1. Functionalism and Strain Theory

Durkheim 
Functionalists such as Durkheim look to society for an explanation of deviance. Although functionalists agree that social control mechanisms such as the police and the courts are necessary to keep deviance in check, a certain amount of deviance is inevitable and can be good for society. It is the collective consciousness that sets the boundaries for behaviour which is acceptable and that which is not. 


Positive Aspects of Deviance:
Reaffirming the Boundaries - Crime and its punishment can unite society against the wrongdoer and reinforce society's norms and values. The function of punishment is not to make the criminal mend their ways but to remove  them from society. Changing Values - Crime and Society's reaction to it can lead us to change our values in keeping with the times. One example is some drug use is "allowed" whilst homosexuality is frowned upon in certain circles but in others it is "allowed" and flourishes. Media coverage of crimes reaffirm the values of the law-abiding and prevents others from rule breaking.

Negative Aspects of Deviance:
Anomie - Durkheim believed that in modern societies, there is a tendency towards anomie (also known as normlessness) that can have negative consequences. In periods of rapid social change, the collective consciouness may be weakened and people may start to look after their own selfish interests. This would lead to a rise in crime rates. Only by re-imposing collective values can the crime rate be brought back under control.

Other sociologists have developed Durkheim's idea that crime can have positive functions:
Polsky - believes that pornography and prostitution can "channel" sexual desire away from other alternatives such as adultery which poses a threat to the family.
Cohen - believes  that crime may act as a warning that something is not functioning properly i.e. high truancy rates would warn us that the education system is not working properly.

Criticisms:
Society obviously requires a certain amount of deviance as Functionalists say, but they offer no way of knowing how much is the right amount - how can one possibly judge that?
Functionalists do not consider for whom crime is functional. For example, seeing a murderer punished for a crime may be functional in reaffirming social boundaries but it obviously is not "functional" for the victim(s).
This approach does not explain why some people commit crime and others do not or why some people commit particular offences such as White Collar Crime.

Merton's Strain Theory
Strain theories argue that people engage in deviant behaviour when they are unable to achieve socially approved goals (money, respect etc.) by legal means. This leads to strain between the goal and the means of achievement. The bigger the gap between these two (i.e. the more anomie that is experienced, the more likely the crime is to occur).

Merton believed that all members of the same society (in this case the USA) share the values - value consensus. In America success tends to be measured in terms of wealth and material possessions. Merton points out that little attention is given to how this goal is achieved i.e.  Talent, Ambition, Effort etc. This in turn leads to an unbalanced society where winning is all and the rules are not very important. Individuals respond in different ways, some of which are criminal.

The American Dream tells Americans that their society is a meritocratic one where anyone who makes the effort can get ahead and that there are opportunities for all. However the reality is often different, especially for ethnic minority groups and the working class. This leads to a pressure to resort to illegitimate means to achieve goals - there is a strain to deviate.

The way people adapt to the gap between the goals the American Dream sets can be very different:

Conformity - an achievement of the goals by legitimate means.
Innovation - an achievement of the goals by illegitimate means.
Retreatism - individuals reject both the goals and the means and become dropouts or drug addicts.

Criticisms:
1. Merton takes crime statistics at face value. These may under represent the amount of white collar crime that occurs.
2. Merton's theory does not explain why some members of the working class turn to crime to achieve their goals and others don't.
3. It assumes that society has a value consensus - that we all strive for the same goal of money and success. Some people do not share this goal.
4. It only accounts for utilitarian crime (crimes which can make the perpetrator money) not crimes involving violence. It also ignores state crimes such as genocide and torture.

General evaluation of Functionalism and strain theory from other perspectives:
1. Crime does not always bring about solidarity. IT may have the opposite effect, for example forcing women to stay indoors due to fear of attack.
2. Marxists would criticise functionalists for not considering white collar crime and for not exploring the role that the ruling class have in enforcing and maintaining the law.
3. Feminists would criticise functionalists for not considering the specific effect of crime on women.
4. Interactionists would claim that Functionalists have concentrated too much on the effect of crime on society. They would consider crime to be more of an individual act. They would also say that Functionalists fail to consider the role of institutions such as the media in labelling criminals and victims.
5. Postmodernists criticise Functionalists for only considering crimes that have a function (utilitarian crimes). They believe that there should be more of an analysis of crimes that are committed for no reason other than boredom or excitement i.e. vandalism etc...