Applying Kathy's Rational Choice Theory

Rational choice theory is predicated on the idea that crime is a matter of choice in which a potential criminal weighs the cost of committing an act against the potential benefits that might be gained (Siegel, 2011, p. 84). James Q. Wilson expands on this decision in his book Thinking About Crime, stating that “people who are likely to commit crime are unafraid of breaking the law

Rational choice theory specifies that all individuals makes logical decisions. It states a person acts without thinking, or even showing any sort of feelings. Theorist think that individuals don’t care in know type of way about the crime that they have committed. Individuals also don’t consider their present nor their future when committing these crimes. In this case, it provides the person that is committing the crime with the greatest satisfaction, because they feel like what needed to be done was done to benefit them. The rational choice theory in this case with Jodi is that she felt that she had to kill Travis so that he wouldn’t communicate with no other females. She felt this if she couldn’t have him no one else could, and so she had to figure out a solution to benefit her. So however, killing him was the prudent and logical decision that she encountered. Also, the trait theory also apply, because of the different behavior pattern that Jodi presented. One of the things was emotions which was the jealous traits that she showed, by not wanting Travis to talk to anyone even though they were not together. I also think this is considering to be a trait theories, because of the different behavior patterns that were going through her mind during the time of the relationship, and break

When it comes down to it, we all make our own decisions. We weigh the pros and cons to decide if the benefits outweigh the potential punishments. The idea of rational choice theory is that people choose their actions based on the options available and choose the one they most prefer. If their choice is to eat a donut or to not, when they really want to eat it, chances are they will eat it. Once you add in punishment, it gets more complicated. If the person were to be punished for eating it, they will most likely think it through more. Say, it’s a teenager who wants to eat the donut but he knows his father will ground him if he does. This donut is the teen’s favorite kind and he really really wants to eat the donut, but the risk of punishment is there, the teen will weigh the consequences against the benefits. Would he choose a few minutes of a tasty donut and risk being grounded for a week or would he choose to forgo the donut and not get in trouble? The act of having a choice to do something you want to do that also has consequences and causes you to rationally decide if it’s worth it or not is rational choice theory.

While watching Taken, a criminal justice major can pick out several different examples of criminological theories. However, the theory I found to be the most relevant was the rational choice theory. Several sociologists and criminologists believe that an individual’s decision to commit a crime is determined by several personal reasons. Those who strongly enforce the rational choice theory believe that an individual who is considering criminal behavior first decides whether or not he/she is willing to become

This idea of a rational calculation of the advantages and disadvantages of crime runs parallel with the Rational Choice Theory offered to us by

The rational choice theory gives insight in to why otherwise law abiding citizens would commit crime. Most burglars do not burglarize because they want something specific from the victim's property nor are they saving the cash proceeds for a long-term goal. They burglarize because they need the money right now to pay off bills, buy food and clothes for their family or to purchase alcohol and illegal drugs. Most burglars would turn to making an honest living, but, even that does not meet their immediate desires for cash. Nor would the earned wages support their lifestyles. (Wright & Decker, 1994).

My example of the rational choice theory of today is the mexican drug controls of December 2011. The drug trafficking organization in Mexico was highly rational, self-interested actors seeked to maximize profit.

Rational choice theory is a criminology theory designed by Derek Cornish and Ronald Clark which states that before people commit a crime they think about what they are going to do (Snook, Dhami, & Kavanagh, 2011). They consider the pros and cons before performing the criminal action. The entire premise of the rational choice theory is that each individual, regardless of whether rich, poor, educated, or uneducated, all utilize rationality when making the decision to commit a crime (Taylor, 2013). The rational choice theory postulates that when a person weighs the costs and benefits of a crime, that person decides whether or not the benefits are worth the risk. It is about maximizing his or her own self-interest (Jacques & Wright, 2010). The

According to the text the rational choice theory is the view that crime is a function of a decision-making process in which the potential offender weighs the potential costs and benefits of an illegal act. Evaluating Ted Bundy according to the rational choice theory, he knew what he was doing weighed his options, picked how he would attack kill and rape his victims. He meticulously sought out his victims. Typically Bundy would bludgeon his victims, strangle them to death then rape them or engage in necrophilia. According to this theory he fully planned out each attack knowing that it was wrong, illegal, and immoral.

