Read the discussion below and give response:

The three examples given in the reading are all related in that they have to do with persons that have gone against the "societal norms". Meaning all the behaviors exhibited by the actors have been deemed, not acceptable by the rest of the population.

The sanctioning of actors by way of tagging them so that they are identifiable to the rest of the population is related to the criminological theory of labeling. The Labeling Theory also known as the “societal reaction” approach was relied upon heavily during the 1960s and 1970s and many of these labels are still used today.

In NYS there are labels affixed to a person convicted of certain sex offenses and they are leveled in part by the offense they committed. These labels are Risk assignments – 1, 2 and 3. Number 3 being the most likely to re- offend and is a threat to public safety. There can be other factors that come into play when leveling a sex offender like the way in which the crime was committed, age of the victim, number of victims etc.

I haven’t seen much other additional labeling of criminals where I reside. Convicts are labeled as such and must report that in certain instances, there is a domestic incident report repository but that is only available accessible by law enforcement and the courts. I have seen elsewhere as Steven Catti points out that Ohio has labels for DUI/DWI Offenders and as the article points out there are labels used in Florida for the same offense.

The reading suggests that labeling may actually encourage criminal behavior more than it discourages it. Labeling theorists believe that a person tagged with a label sometimes begins to identify with the label because they feel that there’s no way out of the stigma.

I think that there is a place for labeling certain offenders. Those that committed certain sex offenses and violent criminals should be known/ labeled to help ensure public safety?