Criminal behavior is something that affects everyone, even if you don’t particularly engage in the act itself. Every time a crime is committed, we often find ourselves wondering what led that person to do that crime. We wonder why they did it because it is something that we could never do, so therefor we cannot fathom the act of engaging in criminal activity. Some people feel that people only engage in it just because they lack the thing that they try to steal or because of their specific background and race. In actuality, there is a link between criminal behavior and the lack of education. However there is also a link between the attainment of education and criminal behavior. There are several ways that theories suggest the affect that education can have on decisions that a criminal may make beforehand. According to chapter seven (Conformity, Deviance, and Crime) of the textbook Introduction to Sociology, functionalist theories along with Emile Durkheim and his concept of an anomie, which is a situation where social norms loose their hold over individual behavior gives us insight into the struggle between education and criminal behavior. “Functionalist theories see crime and deviance resulting from structural tensions and a lack of moral regulation.” (Page 172) Students dropping out of school and coming from difficult backgrounds is seen as a norm within society. Due to their being a failure to try and alter these things, students seek comfort elsewhere. As a result,
This paper summarizes four theories of criminology. Rational choice theory states that criminals act based on a thought process that weighs the pros and cons of criminality. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that most criminals are people capable of having rational thoughts before committing a crime. Trait theory is the view of criminology that suggests criminality is a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that criminals choose to commit crime because of a brain anomaly or chemical imbalance. Social structure theory is “a view that disadvantaged economic class position is a primary cause of crime” (Seigel 139). Those who follow this theory often believe social forces can have a great effect on whether or not a person commits a crime. An example would be those who are poor are more being more prone to commit crime. Social process theory is a view that criminality depends on how a person interacts with different organizations and institutions and processes in society. For example, a family would be considered
Understanding the criminal behavior system and crime typologies that the book demonstrates; it is kind of hard to distinguish what type of serial killer Robert Durst is. Judging from the book examples of different type of serial killers, I would have to say Robert Durst is a hybrid serial killer. While some of his actions from the video series, “The Jinx”, lead me to feel as if he was an expedience killer who wants to protect themselves from a perceived threat as the book states. Some of Durst’s actions also lead me to believe he was a mission killer, who had a vision for killing someone. None of his victims seemed as if they were some random act of murder. I feel as if he had a mission to kill all of them.; one reason making me suspect
Sociological theories of crime contain a great deal of useful information in the understanding of criminal behavior. Sociological theories are very useful in the study of criminal behavior because unlike psychological and biological theories they are mostly macro level theories which attempt to explain rates of crime for a group or an area rather than explaining why an individual committed a crime. (Kubrin, 2012). There is however some micro level sociological theories of crime that attempts to explain the individual’s motivation for criminal behavior (Kubrin, 2012). Of the contemporary
The motivation of criminals encompasses more than one common denominator, however, the degree of culpability and causation are within close proximity of one another. People every day engage in illicit acts for a myriad of reasons that run the gamut from white-collar crimes such as embezzling large sums of money to retail thefts. Gang related and drug-crimes that result in violence have plagued metropolitan areas throughout American. There is never any justification for taking someone’s life unless it is in self-defense, but people kill indescribably for material goods or money. Is it the Americans’ insatiable appetite and relentless pursuit of obtaining wealth and prosperity in achieving the American dream? Yes and no. For some people, this is the underlining-motivator for committing criminal acts regardless of the consequences. The perception of wealth in America as a viable solution for resolving problems is a mirage not a remedy. Even though this is a common known cliché that “money doesn’t buy happiness,” people continue to risk their freedom and commit criminal acts for such a dream. These are just a few irrational explanations of why people under the general strain theory, whether first offenders, or career criminals commit crimes. There are many exceptions, such as domestic violence, sexual assault, mental health problems, drug and alcohol addiction that contribute to criminal behavior as well.
As the crime rate in America increases the amount of convictions increase. There are many reasons and a wide range of factors why people within our society commit crimes which leads to incarceration. “Reasons for committing a crime include greed,
The United States is made up of social classes which are divided based on the socio economic status of the citizen or the family. The three different levels to the class sys-tem are the upper class, the middle class, and the lower class. Unfortunately there is also poverty that exists which is also a factor to be considered when analyzing crime. There are many theorist who believe that a person’s socio economic status has a large impact on the likelihood of whether or not a person will commit crime during their life-time. According to Bank, Flavin, and Leighton, “Marx and Engels believed that crime was about defects of society and the product of the demoralization and alienation caused by the conditions of capitalism.” In short this statement is saying that there are underlying reasons why people commit crimes, it is not just about whether poverty is present, how wealthy a person, what social class they are in, or what a person’s socio economic status is. However, socio economic status, poverty level, and social class all do have an effect on the rate of which crime is committed by citizens.
We can conclude that a person is not born with a deviation towards delinquency, the home and the environment influence their formation. A possible solution to the social disorganization linked to crime is to reduce the gap in the different social spheres. The main factors that influence crime are social and economic factors. Not all poor people are criminals, most people who commit crimes come from poverty and that is a clear reality. So what we have to do is reduce inequalities and achieve social
Throughout the years, the association between a criminal offense and a criminal have become more relevant. Although there are many theories that try to illustrate the concept of why crimes happen, no theory has a profound influence of understanding an individual’s nature, relationship, development, and a society itself (Coleman & Ganong, 2014). To further explain, “theories of crime are defined in relation to modernity, spanning their development from the enlightenment to the present, with the advent of postmodernism” (Miller, 2012, p. 1798). In other words, theories of crime are an approach to understanding an individuals behaviour and actions in their environment, society, and themselves that may lead to crime. Nevertheless, within this paper, it will be comparing the case of
When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).
The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.
The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anticriminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms involved in any other learning process.
Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior. Psychologists have come up with various theories and reasons as to why individuals commit crimes. These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behavior, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory,.
Figuring out why people commit crimes is one of the central concerns of criminology. Do most criminals act rationally after weighing the costs of crime? Is society ever to blame for an individual to commit a crime? Do mental diseases or even genetics factor into whether a person will live a life of crime. Over the years, many people have developed theories to try to answer these questions. In fact, the number of theories of why people commit crimes sometimes seems to equal the number of criminologists. I explore these questions and much more in the paper that follow.
What makes people want to commit crimes? Are criminals any different than us? Does committing a crime mean there is something wrong with you, such as a psychological problem? Do all criminals have the same kind of personality? Is a criminal born or made? Questions like this and many more will be elaborated on throughout this paper.
What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality