Crime is a social phenomenon that is in existence in the world today. Crime entails having a defiant behavior that leads criminal failing to follow the acceptable norms. Not all crimes in the world today are covered by law, but at times people commit crimes without the knowledge that they are committing them.
Those who commit crimes are at times looked down upon, and most of the times are made to be accountable for their actions through punishment of law. Punishment in this case may include being charged a penalty, incarceration and in worst case scenario being subjected to death.
For the longest time ever, there have been debates on why people tend to involve themselves with abnormal behavior as well as involvement in crime. To some, criminal activities are considered a sin that people get involved into due to possession by an evil spirit.
Though there have been many reasons that people come up with to try to explain why people get involved in crime, one thing stands out; the decision to get involved in crime rests in the hands of the crime committer. This paper therefore tries to bring out this point by showing that crime is a decision of the committer of the crime, and not the surrounding factors.
The action of committing crime among different people is entirely on those people who are involved in this crime. One of the schools of thought of reason why people commit crime is the rational theory.
The theory finds its bases in economics, where one has to balance the cost and the benefits that one will incur before venturing in a certain business. Just like the explanation in economics, rational choice theory focuses on how a person is thinking before engaging in a certain crime.
For one, the person has to be calculative of what he/she is going to gain when engaging in a certain crime. In this case, the person is considering the personal interest he or she has, that relates to engaging in that particular crime. When a person goes through the options that are available for him/her, he decides whether to continue with the crime or not.
Another consideration put in mind by committers of crime is whether they are going to be caught and put up to face their actions or not. In case the person feels like the rewards that he/she is going to reap out of committing the crime are more than the risk involved, more often than not these people find themselves engaging in crime to leap the foreseen reward.
As the rational choice theory shows, committing a crime is a process that takes time to resolve to engage in these activities (Briggs Para 2). Involvement in crime is dependent on the assurance that one gets from careful analysis of the rewards to be gotten from these activities.
Since it takes a lot of time and resources to get involved in crime, it is evident that involvement in crime is entirely due to decision of the person to gain the rewards that are foreseen in the involvement of crime.
Some studies have been carried out on the effect of punishment on the crime rate. During these studies, several things have been evident. To start with, if there was an increase in the number of police force operating in a certain region, crime rate was noted to have decreased by a considerable number, and in case the police force was on the decline, the crime rate was noted to increase.
The two findings are indication of the perception of people when getting involved in crime. In the first scenario, the reason why people desist from involving themselves in crime is due to the fact that they have the fear that the police force will catch up with them in case they get involved in crime.
The high number of police workforce threatens the crime committers and in turn shy away from carrying out these activities. In the other hand, fewer police personnel to crime committers means that the threat of been caught is lesser, and committing a crime may go unpunished.
In such a scenario, they tend to involve themselves more in crime as the risk that comes with it is lesser to them. The findings go ahead to show that involvement in crime is entirely dependent on the criminal’s thinking. When they think they will not be caught and can get away with committing of crime, they involve themselves with crime (Arrigo 68).
In the second scenario that involves serving time in jail from being caught in crime, the reasoning is the same. In this scenario, the severity or the length of the crime is what drives crime committers to get involvement in their actions. In case the punishment that they are expecting from committing in crime is severe, it deters the people from committing any sort of crime.
However, in an instance where these people feel that the punishment that comes with committing a crime is lesser than the conceivable benefit, involvement in crime is high, as a lesser sentence to a crime acts as a motivator of committing a certain crime.
The behavior by crime committers in this case is a show of how these people resolve on committing crime. The notable word here being deciding to commit a crime, people tend to result to involvement of crime from the resolutions they make from their risk reward analysis.
Different people have different ways of thinking. The same may be said when it comes to what people admire in their life. Ironically, there are the people in life who admire crime committers and who have high regards to people who engage in these activities.
The admiration is more, especially if the crime committers got away with the crime successfully. To these people, committing crimes is a thrill and at times may go to greater intents to commit them. Admires of crime committers get excitement that comes with involvement in crime.
They committing these crimes as long they do not get caught, which gives them a thrill to get involved in crime. In this scenario, these people have resolved to getting involved in crime from the depth of their thinking. The decision to get involved in crime in this case rests on the crime committers.
Driven by the thrill to get involved in crime, these people tend to make the decision to get involved in crime themselves without any notable pressure from an outside source. Other people commit crime due to some elements like greed, revenge, anger and pride (Bessant 96).
When crime is committed from all these motivations, the decision to commit crime entirely rests on the hands on the crime committers. It is from their own resolution that they decide that committing a crime is more desirable to them than not getting involved in crime.
For instance when it is about greed, the people involved in these crimes usually take a longer time to ensure success of their venture.
During this time, they are usually coming up with means of getting to minimize the risk associated with the act of crime and concentrating with the benefit they may gain from involvement with crime. In this case, the people are directly involved in affecting their behaviors as the malicious motive is the main driving force.
Routine activity theory is the other cause of crime, which tends to show that crime is entirely caused from the decision of the crime committers. Developers of this theory resolve that involvement in crime does not necessarily involve a criminal.
Involvement in crime in this case is a decision by the person, whether he /she may take advantage of the opportunity that presents itself of committing a certain crime. In this particular theory, a crime does not necessarily have to be a big crime, but is inclusive of the petty stealing.
There are three things that have to be there for a person to be presented with that chance of making the decision whether to commit the crime nor not. For one, opportunity has to be there, then there must be no protection in existence, and finally, the person involved must subsequently be motivated to get involved in the deed (Siegel 201).
Decision to get involved in the crime rests on the person who is presented with the opportunity, and he/she may take or leave it. If the person resolves to take it, he/she is personally liable for his/her actions as there is no pressure around. At this point, the choice the person makes determines the action he/she takes.
Self-control is one of the important characters that a person should always have. The decision to commit crime is not always dependent on how the person can control himself when presented with an opportunity to commit crime.
The moral principles that a person upholds are very important when it comes to committing of crime. Though having low self-control has a considerable effect on how a person behaves when presented with an opportunity to commit crime, the moral principle has a very big part to play in any case.
Rational choice theory is keen to show the morals that one upholds play a very important part in deciding whether to get involved in crime or not. It is the motivation that someone has that leads to the person behaving the way he or she does.
Bad motivation in this case leads to the person in question getting involved in the wrong activity of committing crimes. Some of the incidents of crime are usually calculated, and whichever the drive, which may include greed and pride, some people result to criminal activities without any other influence but from their own choices.
Therefore, though debates may pop up as to why people get involved in incidences of crime, at the end of the day it is the decision of the person to do what he feels like, as the choice lies in his/her hands.
Works Cited
Arrigo, Bruce. Social Justice, Criminal Justice. Califonia: Wadsworth, 1999.Print.
Bessant, Judith. Sociology Australia. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 2002. Print.
Briggs, Steven. Important Theories in Criminology: Why People Commit Crime. Web.
Siegel, Larry J. Criminology: Theories, Patterns, and Typologies. Massachusetts: Lowell, 2011. Print.