Rational Choice Theory Of Crime

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

This essay will outline how crime theories are able to assist in recognizing the causes of criminal activity, as well as demonstrating two criminological theories to two particular crimes. Overviews of trends, dimensions and victim/offenders characteristics of both crime groups will be specified. The two particular crimes that will be demonstrated throughout this essay are; Violent Crime (focusing on Assault) being linked with social learning theory and White Collar crime (focusing on terrorism) being linked to General Strain theory. In criminology, determining the motive of why people commit crimes is crucial. Over the years, many theories have been developed and they continue to be studied as criminologists pursue the best answers in eventually diminishing certain types of crime including assaults and terrorism, which will be focused on.

The rational choice theory elucidates scenarios where the person is not aware whether the act is a crime or not, and before performing the act, he or she compares the act to the alternative and finally assesses the outcome of committing the act and the outcome of failing to commit the act. McLaughlin (2001) argues that criminal offenders have the goal of benefitting themselves via their criminal acts, which involves making decisions and evaluating alternatives. Within time constrains, availability of information and ability, criminals perceive these behaviors as rational. As a result, the probability of attaining financial success purges the struggle of failing to have that financial success. For instance, lacking that success and inadequate social worth increases the worth of getting caught. This does not imply that getting caught is the result taken into consideration, there is the probability that imposing a harsher punishment can help in preventing the rise of such crimes (Gottschalk, 2009). The rational choice theory maintains that if the outcome of performing a criminal act is harsher than the veracity of failing to commit the act, then individuals are less likely to commit crime. The truth of the matter, however, is that emphasis on white-collar is not a traditional one. Most corporations focus on charging fines instead of imprisonment (Blickle, 2006). As a result, imbalance exists between the responsibility faced by white-collar and blue-collar criminals. White-collar criminals are punished by paying fines whereas street criminals face imprisonment. Socially, there is a larger stigma associated with street crimes. Street criminals face the wrath of shame, which is not the same fate for white-collar criminals, which

As such, there is growing acknowledgment of this methods limits and failures. Victims, offenders, and community members often feel that justice does not adequately meet their needs (Roberts & Roach, 2004). Justice professionals, who make up the core components, such as judges, lawyers, prosecutors, probation and parole officers frequently express a sense of frustration as well. Many feel that the process of justice deepens societal wounds and conflicts rather than contributing to rehabilitation (Dzur & Olsen,

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.

Though ration choice theory does not completely explain why crime takes place, it does have its strengths and provides a thought-provoking point on the occurrences of crime. Rational choice theory is, what is known as offender specific, in other words, criminals make decisions and assess their skills before a committing law-breaking offense. The métier in this is that it promotes responsibility of consequences, you did the crime, therefore, you should do the crime. The thinking here is that because you were careful in your planning on the execution of the crime, you are guilty. Although I do not totally buy into this argument, it is understandable to believe that because individuals who commit robbery, carefully select their target, wait

Public Shame is a better standby for imprisonment because penalty is more expensive for society to pay for non-violent crimes. The United States facility is overloaded with inmates. Inmates that are half in gang related crimes and the other half for nonviolent crimes. The prisons are getting overcrowded and it is irreverent to ignore that prisons are getting worse. Individuals who are in jail are shamed just as individual who is

(2014), people freely choose behavior based on their rational calculations. With all other things being equal, the choice made by a person will be directed towards achieving the highest level possible of individual pleasure. Crime, according to the rational choice theory, is chosen for its benefits and will always occur if the benefits outweigh the costs. Of all the incentives that drove Dahmer, the sexual fantasies reigned supreme. His sexual impulses dramatically resurfaced whenever he was drunk.

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.

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 Classical School of Criminology was developed by two utilitarian philosophers, Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham during the early 17th century. The Classical School of Criminology is an important theory in the framework of criminal behavior, with principle themes that include: criminal acts are of individuals free will and rational deliberation, calculating, and hedonistic beings. Criminals make a rational choice and choose criminal acts due to maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. As well as minimizing crime, the would be offender must be convinced that the likely punishment for the crime would be swift, certain and proportionately (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001, p. 11).

Sexual offending by adult acquaintances is usually a purposive and deliberate act and therefore, according to Rational Choice Theory (which assumes this), in both the planning and execution of the offence, the offender will have made a series of rational choices, with the intent on benefiting themselves outweighing any perceived risks associated with their commission of this crime. (Clarke & Felson, 1993; Cornish & Clarke, 2008). Rational Choice Theory suggests that the decision to engage in criminal behaviour is influenced by a rational assessment of the cost-benefit of the efforts, rewards and risks when encountered with a crime opportunity (Cornish & Clarke, 1986; 2008). This perspective proposes that crime is committed because it provides the most effective means of achieving desired goals, such as money,

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.

Crime is a socially constructed phenomenon. It is not static but dynamic and is defined into existence. It changes over time and place. For example, early definitions of crime such as classicism defined individuals as rational, free and responsible for their own actions. The emergence of positivism was an attempt to bring scientific methodology to criminology. Positivists believe in objectively quantifying cause and effect. In the early twentieth century a sociological lens was applied. Functionalist sociologists such as Durkheim argued that crime had a positive function for society by reinforcing societal norms and values (Ziyanak and Williams 2014). Anomie and strain theory proposed later by Robert Merton examined how poorer classes experienced frustration through lack of opportunities leading to strain. There are many others including labelling, control and cultural deviance, however; this shows that our understanding of criminology is not static and like crime itself it changes over time and place.

The purposes of this research examine the interaction of educated or non-educated people within social diverse groups. I chose this topic because I wanted to understand people opinion and attitudes towards people convicted criminals and how the court system may influence this decision. I believe it is the first step to understand why people are prejudice, racist, and why they think of committing crime.