1. Provide an argument for the death penalty using rational choice/deterrence theory.
Rational choice theory depends on the personal choice of all people to engage in conforming or deviant behavior based on the perceived reward or punishment of the act. The theory is dependent upon many factors that affect this perception. Deterrence theory states that an efficient system of punishment, applied quickly and swiftly will not only deterred others from committing crimes, but will also prevent offenders from repeating their crimes. Using these theories, the death penalty should provide the most effective deterrent to murder.
The rational choice theory depends on the concept that humans are rational actors and that this rationality means that they have calculated the end results to arrive at a choice for action. It further states that all humans engage in this decision making about all activities and part of this assessment is a weighing of benefits versus risk. Humans will always choose the action which results in the greatest amount of individual pleasure. To control this action, society imposes punishment on those actions that go against the social contract to expand the risk of those actions. The state is responsible for these laws and only by using swift, severe and certain punishment can these laws be a deterrent. With regard to the death penalty, the assessment of action weighs the benefit of killing someone (for financial gain, revenge, etc.) against the threat of death. If the death penalty is applied per the rational choice theory, this would be a significant deterrent. Unfortunately, the death penalty is not viewed as swift, severe or certain, which breaks down the rational choice theory completely. Under our current system, the death penalty is not a guaranteed punishment often due to expert ‘lawyering’ or poorly instructed juries. Furthermore, it is far from swift as most inmates sit on death row for decades before the sentence is imposed. Finally, it is often not thought of as severe because of the time delays and rarity of occurrence. Were these situations resolved, the death penalty would be a much more substantial threat.
In deterrence theory, the goal is to show potential criminals what the results of their actions could be as well as prevent current offenders from recidivism. The death penalty does not currently serve as deterrent due to the inadequacies in the system. It does prevent current offenders from recidivism for the length of their imprisonment, but if they are released on parole, or escape due to the significant time lapse between sentencing and death, they are likely to commit further crimes.
For the death penalty to serve the rational choice theory and deterrent theory, the system must be overhauled to meet the standards required of these theories.
3. How would conflict theory explain the phenomenon of racial profiling in America?
Conflict theory states that for society to function, each individual and group must strive to maximize their benefit from society. These actions lead to political and social change. It further states that the social system can be viewed as a pyramid where the elite of the top dictate the terms of society to the masses as the bottom. Conflict theory can be used to explain the racial profiling that currently exists within the United States.
Conflict theory has four primary assumptions. Competition is at the heart of all social relationships. People may compete over scarce resources, other people, work availability or other societal constructs. Within any society, there exists inequality. Since inequality naturally benefits one part of society, those people will fight to see that it is maintained. If those in the bottom rungs of the system see the status quo as a threat to their equality, revolution will naturally occur. They will fight, up to the point of war, to change the system and try to right the inequalities.
In the United States, the competition is often for decent paying jobs or jobs with decent work conditions. Those at the lowest level of the socio-economic ladder often find themselves working jobs with poor pay and are unable to meet the most basic needs of their families. The inequality of the social system exists without question. Even with affirmative action, the likelihood of a person of minority status being able to pull them out of poverty is highly unlikely. Since many of the poor of society are minorities, including African American and Hispanics, they are finding the voice to rebel. The upper level police members, who are very happy with the status quo, must find reason to prevent the uprising for fear of losing their advantage. By using racial profiling, they are able to target entire races of people for crimes in an area. This constant harassment makes the minority people feel fear of rebellion and maintains the inequality that benefits the upper level of society. By being the top of the pyramid, these people are able to dictate the rules to the lower masses and are doing so by implementing (or trying to implement) racial profiling. If a group of society is always in fear of being accused of crimes they did not commit, they are unlikely to find a common and loud voice of protest.
6. Provide an argument for or against the use of integrative theories. Determine whether these theories clarify or confuse our explanations for crime.
The use of integrative theories could become very useful in the explanation of crimes. While they may seem to complicate the understanding of crime psychology, they are merely demonstrating the exceptional inputs that every person receives when choosing an action in life. Simple theories of causality tend to simplify the extensive involvement of both biology and sociology in the commission of crimes.
