Theories Explaining Burglary
Rational Choice Theory and Routine Activity Theory
By: Tracy Eberts, November 11, 2010
Abstract
Any family can fall victim to home invasion or burglary-not by criminals who rob us of our possessions, but by our routines that allow them into our lives in order to rob us of our souls. Rational choice theory focuses on how to deter burglary. By examining the Rational Choice theory and Routine Activity theory we can see why criminals offend after weighing the rewards against the punishments. The Petit family found this out the hard way when two burglars invaded their home because they were not happy with the bounty that they received from the last two homes they invaded. Unfortunately for them this invasion
…show more content…
Most burglars weigh the positives with the negatives when making a choice to commit their crime. Many of them choose to commit their burglary (or home invasion) during the day because it is safer and there are less chances of being caught. About 57% of these crimes are committed between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. while about 42% are committed at night (home).
Many burglaries are committed by repeat offenders. In the Connecticut Nightmare, a string of burglaries led to the final home invasion and the death of a mother and her two daughters. Many people believe that they are safe where they live; in fact this home invasion occurred in a town that was listed as one of the “100 Best Places to Live.” The Petit’s, whom were the victims, lived in a “family-oriented community” with an “excellent academic reputation” (Swartz-Turfle). The day before Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes invaded the home of the Petit’s they committed a string of burglaries in the same neighborhood. These two were known criminals who had been in and out of prison for the past several years. “Komisarjevsky was 22 years old in 2002 when he was sentenced to nine years in prison, with six years special parole for several counts of burglary and larceny for a string of house break-ins. He was granted parole in April 2007” (Sullo). It was shortly after Komisarjevsky’s tether came off that he began to burglarize again. His partner in crime, Hayes, had a
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
Criminology is the study of why individuals commit crimes. Several sociologists and criminologists have developed theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior and why it occurs. In earlier times, theories such as biological determinism and phrenology were often used to explain criminal behavior. Those theories have since been proven to be unreasonable and unrealistic. As time passed, sociologists and criminologists created more plausible theories including the rational choice, classical, conflict, labeling, life course, critical, strain, social disorganization, routine activity, social control, and positivist theories. In attempts to better understand these criminological theories, an individual could apply one (or more) of these theories to real-life events or things he/she has seen on television. I have chosen to apply the rational choice theory to the popular movie Taken starring Liam Neeson and explain the many examples found throughout the movie.
Scarce research is available on active offenders due to their unwillingness to corporate with researchers and past and convicted offenders may have changed their perspectives after being convicted or left their lifestyle of crime. The most reliable data on these offenses and their perpetrators may come from active burglars themselves. Richard T. Wright and Scott Decker’s book, Burglars on the Job seeks to explain the reasons why burglars commit the crimes they do. They have taken their research to another level by gaining the trust of active offenders in the St. Louis area and gaining inside knowledge of these criminals’ daily lives and their crimes. This paper will address
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).
The two metropolitan areas I have decided to do my research paper on are Cincinnati, Ohio and Dallas, Texas. I choose Cincinnati because it is one of the bigger cities where I live. I choose Dallas because there seems to be a big difference in crime rates compared to Cincinnati. In this paper I will be comparing the burglary rate between these two cities. I will identify the number of burglaries reported to the police in each area and also explain which area had more reported
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.
Burglary has an undeniably large presence in society. Consequently, there is significant discourse surrounding the major criminogenic forces that motivate burglars. As a result, this essay asserts that to a large extent, strain theory provides the most effective explanation for burglary. However, this essay recognises the limitations of strain theory, thus the essay acknowledges the smaller, albeit still significant roles that theories like Seduction of Crime theory and Conflict theory play in explaining burglary. To develop this hypothesis, a number of factors are explored. First however, a definition of burglary must be established; for the purposes of this essay, the Common Law definition shall be used. Additionally, strain theory’s fundamental
Understanding patterns and motivation of crimes is important for solving the mysteries surrounding them. In this sense, theories can be used to explain crime phenomena and answer the questions involved. Through theory, important aspects surrounding a crime can be discovered. Therefore, understanding the patterns and motivations of crimes can be helpful towards preventing their occurrence. This paper focuses on robbery as a type of crime. The two theories that are applied to robbery, in this case, are strain theory and social disorganization theory. Robbery usually involves unlawful taking of property from an organization or an individual through use of force or threat of force. There may also be
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 Routine Activities theory was developed by Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson and is derived from rational choice theory (Walsh & Hemmens, p. 122). Cohen and Felson claim that crime is the result of “(a) motivated offenders meeting (b) suitable targets that lack (c) capable guardians” (Walsh & Hemmens, p. 123). The Routine Activities theory is used to explain not only crime rates but also risk of victimization. It is closely related to Lifestyle theory and often combined with it.
