mapping before arguing. Some behaviour is criminal and widely regarded as deviant, which is the uncontroversial core of the criminal law. Some is criminal but not treated as deviant by many people, and the examples are politically live: minor drug possession, jaywalking, certain traffic offences, and historically a range of consensual conduct between adults. Some is deviant but not criminal, such as rudeness, unusual dress or belief, or refusing ordinary social obligations. And some is neither. Setting the four cells out is a compact way to show you understand that the categories are independent, and it gives your argument concrete material rather than abstractions. The second and third cells are where all the interesting policy questions sit. Set them out compactly, since the cells are the evidence for everything that follows in the post. They also give the post concrete material.

The strongest argument against bringing deviance into the justice system is not tolerance but predictability. Criminal law is written, published in advance, and enforced through defined procedures, which is what makes it possible for a person to know what is prohibited. Social norms are unwritten, contested, and vary by community, so enforcing them through arrest gives officials discretion with no rule to constrain it. That discretion is applied unevenly in practice, which is documented, and this is the point at which a good post connects to real policy: vagrancy, loitering and disorderly conduct statutes have historically functioned as tools for criminalising deviance rather than harm, and several have been struck down as unconstitutionally vague for precisely this reason. That is a decided legal argument, not just a normative preference. That is a legal argument with decided cases behind it, which is stronger ground than a preference for tolerance.

The strongest argument on the other side deserves to be stated at full strength rather than dismissed. Norm violation is not harmless: persistent low-level disorder can affect a neighbourhood's functioning, and the argument that visible disorder invites more serious offending has been influential in policing for decades, though the evidence for the causal claim is contested and the enforcement strategies built on it produced documented costs. There is also a genuine question about behaviour that is deviant, harmful and not currently criminal, where the honest answer is that the remedy is legislation, not police discretion. Saying that keeps you consistent: if something warrants coercive intervention, it should be made law through the process that provides notice and review. Say what you would do about it, because leaving the gap unanswered invites exactly the discretion you argued against. Consistency on that point is what makes the argument hold together.

On execution, the prompt asks about arrest, adjudication and punishment as three separate stages and a post that answers only sentencing has answered a third of it. Arrest is about jurisdiction and discretion, adjudication about process and standards of proof, punishment about proportionality and purpose. Consider also whether a non-justice response is better for behaviour that is deviant and troubling, since diversion, mental health and social services reach conduct the criminal law handles badly, and that is a real answer rather than an evasion. Support the rationale with sources rather than intuition, keep the definitions the prompt gave you, and close with something arguable, such as the single category of conduct you think should be removed from criminal jurisdiction and why. Answer the three stages in order and give each its own short paragraph, since the prompt names all three and a post that answers one has answered a third of the question.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

  • 01
    Use the prompt's definitions rather than substituting your own.
  • 02
    Map the independence of the deviance and criminality categories.
  • 03
    Argue from predictability and notice rather than from tolerance.
  • 04
    Connect the argument to vagueness doctrine and vagrancy statutes.
  • 05
    State the disorder argument at full strength before answering it.
  • 06
    Treat arrest, adjudication and punishment as three distinct questions.
Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

If deviance is behavior that violates social norms and societal rules, and criminality is behavior that breaks formal criminal laws, should deviant behavior be treated differently than criminal behavior in the criminal justice system? Should there be different arrest, adjudication, and punishments for the different types of offenders? Support your rationale.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes. Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages Criminal behavior in the criminal justice system. Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor. The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS Discussion Questions (DQ) Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses. Weekly Participation Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week. APA Format and Writing Quality Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition. Use of Direct Quotes I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. LopesWrite Policy For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. Late Policy The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading. Communication Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours. Criminal behavior in the criminal justice system

02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01
    A position on whether deviant behaviour should be treated differently from criminal behaviour in the justice system.
  2. 02
    A position on whether arrest should differ.
  3. 03
    A position on whether adjudication should differ.
  4. 04
    A position on whether punishment should differ.
  5. 05
    A supported rationale.
03

Four cells, three stages

01

Position

Whether deviance belongs in criminal jurisdiction at all, stated first.

02

The categories

The four combinations of deviant and criminal, with examples in each.

03

Why notice matters

Published law against unwritten norms, and what that does to discretion.

04

Where this has been litigated

Vagrancy and loitering statutes and the vagueness doctrine.

05

The disorder argument

The case that low-level norm violation warrants enforcement, and its evidence.

06

Arrest

Whether the threshold for police intervention should differ.

07

Adjudication

Process, standards of proof and forum.

08

Punishment

Proportionality and purpose for each category.

09

Alternatives

Diversion, mental health and social service responses to troubling non-criminal conduct.

04

Decided cases and enforcement data

Recommended databases

  • Criminology and criminal justice journals
  • Bureau of Justice Statistics
  • National Institute of Justice
  • Legal databases for vagueness and vagrancy cases

Search sequence

  1. 1.
    Start from the prompt's definitions and find the sociological literature that uses them.
  2. 2.
    Search for cases striking down vagrancy or loitering statutes for vagueness.
  3. 3.
    Find evidence on disparities in discretionary enforcement of low-level offences.
  4. 4.
    Read both the disorder policing argument and the evaluations that tested it.
  5. 5.
    Look for evaluations of diversion programmes for conduct at the margin of criminality.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

  1. 01

    Bureau of Justice Statistics

    Office of Justice Programs · 2025

    Arrest and adjudication data by offence type, which is what makes claims about discretionary enforcement testable.

  2. 02

    Law Enforcement

    National Institute of Justice · 2025

    Research on policing strategies including the evaluations of disorder-focused enforcement the counterargument rests on.

  3. 03

    Fifth Amendment

    Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School · 2025

    Due process, which is the constitutional home of the notice and vagueness argument against criminalising norm violation.

  4. 04

    Introduction to Sociology 3e

    OpenStax, Rice University · 2021

    The sociological treatment of deviance and social control, which is where the prompt's definitions come from.

06

Review before submission

Common mistakes

  • Treating deviance as a lesser grade of crime.
  • Replacing the prompt's definitions with looser ones.
  • Arguing only about sentencing and ignoring arrest and adjudication.
  • Ignoring the behaviour that is criminal but not widely seen as deviant.
  • Dismissing the disorder argument instead of answering it.
  • Offering tolerance as the rationale rather than notice and predictability.
  • Failing to consider non-justice responses.
  • Supporting the position with intuition rather than sources.

Submission checklist

  • The prompt's definitions are used as given.
  • The jurisdiction question is answered before the process questions.
  • The four combinations of deviant and criminal are set out.
  • Behaviour that is criminal but not widely deviant is addressed.
  • The predictability and notice argument is made explicitly.
  • Vagueness doctrine or vagrancy enforcement is cited.
  • Uneven application of discretion is supported by evidence.
  • The disorder argument is stated fairly and answered.
  • Legislation is identified as the remedy for harmful non-criminal conduct.
  • Arrest, adjudication and punishment are answered separately.
  • Non-justice responses such as diversion are considered.
  • The post closes with an arguable claim.

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order