Rational Choice Theory and Swordfish
A Development of Theory and Character
Swordfish is a dark counter-espionage action thriller about power, money, sacrifice and 21st-century breaking and entering. Over the course of this paper characters will be introduced and then systematically compared to the rational choice theory and categorized by their actions. First, a review of the movie must be completed. Second, a thorough examination of the rational choice theory will be conducted. Lastly, the selected characters will then be examined against the rational choice theory to explain why each character engages in their criminal activity.
Swordfish starts off in a showdown between Gabriel Shear’s American terrorist group and the entire gambit of the Los Angeles Police Department. Gabriel is minutes away from successfully robbing the World Banc. Everything is in place for the heist to be completed. As a bargaining chip Gabriel has all of the civilians in the bank strapped with suicide vests. These vests are composed of C-4 explosive charges and ball bearings. Gabriel’s audacity doesn’t stop there though; each of the vests is programmed to go off if it leaves a certain area.
There is only one problem at this point. The super-hacker that he hired to break into the computer systems of the bank has a change of heart. The hacker’s name is Stanley Jobson. Gabriel’s well thought out and rehearsed plan is falling apart at the seams right now. A hostage manages to get outside of the World Banc and is grabbed by a member of the LAPD SWAT team. Everything gets loud at this point, the American terrorists are yelling for the SWAT member to let the hostage go, the SWAT team is encouraging their partner to save the hostage, and the hostage is yelli...
... middle of paper ...
...al stealing something from their neighbor who seems to have a perfect life. By the criminal taking from their neighbor they make themselves feel like they are “alive” and that they are true masters of their life.
According to the rational choice Theory “reasoning criminals evaluate the risk of apprehension, the seriousness of expected punishment, the potential value of the criminal enterprise, and their immediate need for criminal gain; their behavior is systematic and selective” (Siegel 106). If any one of these factors does not fall on the positive outcome list, the criminal will not, according to the theory, commit the crime. So it is safe to say that a criminal will have to rationalize their crime in this way: I will not get caught, if I get caught it I will not be punished that severely, I will make a ton of money, and I need to pay my bills with my pay off.
Debra’s crime is a perfect example of the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory is best defined as when an individual rationally decides to commit a crime. The individual’s decision to commit a crime or not is based on the potential gains and potential losses. Debra embezzled nearly 2 million dollars so she most likely decided to commit the crime based on potential gains. In addition, Debra must have known that her chances of getting caught would be slim. Since she was smart enough to commit such a crime, she most likely funnelled the money to an offshore
For instance, Dally did not have much to live for. No family that loved him except for Johnny, just a couple of Old’ friends. He already has a police record, because of how is is so disobedient to the laws. The only fun in Dallys life was picking up girls and finding some new ways to break the law. He never cared for anyone but Johnny, and once Johnny had died that was the end. Dallas did not know how else to handle himself. When Darry got the phone call Ponyboys thoughts scattered then came to a conclusion, “But I knew that was what he wanted, even as the lot echoed with the cracks of the shots, even as I begged silently please, not him… not him and Johnny both - I knew he would be dead, because Dally Winston wanted to be dead and he always got what he wanted”(154). Like Pony said, Dally always got what he wanted and he definitely did. Once Johnny died he did not care about anything in life. Conversely, Johnny had a lot to live for. He is only sixteen years old and he has a lot ahead of him. Johnny was very law abiding he tried hard not to get into any trouble or break any laws. Now that he has made that mistake with Bob he thinks he has ruined his whole life. He has not, there is much more ahead of him. Johnny had died a hero by saving all those kids at the burning church. He finally understands, “Listen, I don’t mind dying now. It's worth it, It’s worth saving those kids. Their lives are
If an individual is familiar with their surrounding “they are more likely to help” (Altruism and Helping Behavior. Print). In the essay, the authors state “the scene of the crime, the streets, in middle class society “represents all the vulgar and perilous in life” (Milgram, Stanley, and Paul Hollander. Paralyzed Witnesses: The Murder They Heard. Print.). In society, the streets, especially at night, represents the dangerous and negative sides of society due to the crimes and chaos that occur on the streets (gangs, drive-by shootings, robberies, murders, large crowds walking, etc.). The crimes and dangers of the streets cause many people to fear being on the streets alone which leads to external conflicts. When the murder was occurring, the witnesses’ attitudes of the streets prevented them from calling the police due to the fear of the streets and since the witnesses were middle-class, they believed that Genovese was poor, a criminal, or someone who has nothing else to do and was expecting for the=is to eventually
History usually forces itself into the present in Juan Jose Campanella’s film “El Secreto De Sus Ojos” (The Secret in Their Eyes). Although it was filmed in 2009, the story is an attempted memorization of the violent reality in 1970-1980s Argentina, an era in which the country was rapidly sinking into military rule-ship. Campanella offers flashbacks into Argentina’s dark days, a period where violence homicide, rape and injustices ruled. Through memory, the film narrate a era in which it was impossible to be an innocent person as the innocents were falsely accused, tortured and even murdered for crimes they never committed, all these for the whims of those in power. Even though, the film is set in the 1970s, it does not call immediate attention to the animosity, the hopeless feeling and the constant struggle between the desire to forget vs. the attempts to remember the chaos and confusion of these years. However, through the use of memory Campanella allow the views to portray an almost perfect picture of what happened in Argentina.