Every theory of crime has at least 2-3 meta-theoretical levels above it. The fundamental issues are usually addressed at the approach level, and are often called the assumptions, or starting points, of a theory, although the term "assumptions" more strictly refers to the background or domain boundaries one can draw generalizations about. Above the approach level is the Perspective level, the largest unit of agreement within a scientific community, and in fact, the names for the scientific disciplines. Perspectives are sometimes called paradigms or viewpoints, although some people use the term paradigm to refer to untestable ideologies such as: (1) rational choice; (2) pathogenesis; (3) labeling;
Rational choice theory involves both offense-specific and offender-specific crimes. Offense-specific crime is crime committed when an offender considers all parts of the actual act before they decide to commit the wrongdoing. The offender would weigh police presence in that neighborhood, if the home is well protected, will people be in the home, ease of getting in and getting out, or if stolen property will be valuable for sale, etc. Offender-specific crime is when the potential offender determines if they have what it take to commit the crime based on self interest. They only think about their personal experience and not particularly about the offense itself. Offender-specific crime is when an offender considers;
Crime has existed in societies across the world for centuries, and is defined as any offense harmful against the public. However, the true nature of crime is more complex as there are many different motives and causes behind a criminal act, which cannot be contributed to a single factor (Barlow & Decker, 2010). Within the field of criminology, a number of theories exist that attempt to explain why some individuals commit crime, while others abstain from it. Some theories attribute crime to the specific environment; they believe that an individual commits crime when certain ecological conditions are met (Felson, 2001). Others argue that crime is caused by the individual themselves; that criminals are the result of unrestrained thoughts and low self-control (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 2001). This paper will analyze aspects of a real world scenario using both routine activity theory and low self-control theory, for the purpose of better understanding and evaluating certain criminal behavior.
Burglary and robbery are different in many ways, but are the same. Burglary is when a person unlawful entry to a person home or business building to commit the act of theft or a felony. When the action of a burglary is committed by someone, the victim does not have to be present at the time of the incident. (DeMille, 2016). When dealing with building types it can be numerous kind of business offices. Burglary must take place when a person only unlawfully entered your home or building without permission. Depending on the state’s the status of the laws for the offense of burglary can be considered a felony. Robbery is when a person has taken or trying to take something from another person that has value unlawfully by force, intimidation or even threatening that person. Robbery is different from burglary because in order for a person to commit the offense of robbery, a victim must be present at the time of the incident for the crime to occur. Depending on the states and the values of the item that was taken from the victim at the time of the incident the states statues of the laws for the offense of robbery can be considered a felony. (DeMille, 2016). Burglary and robbery are the same in only one category; both are considered to be property crimes.
As the nineties began, the general theory of crime became the most prominent criminological theory ever proposed; furthermore, it is empirically recognized as the primary determinant in deviant and criminal behaviors. Known also as the self-control theory, the general theory of crime can most simply be defined as the absence or lack of self-control that an individual possesses, which in turn may lead them to commit unusual and or unlawful deeds. Authored by educator Michael R. Gottfredson and sociologist Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990) essentially “dumbed down” every theory of crime into two words, self-control. The widely accepted book holds that low self-control is the main reason that a person initiates all crimes, ranging from murder and rape to burglary and embezzlement. Gottfredson and Hirschi also highlighted, in A General Theory of Crime (1990), that low self-control correlates with personal impulsivity. This impulsive attitude leads individuals to become insensitive to deviant behaviors such as smoking, drinking, illicit sex, and gambling (p. 90). The extreme simplicity, yet accuracy, of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (self-control theory), make it the most empirically supported theory of criminal conduct, as well as deviant acts.