Unfortunately the deterrence/rational choice theories does not answer this question very effectively, other than offering the belief that for some people the reward of committing the crime far outweighs the chance they will be caught and subsequently punished for the crime. This basic risk versus reward decision making is at the core of human behavior, and provides the foundation of what the deterrence and rational choice theories believe. For the purpose of this paper I am going to discuss the origins of the deterrence/rational choice theories for crime. I will discuss why some criminologists support the deterrence/rational choice theories as an important explanation for crime. Furthermore, I will discuss the key problems for the theory that limits its effective’s in criminology and understanding of the causes of crime.
USA. Rumbelow, 1988, Petharick 2009 Woodworth and Porter (2001) Shone, R. (2008) Solving Crimes Through Criminal Profiling. Rosen Publication Group. New York. Douglas, J.E.
This paper does not go as far to say that imitation is a tautology for the cause of criminal behavior; rather, merely that it is the most important factor of criminal behavior. With so many crimes occurring around the globe, the question remains: where does criminal behaviour stem from? Some say it is how a person is brought up, while others believe it is caused by peer influence. Though these two conditions certainly can lead to extremes in behavior, most unlawful acts stem from imitation. For example, if a person saw a crime being committed, and they believed that the act was rewarding in some manner to themselves if they were to perform it, they would act on it.
The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 42-65. doi: 10.1177/0002716203262548 Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2005). Evidence-Based Crime Prevention: Conclusions and Directions for a Safer Society. Canadian Journal of Criminology & Criminal Justice, 47(2), 337-354. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Yeh, S. S. (2010).
The Usefulness of Sociological Theories in Explaining Crime and the Control of Crime This paper seeks to explore the usefulness of Sociological Theories in explaining crime and whether in doing so there arises implications for probation practice. I shall begin by providing a brief explanation for the historical development of criminological thinking, starting with Classicism and moving onto Positivism both which lay the foundations for the development of sociological theories in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Analysis of the literature has highlighted the vast array of theories to which my attention will be paid. However, due to the limitations of this piece of work and in order to provide an in-depth account of the usefulness of particular theories I have chosen to focus on two; Labelling Theory and Subcultural Theory. I will provide a thorough account of how they attempt to explain crime and how offenders are propelled into crime and the usefulness of such theories.
2004. Vol. 32 Issue 1, p59. Nagin, Daniel S. and Raymond Pasternoster. ?Personal Capital and Social Control: The Deterrence Implications of a Theory of Individual Differences in Criminal Offending.?
Learning About Crime From Official Statistics In order to enlighten the general public and policy makers about the extent of crime, the crime dilemma itself must first be measured. Therefore it can be seen, that the research carried out towards crime is a fundamental subject in itself. There are a diversity of methods used in order to study the extent of crime, such methods include; statistics, surveys, questionnaires, biographies, interviews etc… The research methods used can be both quantitative and qualitative. There are two primary sources of data used in order to assist the general public in learning about the extent of crime; these are generally termed ‘official’ and ‘unofficial statistics’. However, the objectives of these methods are similar but the findings from them are generally not.
There are new crimes which are not explained by other prospectives. Crimes such as Cyber theft, terrorism and racism e.t.c. Post modernists prefer to focus on the individual, crime is a one-off event expressing whatever identity an individual choses. Whereas Functionalism mainly focuses on society as a whole. Crime is seen as inevitable, as well as expected.
Thesis Even though there are criminals who will weigh the risks of breaking the law and calculate the overall personal gain verse the consequences; the deterrence theory is believed to assist in cutting down on crime. Criminologists contend the certainty of fear of being caught committing a criminal act is enough to discourage violation of the law. Introduction This paper will discuss a peer reviewed article written based on observation and experience of two authors, concerning exactly how effective the deterrence theory is. Furthermore, the observation and evaluation by the authors, and why the study was conducted will be touched upon. In conclusion, how the authors were able to apply the deterrence theory to their empirical research while attempting to explain their personal observations will be analyzed.
This is undertaken by solely examining Strain theory and Rational choice theory. Although individual influences in crimes are of importance; they should only be recognized as an aptitude of crime rather then its cause. For that reason, a critique of these issues promotes a change by the academic community away from discussions over their success towards the development of more unifying theory building in the current economic climate. A theoretical perspective that has been used to explain white-collar crime is rational choice theory (Paternoster and Simpson, 1996; Piquero et al., 2005). Its bases its argument on the idea that people consider their decisions prior to undertaking criminal acts, and then act in their self-interest.