The offender’s choices may not always be rational and may draw on previously established beliefs about their opportunities to commit acts of violence. This theory focuses on the effectiveness of interventions to decide how to best reduce the benefits of crime and increase the cost of criminal action. Rational Choice theory is in the classical school, which is based on the idea that individuals choose to engage in crime (Gosselin, pp. 67-68, 2014). Biological
Similarly, the phenomenon being studied takes place after a behavior has occurred and must be a reaction to the behavior in question. It therefore includes the basic decision regarding whether to employ punishment as a control or to consider the fact that people are to be blamed for their harmful acts. Any theory must be testable, thus it must be stated in such a way that other people c... ... middle of paper ... ...er policies and crime programs as well as strengthen the existing ones. Through the understanding of criminal behavior and various patterns of crime, the criminal justice system is better placed when it comes to the prevention of a particular type of crime and easy apprehension of criminals due to the ability to detect their next move. 5.0 Conclusion Form the research carried out, it is evident that there is no single theory which can adequately provide all the explanations in relation to crime since a crime patterns entail several phenomena.
Among the goals of rational choice theory is to explain all types of crime (Cornish and Clarke, 1986). However, it does not propose that there is an underlying unity between different types of crime like other theories. Instead, these diverse elements are important in explaining why such events occur. Also, it incorporates factors that lead to crime, emphasizes the pattern of decisions throughout a criminal career, and accounts for situational variables of crime. In comparison, the deterrence theory proposes that the fear of legal punishment diverts people away from crime, while rational choice theory advances that in the act of choosing whether or not to commit a crime the benefits are weighed (Stafford and Warr, 1993; Cornish and Clarke, 1986).
These characteristics are Barkan and Bryjak mentioned in the book that some “kinds” of people to contribute crimes than others. However, we should know that any of these explanations are not absolutely true and they just explain that some of our social characteristics influence chances of committing crimes. Works Cited Barkan, Steven E., and George J. Bryjak. Myths and Realities of Crime and Justice: What Every American Should Know. 2nd ed.
According to this perspective, free will and moral responsibility are sheer illusions. Therefore, instead of punishing people for engaging in criminal activities, society should discover ways of meeting their needs by ‘providing them with the requisite human social qualities for them to control their future behaviour and so convert them into law-abiding citizens’ (King 1981:19). This model goes back to the notion of a criminal law without criminal sanctions. It argues against the utilization of criminal sanctions, and considers it not useful in curbing crime, as well as a threatener to those subjected to it.
Instead of viewing these theories as contradictory, preferring the one and ignoring the other, it is contended that Gabriel Tarde’s (Wil... ... middle of paper ... ...ponse to their situation to support their view. There is a valid place for social theories such as the strain theory because, through understanding social factors which may put people at risk of committing crimes, actions directed towards alleviating the strain will result in prevention of crimes by removing some reasons the offender may have to commit the crime. The classical view of criminal behaviour which states criminal behaviour is a rational decision made by the criminal is, provided that the offender is capable of rational thought, indisputable and is the most convincing explanation of criminal behaviour. As a society then, we need to work towards making crime a more unattractive option. Relieving the strain is one way.
As Joe Arpuio states “getting tough on crime,” the tougher retributive punishments are, may again deter crime. Deterrence- Deterrence is the intention to prevent future crimes from taking place, becoming split into two specific types of deterrence, general and specific. General deterrence is “actions that take place to persuade other persons from committing criminal acts” (Couture, 2014, p. 128). While specific deterrence is “punishments aimed at stopping... ... middle of paper ... ...ause it deals with society as a whole. Yes, general deterrence may use certain individuals as an example for society, but if the punishment for that certain individual is strict enough and is able to deter others from society from committing crime it is doing its job.
Deterrence theories rely on criminal prosecutions to prevent corporate crime after the crime has already been committed (ex-post), where as compliance theories focus regulatory agencies that encourage compliance with the law before the crime takes place (ex-ante). 3.1 Deterrence Theory Deterrence theory argues that individuals act in accordance with their self-interest and obey the law because they fear the penalties of criminal behavior. More often than not, they choose not to commit crimes because they have seen harsh punishments imposed on others. Current research on deterrence emphasizes the role of the criminal justice system enforcing and punishing offenders. The fear of detection, conviction, and punishment resulting from prosecution forms the core of deterrence theory.
The media enters in as a forum to present conservative and liberal opinions to enact and enforce criminal laws and punishment. A debate over crime often strives to define prevention and punishment, in models that make these terms mutually exclusive, versus a view that crime prevention is a result, and punishment only one possible tool for achieving that result. Different forms of punishment will be discussed in relationship to the criminal justice system as well as the purpose the punishment serves, problems relating to the punishment, and an opinion on improvements and solutions. False beliefs regarding crime and the criminal justice system are often created by media coverage. Statistics on crime rates, violent crimes, racial involvement, and juvenile crime are often misrepresented, allowing a fear of crime by society.
In this case, an interest in the broad deterrent effectiveness of these measures is an interest in their crime preventive effectiveness by whatever means prevention is achieved. Accordingly, a person contemplating the commission of a crime would undertake a cost-benefit analysis and would execute the criminal plan only if potential benefits sufficiently outweighed expected costs. In addition to theorists, courts have adopted the rational actor model as a justification for the imposition of certain penalties, specifically the death penalty for the crime of murder. Under general deterrence theory persons are punished for violating the criminal law to serve as object lessons for the rest of society. Society, according to the theory, thus transmits the following message.