The manifest functions of crime (deviance), according to Durkheim are to promote social change, to promote social unity, and to clarify moral boundaries and affirm norms. The latent function of crime, I would say, would be that it provides employment for those in criminal justice. Functionalism differs from conflict theory in that conflict theorists would say that crime occurs because there is an unequal distribution of wealth and many of those who do not have access to the wealth choose crime in order to acquire some. Overall, conflict theorists don't necessarily focus on the crime itself as they do the law. Conflict theorists believe that the law is a "tool of oppression" used by the elites to maintain their privileged status. Because the "have-nots" (or whatever you want to call them) are the ones who could potentially rise up and knock the elites off their pedestal, they create laws that keep the lower classes in check. Symbolic interactionists look at the individual's situation in terms of why they commit crimes. Symbolic interactionists would look at labels that an individual has been given, their associations with other people who may have committed crimes, or their attachments (or lack of) to the community, family, and authority figures. **I hope I didn't just answer someone's essay question. ;)