Homicide Violates A Serious Norm That Is Sanctioned With Pri

Homicide Violates A Serious Norm That Is Sanctioned With Prison Senten

Homicide violates a fundamental societal norm, one that is typically sanctioned with criminal punishment, including imprisonment or, under extreme circumstances, the death penalty. Such acts are considered violations of the social contract and moral expectations that protect human life. However, individuals like Pete from Detroit, a self-styled hit man, attempt to reframe their violent actions through psychological and social mechanisms that minimize their perception of moral violation. Pete emphasizes that he operates within a strict contractual framework, suggesting a sense of professional responsibility that separates him from society’s normative standards. By viewing his killings as “just a job,” he seeks to detach himself emotionally and morally from the acts, akin to the detachment seen in other professional roles such as surgeons or prostitutes, as described by Goffman. This reframing allows him to maintain a sense of self that does not see his actions as criminal or morally wrong, despite their clear violation of societal norms. Such self-justification strategies are crucial in understanding how individuals involved in deviant or illegal behaviors psychologically manage their actions to sustain a coherent social identity.

Paper For Above instruction

The assertion that homicide violates a serious societal norm is a fundamental understanding deeply embedded in social and legal frameworks. The law treats killing as a grave offense because it undermines the societal order that prioritizes respect for human life. However, individuals engaged in acts of homicide, especially those who do so repeatedly and intentionally, often develop cognitive strategies to rationalize their actions. The case of Pete, the Detroit hit man, exemplifies how some individuals employ framing techniques to dissociate themselves from the moral implications of their acts, allowing them to see themselves as operating within a professional or contractual norm rather than breaking societal rules.

Erving Goffman's concept of framing provides insight into how Pete and other similar individuals psychologically compartmentalize their behaviors. Goffman describes 'frames' as mental structures that help individuals interpret their circumstances and actions (Goffman, 1974). For Pete, the act of murder is reframed through a contractual lens, transforming a heinous act into a professional service. He requests not to know the details of his targets’ motives to maintain emotional detachment, viewing victims as “targets” rather than people—an act of dehumanization that facilitates moral disengagement. This strategy aligns with Gerome’s (2020) research on cognitive dissonance, where individuals reduce psychological discomfort by distancing themselves from the moral significance of their behaviors.

The notion that Pete considers his work "just a job" reveals an important aspect of deviant behavior—normalization. By framing his murder activities as routine, he minimizes the perception of norm violation and preserves a self-image as a law-abiding individual within his own set of norms. This is consistent with Sykes and Matza’s (1957) techniques of neutralization, where offenders justify their deviant acts by denying responsibility, condemning the condemners, or claiming that the act was necessary. Such rationalizations are essential for individuals like Pete to cope with their violations of societal norms while maintaining psychological stability.

Understanding Pete’s framing also underscores the importance of social context in shaping perceptions of norm violations. While homicide is universally condemned, altered social frames allow individuals to rationalize their participation in such acts, thus blurring the line between legality and morality (Kelly, 1985). Moreover, the professional identity Pete constructs enables him to see himself as operating within a specialized domain where norms differ from those governing ordinary society. This reflects a broader pattern among professional deviants who preserve a sense of legitimacy by reframing their misconduct within alternative normative systems.

In sum, Pete’s claim that his murder work is "just a job" exemplifies the complex psychological strategies employed to reconcile engaging in illegal acts with a positive self-image. Through reframing and cognitive distancing, he reduces feelings of guilt and aligns his behavior with the norms of his occupational role, despite its clear contradiction with societal standards. Analyses like Goffman’s frame theory and techniques of neutralization are instrumental in understanding how individuals navigate and justify deviant behaviors, revealing the fluidity and contextuality of norms within human social life.

References

• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
• Kelly, D. H. (1985). Deviant behavior. St. Martin’s Press.
• Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664-670.
• Gerome, A. (2020). Cognitive dissonance and moral disengagement in criminal behavior. Journal of Criminal Psychology, 10(2), 120-135.
• Bohannon, J. (2013). Professional killers and the psychology of morality. Psychology Today.
• Horgan, J. (2011). The Psychology of Terrorism. Routledge.
• Scully, D. (2003). Understanding Deviance: Connecting Society and Its Rules. Wadsworth Publishing.
• Sutton, A., & Travis, D. (2018). Rationalization and moral disengagement in organized crime. Journal of Criminology, 14(3), 250-266.
• Black, D. (1976). The behavior of law. Academic Press.
• Weinberg, L., & Williams, M. (2019). The social psychology of norm violation: A cross-cultural view. International Journal of Psychology.