During the course of our class we have encountered plenty of important topics and vital information that is essential to the field of the Criminal Justice system. Such as; Crime and justice including laws, Victimization and Criminal behavior, Laws, Police officers and Law enforcement and the criminal justice system in itself. These topics are daily situations yet individuals are oblivious to what's going on and that in it can be a major problem to the community. On that note this paper will express the ignorance and selfish values of twelve individuals by fully explaining the movie "Twelve Angry Men"
Situational crime prevention is an idea criminologists use in order to reduce the chances of crime initially taking place. This theory does not aim to punish criminals after the crime has taken place like the criminal justice system does, but however the opposite, it aims to reduce the chances of the crime taking place to start with. Ron Clarke (2005) describes this theory as an approach that aims to reduce the opportunities out there for crime, involving rational choice theory. Clark focuses on three methods within this theory, directing at specific crimes, altering the environment we live in and aiming to reduce the benefits of committing crimes.
The brothers’ vigilante deviance has many causes, all stemming form the Social theory of deviance. The Labeling, Conflict and Strain theories are three of the most important theories for understanding what caused the brothers to start, continue, and stop killing the mafia. Each of the theories plays a part in causing the brothers’ to kill, but without all of them they would not have the acceptance and success that they did. These theories, even though they are meant for the real world are just as relevant for works of fiction in movies and books.
When criminals think that the benefit of committing the crime will outweigh the cost if they get caught, they make a choice to commit the crime. There are two varieties of rational choice theory. One, situational choice theory, which is an extension of rational choice theory and two, routine activities theory or RAT, which states that the daily routine or patterns in ones’ activities make it much easier for an individual to become a victim of crime. The theory is, crime is more likely to happen when a criminal and their victim come together in the absence of authority (Schmalleger). A situation made easier to come by when the criminal knows the victim’s daily routines or patterns.
