SO SA 2 182- E xp lo rin g c rim e & B eh avio u r Ahm ed A boka r- B 00788037 Due: J a n29th , @ 4:0 5 Dr. C hris G ia co m anto nio Con tr o l, R atio n al C hoic e a n d R ou tin e A ctiv it ie s Rational Choice Theory ‹: Rational choice Theory is focused on the crucial assumptions of criminology, which shows that people choose their behaviour freely and are driven by the escapage of pain and the quest of pleasure.
People choose their actions by each option’s capability to produce advantage, pleasure and happiness. Rational choice adds a really small attitude on why original offenders choose to commit the certain crimes they do so, people choose to commit crime because they feel satisfied of doing so and it gives them a sense of rewardness, it is ‘easy”, and also in their minds it is satisfying and brings a lot of enjoyment to them.
The main assumption of this theory is that people are logical beings whose actions can be controlled or altered by a fear of discipline. In this way, it is true by being disciplined these offenders can think twice on what they have done by their actions and can be controlled by the fear of their punishments. To reach an agreement of setting a certain amount of punishment, according to this theory, an approval should be limited to what is needed to get one’s mind off of commiting crimes and letting themselves believe it is socially acceptable to do so. Rational choice is an assumption on a utilitarian belief that actions are established on a attentive assessment of the utility of conducting in a certain way. This assumption assumes that anyone who takes part in crime is within themselves meaning it is a personal choice, and these offenders are accountable to blame for their criminal actions. By the meaning of offending, rational choice hypothesizes that offenders weigh the possible benefits they can get from it and the chances of getting caught in a act, and then make a decisive decision on what they will pursue. So, before commiting in a criminal act, the harshness of what the expected punishment will be and or what you will be gaining by committing this criminal act. This basically means if the offender believes the risk is too high, the costs to be too high, and or the money is too low to commit, they will back out and not pursue to take on the act. The assumption of this theory is all based on a lot of different factors about the decision making case and the psychological desires. It is proven that people choose to commit crime after a long examination of the costs and the profit on what they will get out of it. This contains seeing both personal roles, which could consist of, in need of money, owing money, retaliation, and or simply entertainment because they enjoy doing so, and situational aspects such as, target/victim accountability and the existence of witnesses,chaperones, or the police. Rational choice focal point are on the convenience of committing a criminal act and or how criminal choices are put together by the social environment and the situational features. Routine Activities Theory: ‹ Routine activities theory is an accessory of rational choice theory. Routine activities theory depends upon three components that are needed for a crime to happen: ‘Motivated offenders, suitable targets, and capable guardians”. These three components must report in times and space for a crime to happen. (CH 2, Pg.61). Routine Activities Theory provides a big attitude on crime in that it anticipates how changes in social and economic circumstances influence the overall crime and victimization percentage. Felson and Cohen (1979) hypothesizes that criminal acts are a ‘structurally significant phenomenon,” basically explaining that violations are neither random or incidental acts. (CH2, Pg. 61). In the repercussions, it is the routine of activities people engage in between the order of their day and night lives that causes some people more affected to being looked at as a good enough target by a logically considerate offender. Routine activities theory compares the impressions of committing an act to the everyday motives of social communication. Crime is then normal and is reliant on available chances to offend. If there is an endangered target and there are acceptable rewards, a desired offender will take that opportunity and will not hesitate to commit that crime. In terms of convenient targets, the choice is altered by the offender’s approach of the target’s accountability; the more convenient and the more available the target is, the more likely the crime will happen. Also the amount of motivated criminals that are around also has a big role in the crime levels as well. It is proven that offenders are less expected to commit a crime if there are other ways to achieve what they are desired to get through appropriate means. This basically means that criminal desires can be decreased if offenders take a look at what they are capable of achieving in their lives and take the route that will cause them no harm and make them feel good within themselves, and think that they don’t have to go out there and commit a crime while they can do something socially acceptable for themselves and get rewarded the same way without any repercussions. The existence of capable guardians is also believed to prevent people from offending. Guardianship can be the real presence of a person who is capable to act in a careful manner or in the form of a more non-violent automated devices such as video surveillance and or certain kinds of security systems. These different kinds of security systems can restrain these offender’s approach to their ‘convenient” targets. This way, the existence of guardians will block most of these offenders, processing these targets off limits. This meaning, the existence of opportunity gathered with a lack of guardianship makes criminal motivations go up and the possibility of an offence happening.Control Theory: ‹ Unlike most criminology theories that aim to explain why people commit crimes, Control Theory attempts to explain why people obey rules. Control Theory offers an understanding for how behaviour works and a look of what is expected in society. A few control theories point out the development processes during early ages by which inner pressures develop. Social control theories, for instance, targets mainly on the outer factors and the development by which they become useful. Deviance and crime happen because of incomplete pressures. For social control theory, the basic view of human nature adds the appreciation of free will, this meaning giving offenders the room of choice, and responsibility for their actions. Social control theory hypothesizes that crime happens when certain bonds are weakened or not well stabled. Control theorists argue that if you don’t have these certain bonds, crime is not an unavoidable issue. Unlike these other theories that look to give an understanding into why people commit these certain acts, control theories focuses on the complete opposite, wondering why people hold back from offending. Criminality is looked at as a chance for everyone within the society, avoided only by anyone who tries to continue a family and social bonds. According to Hirschi, these four bonds are established upon attachment to individuals both within and apart from the family; ‘Attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. Attachment reflected a person’s sensitivity to the opinions of others; commitment flowed from an investment of time, energy, and reputation in conformity; involvement stemmed from engrossment in conventional activity; and belief mirrored a person’s conviction that he or she should obey rules.” (CH 2, Pg.57) These four aspects of social control are supposed to connect and relate anyone from getting into criminal activities. Those looking to test their will power of this theory as it mainly targets young people have closely inspected bonds with family, schools, community, and religion to complete the amount to which these such bonds help people stay away from committing criminal acts.