Reviewing Crimes Committed And Rational Choice Criminology Essay

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

According to word iq (2010) ,Rational choice is a way of looking at deliberations between a number of potential courses of action, in which "rationality" of one form or another is used either to decide which course of action would be the best to take, or to predict which course of action actually will be taken. While Robert Kane (2002) describes free will as the apparent human ability to make choices that are not externally determined and doing what one wants without coercion, punishment constraint or oppression. It generally means being your own person which is an illusion because actions are mostly determined by factors we have no control about. According to Becker G (1968), Deterrence theories have shown that the decision to commit a crime is the result of a rational consideration of the costs and benefits of a criminal act. With various ways including the the Expected Utility Model which seeks to maximize utility and the bounded rationality. According to this model, criminals are assumed to assign probabilities and values to all the outcomes of an action, to multiply the probability and value of each outcome, and to sum the products over all outcomes into an overall evaluation of the action. This process is repeated for every action and ends with the selection of the action with the largest expected utility. To emphasize more on the rational choice to commit a crime, the reasoning criminal evaluates the risk of apprehension, the seriousness of the expected punishment, the potential value of criminal enterprise and his or her immediate need for criminal gain. He carefully chooses the target and their behavior is systematic and selective.

People have different levels of rationality. based of hindsight bias where a person becomes wise after an event, it follows that those who have experienced the event will not think the same as those who have experienced it cultural differences also influence the rationality of individuals, there different behaviors in different countries and different levels of individualism in different parts. Culture influences the way people think. Improved information will also increase rationality of a person. Genetics is also thought to determine the level of rationality in individuals. Research by Wallace, Cesarini, Lichten stein and Johansson (1990) has shown that genetics account for 42% of the variation of behavior. According to Margaret, L & Karen S. (I990), Institutions also affect the levels of rationality among individuals within them by removing uncertainty and by permitting individuals to rely on the reasons established through time and experience. Camerer, C., & Thaler, R. H. (1995). Reveal that social conditions have an immense influence on the choice of an individual. Taking education as n example, a person will have to conform to the values taught in education to choose from a variety of actions.proffession also sets ethics and code of conduct whereby one is supposed to act by the stipulated ethics in order to remain in the proffesion.parent to child relationship in the young ages also affects the choice of individuals. Culture affects the choice of individuals by setting up traditions which are rituals, and are conducted in order for everyone to behave in socially acceptable ways. Similarly, they pressure people to behave in a predictable fashion .Tradition is often regarded as a source of social stability because social behavior is first learned in the family. Also, the society establishes laws to mandate acceptable behavior. There are two basic kinds of law: natural law and positive law. Natural law has been recognized throughout history as a general body of rules of right conduct and justice common to all mankind thus limits the choice of people to do various actions. Positive law, on the other hand, consists of regulations formulated by the heads of a country or society. "In many cases, natural laws have been written into positive laws by governments. The prohibition against killing, for example, is common to virtually all of mankind, and most nations have enacted laws against it. These laws hence limit a person to live in accordance to them.

A scholar Jacki Charity affirms that the concept of social justice is quite complex. It is an idealistic notion based on the premise that members of a given society assume a shared responsibility for one another. What is just is ultimately determined in the social realm, and is based on the behavior and attributes considered important by members of the community. Psychological & Sociological Perspectives of Social Justice considers the roles of humans in the social environment, and how these roles and attitudes affect and change (Schaefer & Lamm, 1994) .It is important to understand how individual attitudes, goals, and beliefs can affect social thinking and behavior as it relates to social justice and welfare and to judge them according to that. Conversely, if members of the community believe that a viable social service system is in place, the victim deserves to suffer. Society is not responsible for intervention if the victim can be blamed for not utilizing existing programs and fails to make good, responsible choices. We should not consider whether social programs are just, but instead, we should evaluate the consequences of social programs on the well-being of humans. Decency is about how people should conduct themselves toward one another. following information from the positivist school (2010) on Psychological conditions, Sigmund divided the personality into the id, the primitive biological drives, the superego, the internalized values, and the ego, memory, perception, and cognition. He proposed that criminal behavior is either the result of mental illness or a weak conscience. John Bowlby proposed an attachment theory in which maternal deprivation was a factor that might lead to delinquency. Some forms of criminal behavior such as sexual offences, have been medicalised with treatment offered alongside punishment. Biological conditions need also to be put into consideration while holding people accountable for their actions for example, the Physical characteristics where modern research might link physical size and athleticism and aggression because physically stronger people have the capacity to use violence with less chance of being hurt in any retaliation. Otherwise, such early research is no longer considered valid. The development of genetics has produced another potential inherent cause of criminality, with chromosome and other genetic factors variously identified as significant to select heredity rather than environment as the cause of crime. Similarly, a number of reputable studies demonstrate a link between lower intelligence and criminality. If their intelligence is poor, they are also less likely to be deterred. Other medical factors like testosterone and adrenaline have been associated with aggression and violence, and the arousal and excited state associated with them. The excessive consumption of alcohol can lower blood sugar levels and lead to aggressiveness, and the use of chemicals in foods and drinks has been associated with hyper-activity and some criminal behavior.

As a society we do have a choice to reduce the escalating number of crimes today. Bo, L (18th 02.2008) tells us that all we need to do is to first learn to recognize the influence of socially sanctioned hatred. As human beings, we seem to have a built-in temptation to objectify other groups of people in order to feel superior to them or to find a scapegoat for all our problems. People who break the law are not all alike. They are an enormously diverse group of human beings. Also, we need to make drugs a public health problem instead of a criminal justice problem as most cases are about drugs. We need to insist upon a more mature dialogue about the drug problem. We have to "decriminalize" their use, treating the problem as the public-health issue it is. Another choice is to separate violent and nonviolent offenders’ right from the start since it’s inconceivable that we routinely dump nonviolent offenders in prison cells with violent ones, even in local jails and holding tanks. None of us, including prison staff, should accept violence as a fact of prison life. Also we need to regain compassion and respect for those who wrong us. Over the past years, we have increasingly legitimized cruelty and callousness in response to the cruelty and callousness of criminals. By not allowing family visits or access to colleges and magazines all we want is to make sure inmates are miserable every second of the day. We no longer want them to get their lives together. We just want them to suffer In the long run, however, this approach will not make us happy, nor will it keep our children safe from crime. We need as the criminal justice system to allow for transformation, not merely rehabilitation. Another way forward is joining and supporting the restorative justice movement as for decades the justice system has been run according to the tenets of "retributive justice," a model based on exile and hatred. "Restorative justice" is a far more promising approach. This model holds that when a crime occurs, there's an injury to the community; and that injury needs to be healed. Restorative justice tries to bring the offender back into the community; if at all possible, rather than closing him out because even so, prisons can be environments that maximize opportunities for the inmates to become decent and caring human beings. Lastly, we need to take the issue of crime and punishment personally.

The job of the criminal justice system is to control all deviant acts that an individual with freewill and rational thought might do in the pursuit of personal pleasure. This is made easier by the fact that human actions are predicable and controllable. With the right punishment or threat the criminal justice system can control the free willed and rational human being. The problem the criminal justice system has is finding the right punishment or threats.

The rational choice philosophy is psychological and individualistic. It’s a psychological theory because it explains a person’s action in terms of his or her mental status. The American justice system supports the philosophy because before an individual is judged, tests have to be conducted to determine his mental status at the time of the offense.