"Structural theories view crime as a product of the structure of society, asking the question, “Why do some societies have more crime than others?” From this perspective, crime is rooted in two primary factors-differential opportunity and discrimination toward certain (powerless) groups within society. In a society where the rich and poor live in relatively close proximity, the poor turn to crime as an alternative pathway to success. Crime is defined by the powerful, and laws are created to ensure that the group of groups in power retain the resources. Examples of structural theories are structural functionalism, strain theory and conflict theory. The ominant sociological theory of crime for the first half of the 20th century was “structural functionalism”. According to Durkheim, founding father of sociology and structural functionalist, crime and deviance is the product of social distancing and “anomie”-a state of normlessness. Durkheim also believed that deviance and crime, despite their negative effects, serve a social function by promoting social solidarity among the law abiding. When a criminal or deviant act is committed and made public, law-abiding members of society are united in pointing their fingers at the perpetrators. Law-abiding citizens can also look to deviant behavior to help them define the boundaries of acceptable behavior (Durkheim, 2003). Structural functionalism is illustrated by Kai Erikson’s (1966) case study analysis of Puritan response to revolutionaries in 17th century Bay Colony, showing how societal response to these “offenders” served to solidify the rest of the community and strengthen their moral convictions. Strain theory is another example of a structural theory of crime. According to strain theorists, crime is the product of differential opportunity. Robert Merton extended Durkheim’s ideas, suggesting that anomic results when access to prescribed goals and availability of legitimate means to obtain those goals are lacking. Crime occurs when individuals do not have access to legitimate noncriminal means to obtain the success everyone strives for. Cloward and Ohlin (1960) took this idea further, suggesting that crime is more likely to occur when particular illegitimate opportunities are present, and some people have greater access to particular types of illegitimate opportunity. “Conflict theories” locate the cause of crime in the incompatible interests of multiple groups in society. Conflict theories became prominent in the 1960s and 1970s with the work of Quinney (1970, 1977). Whereas structural functionalists view society from a consensus perspective in which norms are created through a shared understanding of the majority, conflict theorists contend that society is heterogenous and conflictual. Crime is defined by the dominant class to include behavior patterns of those who do not have power in society ad used as a tool to serve the interests of the powerful. A reflexive relationship exists between the definers of crime (the powerful) and those defined as criminal (the powerless) whereby those defined as criminal begin to see themselves as such and learn to play the role with increasing probability of being defined as criminal in the future. Those in power construct an ideology of crime to make sure they stay in power. A social reality of crime is created by defining crime, creating and applying laws, and constructing behavior patterns in such a way that the probability of criminality (and sanctions for criminality) is high for powerless members of society. Conflict theory offers an explanation of both criminal behavior and criminal justice."