Rational Choice Theory To Commit Crime

Jennifer,

I agree with you that the rational choice theory holds that an individual offender makes a rational choice to commit crime after weighing the costs and benefits. I believe that in part, the rational choice theory was popular amongst some in criminal justice due to the belief that crime did not stem from social issues as it helped to negate the issues of racism by some conservative politicians who maintained crime was getting worse. I did not consider your point about “three strikes” laws and other current tough on crime approaches. It seems likely that those in support of these types of punitive actions you mentioned would also be in support of the rational choice theory. Similar to you, I also wrote that I believed crime to be largely

However, rational choice theory goes further in that it explores how crime falls to the individual, and not society. The rational choice theory holds that offenders are rational people who seek to maximize their pleasures and minimize their pain. As such, the rational choice theory is more about the choices a person makes to commit crime and not as much on the punishment that one should receive if they commit crime. The rational choice theory can be popular among those who are in support of a punitive justice system as it holds society and environment are not an excuse for a person’s actions as it is an individual’s choice to commit crime. I will concede that I am a bit perplexed as to your example of strain theory. I would disagree that breaking into someone’s home would be considered an “exigent situation” and thus not result in any prosecution. While I agree that it would not be appropriate for police officers to deal with biological theories, I would have to disagree with you that prosecutors should handle and establish diagnosis. I do not believe it would be appropriate or ethical for prosecutors to be using biological theories in the prosecution of