The criminal activities theory talks about crime events (Criminal Justice, n.d.) It looks at why some people commit crimes and what are the motivations to commit the crimes. This theory suggests that the daily routine of society could cause or create the opportunity for a crime. All you need is a likely offender, a target, and the absence of a guardian to create an opportunity for a crime. Suggestions made to reduce crime from this theory try to alter the routines and limit opportunities to prevent crimes.
They explain how the subculture has an effect on an individual’s upbringing. Due to these cultural transmissions, individuals easily learn criminal roles. Since the theory - delinquency and opportunity helps to show a correlation between the two, then it would imply that the individual must have access to illegitimate means in order for one to become delinquent. The trait theory also highlight why juveniles commit delinquent actions. According to this theory, all persons are aware and fear the sanctioning of the law, but some are unable to control their urges and passion (Siegel, 2012).
One reason why minors should not be treated the same as adults when committing crimes is that the consequences given to minors in adult court would have a negative impact on their life. One example is because prison may be an unsafe place for minors to rehabilitate in a way that they would be able to do
There is no shortage of disagreement with the perception of Officer Beserra and Rational choice theory. As Officer Beserra stated that individuals make a conscious decision to commit crime to gain a benefit from the criminal act. Also, that an individual wouldn’t deter from committing crime if the benefit is greater than the consequence, even if they got apprehended. In the same manner, Miller & Miller professed that people voluntarily and willfully choose to commit criminal acts similar as they choose to do other things such as working in a grocery store.
Gov,p1). That as long as society does not provide support and love the violence will continue in communities without these facilities. Finally, Most notably, they lead to negative emotions such as anger, frustration, depression, and fear and abusive can be a factor and the treatment from others can spike the interest of other concepts (SagePub.com,p1). The things that are implied in the youths everyday life or the events that have happened in front of them as negative cognition. These are the main reason why the crime is violence as other people look at it as labeling the violences to themselves.
As a result of public shaming being a more effective punishment, criminals are less likely to repeat the offense. Public shaming could result in a criminal to have a traumatic experience. Unlike other forms of punishment, public shaming allows for a criminal to truly feel what they did was wrong and it “can be a strong motivator for good behavior” (Diana Kwon). A criminal could be sentenced to 4-8 years of jail time and remain unchanged, but with public shaming the criminal receives publicity that is “so unpleasant that it qualifies as punishment” (Greg Beato). Because of this, Some people would argue that with public shaming a punishment is extended beyond the sentence.
This theory supports the situational crime prevention theory that crime is a choice and can be deterred through the removal of suitable targets or guardianship. Guardianship can be a security guard, a fence, a password or any other person or item that makes a target unsuitable due to increased chances of being caught or the offense too difficult. Routine activity theory is one of the more popular and accepted theories of
Death penalty would fit under general and specific deterrence. Those in favor believe that death penalty is the best way to protect society of the most dangerous criminals, “Imposing a severe punishment allows society to express moral outrage at the offender’s breach and simultaneously helps reinforce a shared sense of commitment to the violated norm.” (Acker, 2003, pg. 173). How
Mandatory sentencing laws often target moral vices like alcohol, sex, drugs, and to friendships and family via prohibition, and crimes that threaten a person's livelihood. The idea is that there are some crimes that are so serious there is no way to accept the offender back into the general population without first punishing them sufficiently. Some crimes are viewed as serious enough to require an indefinite removal from society by a life sentence, or sometimes capital punishment. It is viewed as a public service to separate these people from the general population, as it is assumed that the nature of the crime or the frequency of violation supersedes the subjective opinion of a judge. Remedying the irregularities in sentencing that arise from judicial discretion are supposed to make sentencing more fair and balanced.
In allocation models there needs to be taken into consideration other aspects of crime, such as behavioral and physical characteristics of communities so that there can be a more appropriate understanding of the crime itself and find ways of how to prevent criminals from doing the crime in lieu of just hoping that there will be an officer nearby that can get to crime scene on time to halt the crime or hoping to discourage criminals by making them believe that police is omnipotent (Kennedy, Caplan & Piza, 2011, pg. 340). Another disadvantage of crime prevention model is that its calculations are based off assumption that crime occurs randomly, which will make the results inaccurate (Fritsch et al., 2009, pg. 35). One of the advantages of the crime prevention allocation model is that it can at least provide police administrators with an idea of where crime is being concentrated, however there is no evidence that concentration of crime will necessarily lead to more crime; it just means that crime will most likely happen there but it might also not happen at that location at all and happen somewhere else (Kennedy, Caplan & Piza, 2011, pg. 341). Another advantage of the crime prevention allocation model is that it has helped paved the road for more precise allocation models such as the Allocation of Patrol Personnel (MAPP) that is being employ by many police departments today (Fritsch et al., 2009, pg. 40). Because policing is a dynamic system I do not think that the crime prevention allocation model can work in a modern city, however I think that it can help supplement other things that police departments are already doing in order to prevent crime, moreover I believe that it is better to use the crime prevention allocation model as an alternative to doing allocation by
The main purpose for our criminal justice system should be to stop future crime. General deterrence would be a good way to set an example to communities who disobey the law. Allowing bystanders to see the punishments of crime will instill fear into them, causing them not to repeat the crime they witness. Specific deterrence allows for criminals to still be in society, but every time they think about doing something illegal they will have a negative feeling. These method focusses on educative function allowing people to learn from their mistakes and preventing further complications.
The freedom of choice has forever had a connection in our everyday lives. We make choices every day without analyzing the true outcome of our decision. Some make choices more carelessly than others. However, they’re those who are affected greatly by choices made and those who can easily overcome them. The article, The Tyranny of Choice by Barry Schwartz, describes the differences between a maximizer and a satisficer and shows how a variety of choices is not always the best for a person.