The nature and damage of white-collar crime can result in a variety of punishments for the offender. Some sanctions being time in prison, some being fines, and others being a combination of both. For example, Chalana McFarland who was a real estate attorney and was accused of fraud, money laundering and other crimes costing investors $20 million. She was charged with $12 million in restitution and thirty years in prison (Haury, 2012). Another example would be Bernie Madoff, who owned Madoff Securities, was involved in a Ponzi scheme. It is believed that investors lost $50 billion dollars. Curently Madoff is serving a 150-year sentence in a prison in Butner, N.C (Haury, 2012). As these white-collar crime cases show, the costs of these crimes can be quite serve and earn life sentences as well as very hefty fines. Moreover, white-collar crimes have huge economic effects on victims, often causing life altering losses. Under consideration white-collar crimes are quite high-cost actions that hold large possible punishments and large ethical issues. In a research experiment done by Christian Seipel and Stefanie Eifler, a theory branching from rational choice theory was tested in relation to crime. The theory they explored was referred to as high- and low- cost theory. This theory discusses the factors that influence low cost crime and high cost crime. Low cost being defined as crimes that have low
Did you know that in 2014, shoplifting and worker’s theft cost the retail industry a loss of thirty-two billion dollars (Wahba, 2015)? According Wahba “a common misperception about shoplifting is that retailers can ‘afford’ the loss of a candy bar or a pair of jeans” (2015). This type of reasoning certainly does make more sense when explained through the context of a criminological theory. For example according to the Rational Choice theory individuals weigh the costs and benefits associated with a criminal and or deviant act and then make a conscious choice. Other criminological theories explain criminal and deviant behavior using a biological, psychological, social, conflict, or multifactor component. Taking that into consideration in this
Look around and you’re guarenteed to see some type of crime. Whether it’s as simple as someone speeding or as severe as a shooting its happeneing and its nonstop. However the question that might never be solved is why does it happen and what drives people to do what we have been told our whole lives is wrong. During this semster we have learned the different types of theories as to why crime occurs. Growing up I always felt strongly that people chose to do bad and too this day I stand by this belief. Because of this I see no other theory to write about than the Rational Choice Theory. The idea of rational choice theory is that before the crime takes place the criminal thinks through what they 're going to do and that they are fully aware they 're committing the crime. And more than just thinking about doing the crime theres also a mix of emotions
Pratt, T. C. (2008). Rational Choice theory, criminal control policy, and criminology relevance. Policy essay, 43-52.
Personal choice to commit a crime shows the person’s ability to rationalize; indicating they are knowledgeable that the act is illegal, and those consequences can ensue, According to (e.g.. TRAVIS HIRSCHI, 1986) he stated that, because rational choice theory assumed that people are free to choose their course of action, people consider first their own profit or pleasure, which is a personal choice to commit a crime. An example could be a mother of an infant who is in desperate need of milk for her new born. She decides to steal formula from the supermarket for her new born. Because of her personal choice, she decided that committing a crime was a better option than her infant going hungry despite the consequence of theft.
In 2005, the Palestinian director and writer, Hany Abu-Assad, released his award winning motion picture, “Paradise Now.” The film follows two Palestinian friends, over a period of two days, who are chosen by an extremist terrorist group to carry out a suicide mission in Tel-Aviv during the 2004 Intifada. The mission: to detonate a bomb strapped to their stomachs in the city. Because the film industry seldom portrays terrorists as people capable of having any sort of humanity, you would think the director of “Paradise Now” would also depict the two main characters as heartless fiends. Instead he makes an attempt to humanize the protagonists, Khaled and Said, by providing us with a glimpse into their psyches from the time they discover they’ve been recruited for a suicide bombing operation to the very last moments before Said executes the mission. The film explores how resistance, to the Israeli occupation, has taken on an identity characterized by violence, bloodshed, and revenge in Palestinian territories. Khaled and Said buy into the widely taught belief that acts of brutality against the Israeli people is the only tactic left that Palestinians have to combat the occupation. In an effort to expose the falsity of this belief, Hany Abu-Assad introduces a westernized character named Suha who plays the voice of reason and opposition. As a pacifist, she suggests a more peaceful alternative to using violence as a means to an end. Through the film “Paradise Now,” Abu-Assad not only puts a face on suicide bombers but also shows how the struggle for justice and equality must be nonviolent in order to make any significant headway in ending the cycle of oppression between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
It According to their theory, the criminal act and the criminal offender are separate concepts. The criminal act is perceived as opportunity; illegal activities that people engage in when they perceive them to be advantageous. Crimes are committed when they promise rewards with minimum threat of pain or punishment. Crimes that provide easy, short-term gratification are often committed. The number of offenders may remain the same, while crime rates fluctuate due to the amount of opportunity (Siegel 1998). Criminal offenders are people that are predisposed to committing crimes. This does not mean that they have no choice in the matter, it only means that their self-control level is lower than average. When a person has limited self-control, they tend to be more impulsive and shortsighted. This ties back in with crimes that are committed that provide easy, short-term gratification. These people do not necessarily have a tendency to commit crimes, they just do not look at long-term consequences and they tend to be reckless and self-centered (Longshore 1998, pp.