Low Self Control Case Summary

Furthermore, criminal behaviour is learned, and when this behaviour is been taught, it entails techniques of committing the crime which at times can be complicated and other times quite simple; ' the specific direction of the motives, drives, rationalisation and attitudes.' (Newburn, 2013, pp. 394). Although this theory is rarely used when theorising white collar crime, it is nonetheless an important factor in many offending. For example, a study carried out by Geis of an electrical equipment company found that a lot of manufacture encouraged price fixing by their employee as a way of coping with market pressure. Geis pointed out that these activities was an established way of life where those that are involved learns attitudes and rationalisation that favour and support such misconduct. (Newburn, 2013). A second theory was given by Hirschi and Gottfredson, which is called the Self Control Theory. This theory focus on human nature and the significance of gratification. The central idea of this theory is that individuals peruse self interest and self gratification and the avoidance of pain. In regards to this theory crime is seen as a way in which individuals maximise pleasure and minimise pain. Furthermore, they argued that the differences that there are between those that chooses not to be involved in criminal activities and those that choose to

Does the Perceived Risk of Punishment Deter Criminally Prone Individuals? Rational Choice, Self-Control, and Crime

It allows us to examine what makes crime acceptable and desirable in the minds of potential criminals, and it gives us the tools necessary to use a proactive rather than reactive approach to crime control. To look at crime from a psychological point of view is nothing new. However, use of this technique may lead to better methods of deterrence. To begin, we must understand what the concepts are that have shaped the average person’s mind. In general the average person is faced with the concepts of determinism, free will, and social identity as they mature into adulthood.

The defendant, Andrelly Garcia is a 27 year old female, from Massapequa, NY. Who is currently separated from her husband, the father of her two small children, Rosalin (6) and Jacob (4). Mrs. Garcia stated that Mr. Garcia is financially supporting the household, because she is currently unemployed. She reported to be in good physical and mental health.

When there are high incarceration rates, one often wonders what can cause a person to commit crimes and be incarcerated. There seems to be two theories that fit the bill on affecting high incarceration rates. The first theory is the self-control theory. This theory is “the primary difference between criminals and non-criminals.” (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990) This would include many inmates that re-offend and violate parole. These individuals

There are many perspectives in which one can analyze and understand why a person decides to commit a crime. Some perspectives are social learning theory, strain theory, classical and rational choice theory, deterrence theory, biological and psychological positivist theories, among others. However, for the purposes of this paper, the biological and psychological theories will be discussed.

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.

2. Self-control theory, routine activities theory, and situational and environmental crime prevention are related to each other because most offenders have low self-control and respond to environmental cues that either entice or thwart criminal behavior. There are three prongs to routine activities theory, a likely offender, a suitable target, and the absence of capable guardians. The likely offender, in this

When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).

Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) control theory regards parental controls as key in developing self-control, which is related to crime. People who show low self-control tend to live in the here and now, whereas those who have better self-control like to defer gratification. For example, criminal acts provide excitement, have few long-term benefits, and require little preparation. Moreover, they cause pain to their victims, which is correlated to being self-centered and insensitive – both qualities of people with low self-control.

When in context with violent crime, these stressors become even more intense, and irrational prejudices lead to failure of control over one’s own impulses. People are more insecure around members of different demographics, with the subconscious tension creating moral ambiguity within the mind, leading to a higher propensity of violent crime. Since these innate biases cannot be consciously controlled, the deterrence theory cannot be considered as a factor for curbing violent crime. Other subconscious factors manipulate people to act out impulsively without premeditated thoughts of the consequences.

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.

Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime proposes that low self-control is the cause of crime. Self-control is defined as a person’s ability to control their emotions, behaviors and desires in the face of external demands. Hirschi argued that everyone is born without self-control but it is gained through familial interactions. Parents who supervise their children, recognize deviance and punish deviant acts build self-control in their children. Therefore, low self-control is the product of unsuccessful parenting, such as failing to recognize and correct children’s wrong behavior. Children with low levels of self-control end up being more prone to crime, and their criminal tendencies continue into adulthood. If a child is never told

Lifestyle theory shows victims’ exposure to their own lifestyle choices. This exposure can lead them to the criminal attacker and situations with their own choices. Examples of such actions are as follows: going out at night alone, living in a bad part of town, associate with known felons, promiscuous, excessive alcohol use, doing drugs, going down a dark alley, etc. Crimes taken place are not random, but a part of the lifestyle choices the victim has portrayed. This impulsive behavior or low self-control comes at a high risk for victimization. (2006) This style of life offers more opportunities for the crime to occur.

What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality