Are Criminals Rational Decision Makers Essay

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

To begin with, criminal justice is a system that is designed to maintain social control, which means it is a necessary aspect of every society since “Laws are the conditions under which independent and isolated men united to form a society” (Beccaria, 1764: 16). In order words, crime control deals with the methods that are taken by a society to reduce its crime. As a matter of fact, there are various crime control strategies from community policing to risk assessments. In addition to the different tactics for controlling crime, there are several theories that not only attempt to explain the causes of crime, but also outline different ways to handle offenders; for example, deterrence, rehabilitation, and even retribution.

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).

This paper summarizes four theories of criminology. Rational choice theory states that criminals act based on a thought process that weighs the pros and cons of criminality. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that most criminals are people capable of having rational thoughts before committing a crime. Trait theory is the view of criminology that suggests criminality is a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that criminals choose to commit crime because of a brain anomaly or chemical imbalance. Social structure theory is “a view that disadvantaged economic class position is a primary cause of crime” (Seigel 139). Those who follow this theory often believe social forces can have a great effect on whether or not a person commits a crime. An example would be those who are poor are more being more prone to commit crime. Social process theory is a view that criminality depends on how a person interacts with different organizations and institutions and processes in society. For example, a family would be considered

Sociological theories of crime contain a great deal of useful information in the understanding of criminal behavior. Sociological theories are very useful in the study of criminal behavior because unlike psychological and biological theories they are mostly macro level theories which attempt to explain rates of crime for a group or an area rather than explaining why an individual committed a crime. (Kubrin, 2012). There is however some micro level sociological theories of crime that attempts to explain the individual’s motivation for criminal behavior (Kubrin, 2012). Of the contemporary

There have been theories made by people in government position on the crime epidemic and how to lower crime the crime rate. Many believe that the tougher the consequences, the better it would help people deter away from a life of crime. Unfortunately, this is not true for countries like the United States. We have very strict consequences for people that commit crime, yet we also have one of the

Initially, the main belief was that criminal behavior was based on rational choice or thought, where criminals were believed to be intelligent beings and weighed the pros and cons before deciding to commit a crime; classicists Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham introduced this view. Essentially, these criminals would compare the risks of committing the crime, such as getting caught, jail or prison time, being disowned by family and friends, and so forth; and the rewards, such as money and new possessions. After making comparisons, the person would make a decision based on whether the risk was greater than the reward. This is like what is presented in an article on Regis University Criminology Program’s website, which states that a criminal “operates based on free will and rational thought when choosing what and what not to do. But that simplistic view has given way to far more complicated theories” (“Biological Theories Primer”). Nowadays, biological theories make attempts in explaining criminal behavior in terms of factors that are primarily outside of the control of the individual.

They implemented community outreaches to deter the population from crime in a positive way rather than through fear or punishment and they increased surveillance and security through their SSTs. The study does not reflect Rational Choice Theory because the SSTs are attempting to control crime through fear, classical theories do not apply to this study. However, it does reflect Routine Activities Theory. Routine Activity is defined as “crime and victimization are highest in places where three factors come together in time and place: motivated offenders, suitable or attractive targets and absence of a guardian,” (Intro to Criminology, page 70). In these urban areas all three factors certainly come into play. Motivated offenders such as gangs or mislead youth, attractive targets such as places with broken locks (that the SSTs repaired) and before the SSTs there was an absence of a constant guarding- authorities only coming when called for specific crimes. According to this study, the Neoclassical approach is more successful in crime prevention of all sorts whether personal, property, etc. because crime is not black and white. There are always conditions to consider when convicting someone of a crime such as be age, mental capacity and number of offenses. Classical is far too broad to properly and fairly deter

In 2014 it was reported that approximately 318.9 million people reside within the United States. With the many people living together it would be inevitable to consider that criminal acts will prevail in the U.S. This is without saying that, without rules, guidelines, and the police officers that are needed to enforce the rules, which would leave individuals who would then seek to take the law into their own hands, which we do not want. However, when you think about the many different criminal acts that are being committed throughout the U.S. do you ever think about what actually influences them to the carry through with these criminal acts.

Theories of crime causation get to the fundamental characteristics of human nature. Theories of crime causation can be separated into trait theories and choice theories. Both types of theories make valid points about the causes of crime, yet they are have different implications for preventing the causes of crime. Thesis: Trait theories and choice theories both assume that humans are self-interested, but their conceptions of self-interest limit the applicability of each to certain types of crime. Trait theories appear more suited for explaining the causes of violent crime, whereas choice theories are more appropriate to property crimes or economic crimes.

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

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

According to Paternoster and Bachman (2001), “the rational choice perspective was explicitly developed to assist policy thinking,” aside from, “every act of crime involves some choice by the offender and that he or she can be held responsible for that choice and can legitimately be punished (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001, p. 34).” A successful example of the rational choice theory illustrates as Paternoster and Bachman (2001) points out, “that studies of the victims of serial killers and rapists through Rossmo’s (1995) geographic profiling, which is bases on findings from environmental criminology (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1991) in that most crime is committed within activity spaces of offenders

The causes of crime in the United States of America can stem from the biology, sociology, or psychology of a person. This reasoning is because the underlying cause of crime is contingent upon the biological and psychological state of a person as well as the social group in which the individual decides to dwell. The fatal mixture of these forces have the capability to formulate an evil and wicked criminal. An individual’s psychological background, social impact and media influence can weigh heavy on an individual’s choice with crime. The spread of crime has a negative effect in our society, especially with our youth.

The environment of where a person was raised is another leading cause of crime. When someone grows up in a place where they see all these bad things happening in their society it serves as a role model to them and they adapt other people’s actions. Growing up in a household where somebody does not have parents or a guardian telling them what is right from wrong leads you to do the unthinkable because they do not have any family direction showing you the right way to live life.” One of the most important environmental factors during childhood development is that of socialization or the way a child is ‘taught’ how to act”(Chemistry Web) Lack of faith causes a person to think of violence as their only way to get attention. When someone has no religious values, they think of all the bad things that are bothering them instead of the good that they can bring into their life. Gangs in an environment are a big cause of bringing crime to a society because they are the people who do the most outrageous crimes. They are the ones who are drug dealers, who bring graffiti into neighborhoods, and who commit drive by shootings. Individuals join these gangs to be accepted, to be honored by the people within the gang, and because they may not value themselves