When a person chooses to commit a crime, it is not a simple choice, even if it appears to be. Many factors go into that decision, factors that extend past even rational choice theory. It can be argued that there are certain biological imperatives that affect a person’s choices. Yet, this alone does not explain crimes. The societal constructs, the domestic situations, any mental illness not related to genetics, and even the weather of the day may contribute to the commission of a crime. Integrative theories use many simpler theories in combination to explain this complicated process that occurs within a criminal’s brain. These theories are combining knowledges including evolutionary theories, biological tendencies, psychological manifestations, sociological constructs and even other causality theories to create a cohesive structure for the understanding of criminal behavior.
While I argue that these integrative theories may one day be very useful in providing major factors that contribute to delinquency and anti-social behavior, I believe that time is far into the future. Currently, integrative theory is best used to describe the factors in a criminal’s past that contributed to their behavior and is purely theoretically based. Possibly, as we learn more and the theorists confirm their hunches, we can use this data to predict a criminal’s next action and prevent a crime from occurring.
8. Can the concept of rational choice involve passionate crimes? Explain and defend your answer.
Rational choice theory is accurate, even for passionate crimes. Many would argue that the criminal who commits a crime of passion is going against any rational choice and is instead acting upon revenge or instinct. However, rational choice applies to passionate crimes because the perpetrator still chooses his or her action, despite the knowledge that it goes against societal guidelines.
To many, a crime of passion would appear to defy logic and therefore must defy any concept of rational choice. However, the rational choice theory states that the person weighs their choices and will choose that action that results in the greatest benefit to them. From an outsider’s perspective, it would seem that the likely punishment and incarceration (or even death) would be enough of a negative to outweigh any ‘pleasure’ benefit to the person, but this is not accurate. When considering a passionate crime, the person merely glides through the steps of rational choice in a quick succession. At the time, the fulfillment of the revenge or anger inside of them seems to far outweigh any punishment that society could put upon them. In fact, they are likely to see the instigating event to have been more detrimental and even more painful than any punishment the law could inflict upon them.
A perpetrator of a passionate crime still goes through the basic eight steps of rational choice theory. However, when they arrive at the point in which they weigh the negatives of their action against societal standards, they see them as minimal and continue into the behavior. Therefore, the continuation of rational behavior, where the laws being created and imposed in a swift and certain manner act as deterrents, does not affect the perpetrator of this crime. Since they are unlikely to see the negatives in their behavior, they are unable to see the punishments associated with it as worse than the pain they will go through if they don’t commit the act.
10. The “Chicago School” is considered foundational to many who study crime and society. What is important about it? What did it accomplish if anything?
The Chicago School is used to reference the research conducted by the University of Chicago’s sociology department. The research conducted, beginning in the 1920s and 1930s, applied the techniques of science to explain the behavior of people and societies. These theories expanded upon the commonly accepted concept of biological and genetic predispositions and demonstrated that the causative factors of social structure and physical environment were paramount in the decisions of criminals. These theories used the city of Chicago to explain how the urban environment affected the crime committed there.
The landmark theory that came out of the Chicago School was the Social Disorganization Theory. This theory connected the failure of the social structure of a neighborhood to the rate of crime within the area. This ecological or environmental theory was revolutionary at the time but is now an accepted, though improved upon, theory. We can witness the effects of this theory with the development of YMCAs and other youth group organizations within inner cities. The creation of parks and the investment of time and resources within an inner city neighborhood provide pride for the local community.
Another W.I. Thomas four wishes theory also emerged from the Chicago school. He stated that every environment produces drives that he called ‘wishes’. These wishes were for new experiences, security, response and recognition. He argued that in a socially disorganized area, these wishes would be changed accordingly and results in anti-social behavior to attain these drives. He postulated that the society could change these wishes and solves problems together, therefore becoming an organized society.
The overreaching implications of the Chicago School extend far beyond the theories that were postulated in the University of Chicago. To look at the neighborhood and environment as a factor in the crime statistics of an area was, at the time, a new and revolutionary idea. The actual research methodologies practiced by the school further have influenced the research of other societies and increased the overall accounting of data. The Chicago School introduced a new way of thinking that has continued to this day.
Greek, Cecil. “Conflict Theory.” Criminological Theory. 22 Nov 2005. Florida State University. 29 Sep 2006 .
Keel, Robert. “Rational Choice and Deterrence Theory.” The Evolution of Classical Theory. 15 July 2005. University of Missouri – St. Louis. 28 Sep 2006 .