In this essay I will be comparing and contrasting the Rational Choice Theory(s) and the Trait Theory(s). We will start with the history of the two theories and progress toward some of the individual principles in the theories. Next step will be explaining how each theory contributes to criminal behavior. My closing paragraph will conclude the essay as well as give detailed information on how society punishes the crimes committed.

Cesare Beccaria published the well-known book On Crimes and Punishments in 1764. Beccaria’s thoughts are commonly referred to as the classical theory. (Shoemaker, 2009, p. 64-65) The work in On Crimes and Punishments inspired multitudes of criminal philosophers two in particular; Locke and Hume. These two believed that, “human nature was predicated upon the search for pleasure and the avoidance of pain, and that human action was consequently organized around calculative strategies aimed at utility maximization.”(Hayward, 2007, p. 233) This thought justification is how those who believe in the Rational Choice Theory get further away from the social issues that may affect the commission of crimes and try to keep it focused on the individual desires of pleasure and avoidance of pain. This thought process may also be in part to the societal want of the juvenile delinquent’s behavior to be solely their fault based on an economic standpoint because if it is individual fault society does not need to fund programs to fix it. As stated in the book The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending, “… a rational choice perspective on criminal behavior- was intended to locate criminological findings within a framework particularly suitable for thinking about policy relevant research.” (Cornish & Clarke, 2014, p. 1) That is to say that yes, many philosophers may truly believe in Choice Theory but some were probably motivated more by economic

Choice theory was born out of the perspective of crime causation which states that criminality is the result of conscious choice. This theory is also known as the rational choice theory. According to this theory, the choice whether or not to commit a criminal act is the result of a rational thought process that weighs the risks of paying the costs of committing a crime, against the benefits obtained. In other words, if the benefits--monetary or otherwise--outweigh the risks of sustaining the costs, such as fines, imprisonment or execution, then according to this theory the individual would be inclined to commit the crime, all other things being equal. In this calculus, the benefits are known. For example, “this diamond that I want to

The topic I have chosen to write this research paper over is the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory started with the work of Cesare Beccaria in the late eighteenth century. From that point forward, the theory has been developed and opened up to incorporate different viewpoints, like discouragement and routine activity theory. The rational choice theory is a monetary rule that expresses that people dependably settle on reasonable and legitimate choices. These choices furnish individuals with the best advantage or fulfillment, given the decisions accessible and are likewise in their most elevated self-interest.

Rational choice theory, also known simply as choice theory, is the assessment of a potential offender to commit a crime. Choice theory is the belief that committing a crime is a rational decision, based on cost benefit analysis. The would-be offender will weigh the costs of committing a particular crime: fines, jail time, and imprisonment versus the benefits: money, status, heightened adrenaline. Depending on which factors out-weigh the other, a criminal will decide to commit or forgo committing a crime. This decision making process makes committing a crime a rational choice. This theory can be used to explain why an offender will decide to commit burglary, robbery, aggravated assault, or murder.

People chose all behavior and including all criminal behavior. Which in this case the choices that criminals make brings them pleasure and adrenaline. Criminal choices can be controlled by fear of punishment, but not all the time. The crime will be limited when the benefits are reduced and the costs increase. Rational choice theory is a perspective that holds criminality in the result of conscious choice. Not to mention, that it is predicted that individuals choose to commit crime when the benefits outweigh the costs of disobeying the law. In the rational choice theory, individuals are seen as motivated offenders by their needs, wants and goals that express their preferences. This theory has been applied to a wide of range in crime, such as robbery, drug use, vandalism, and white collar crime. Furthermore, rational choice theory had a revival in sociology in the early 1960s, under the heading of exchange theory, and by the end of the decade was having a renewed influence in criminology, first as control theory and later as routine activities theory.