Why exactly do criminals commit crime? Is it something deep in their minds that tells them to do something? Is it in their genes to commit the crime? Or is it how the world has shaped them? There are many theories out there to try and figure out this question. Criminologists have spent countless years trying to figure out why criminals commit crimes, so that crime could possibly be reduced or even stopped. There may be no one hundred percent correct theory but I believe that there are some more correct than others. I am a firm believer in the Strain Theory, however I do not read too much into Lombroso's theory of anthropological criminology. I think these two theories prove that there are some really good theories on why people commit crimes …show more content…
I can not see every prisoner having early human features and every soldier having modern features. What even determines what is an early human feature and what is a modern feature? This idea is just full of flaws. Surely not everyone with these anomalies commits crime. It is absurd to walk around measuring faces and saying that they are more likely to commit a crime. These two theories are complete polar opposites. The strain theory says that the world around them is the reason for crime. Where the anthropological theory is based on your genes specifically your facial features. I can understand a theory based on genetics when it comes to mental illness or past family members being a criminal, but one that bases crime on face features is absurd. The mind of a criminal, why he or she commits crime is a very complicated matter. To say that someone commits crime because their face looks like an early human surely sounds like something a first grader would come up with. I believe that crime is a direct correlation to the world around us. That is why the strain theory makes the most sense to me. Take for example a college student. If a student is failing (strain) they are more than likely going to do something. They may have healthy coping mechanisms like more studying or getting help from a teacher. Or a student may have unhealthy coping such as cheating or paying a peer to do their work for them. We don’t all know what its like to be a criminal but I think we all know what it is like to be failing a class at
The two theories I have decided to merge are Agnew’s General Strain Theory and Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory. I picked General Strain Theory because it does a good job at discussing some of the things that can trigger the release of a person’s negative emotions which in turn may lead to deviant behavior. I also decided to write about Social Bond Theory because it describes some of the factors that keep people from committing crime. Both of the theories have strengths and weaknesses individually, but when merged they help fill in each other’s gaps. (Agnew, 2011; Hirschi, 2011) +1 (888) 295-7904
... On the other hand, Strain theory explains deviance as the outcome of social strains due to the way the society is structured. The slight differences between theories are that labeling is placed on someone; it is something that is given, but strain is something you place on yourself due to the way many individuals cope with stress. . The White Family portrays corruption and poverty. They take part in shoot-outs, robberies, gas- huffing, drug dealing, pill popping and murders.
Criminals have been linked to many theories. Some are absurd, to others being logical. As a nation, we only make 5% of the world’s population. Yet, we hold 25% of the world 's population of prisoners. Many can be missing a superego from the psychodynamic psychology. Others just grew up with criminals like differential association. To many not seeing themselves at fault, but try to make the act they did less severe than it actually was, like in neutralization theory.
Firstly criminals have strong drives towards the crimes they commit. Someone can be influenced by the worst of the emotions, anger, it overshadows right and brings out an uncontrollable desire for harm. Anger leads to hate and hate leads to grudges and when an individual is misled by an emotion as strong as anger or hate, a criminal can rise out of even the most innocent. All humans have an inner conscience, a sort of voice in the back of their heads leading them
Various theories have taken approach to this question however we shall take the perspective of Agnew’s general strain theory; to summarize Agnew claims he reasons that people commit crime as a response or coping mechanism
General Strain Theory was reinvented by Robert Agnew in 1992 and contributed a new perception to the present strain theory that was popularized a couple eras ago (Agnew, 1992). Classic strain theory is connected; first with Merton’s (1938), Cohen’s (1955) and Cloward and Ohlin’s (1960). Founded on Durkheim’s theory of anomie (1893), Merton industrialized his theory of deviancy inside a societal fundamental context. Merton’s interpretation on the topic is that goal-expectation inconsistencies, composed with social stratification generates strain between underprivileged societies in turn leading them to use any means necessary, such as criminal, in order to accomplish socially defined goals (Merton, 1938). Merton specified that deviance was a creation of inconsistency amongst social goals and the genuine means to attain these goals (Smith & Bohm, 2008). Merton shaped a typology of deviance contingent on how diverse human beings adjust to ethnically persuaded strain. Conferring to Merton, crime can be elucidated by the predictable socially acknowledged goals and the conceivable genuine means of accomplishing them.
Those specific strains are most related to crime when they; are seen as high in magnitude, are seen as unjust, are associated with low social control, and provide some pressure or incentive for criminal coping (Agnew 2001, 2006). Based on these characteristics, it is predicted that not all strains are related to deviance and delinquency. The first factor that influences the likelihood of negative life events and conditions to result in crime is the perception of strain as high in magnitude and its influence the person’s ability to cope in a noncriminal manner, the perceived costs of noncriminal versus criminal coping, and the disposition to engage in criminal coping (Agnew 2001). The presence of severe strain increases the likelihood of an individual to commit crime and reduces the ability of the person to cope in the noncriminal manner because it is more difficult to legally cope with a big severe problem than a smaller one (Agnew 2001,
Trait theory views criminality as a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. It is based on a mix between biological factors and environmental factors. Certain traits alone cannot determine criminality. We are born with certain traits and these traits along with certain environmental factors can cause criminality (Siegel, 2013). According to (Siegel, 2013), the study of sociobiology sparked interest in biological or genetic makeup as an explanation for crime and delinquency. The thought is that biological or genetic makeup controls human behavior, and if this is true, then it should also be responsible for determining whether a person chooses crime or conventional behavior. This theory is referred to as trait theory (Siegel, 2013). According to Siegel (2013), due to the fact that offenders are different, one cannot pinpoint causality to crime to just a single biological or psychological attribute. Trait theorist looks at personal traits like intelligence, personality, and chemical and genetic makeup; and environmental factors, such as family life, educational attainment, economic factors, and neighborhood conditions (Siegel, 2013). There are the Biosocial Trait theories an...
Similar in importance to strain theory and social control theory, Differential Association theory was Sutherland's major sociological contribution to criminology; . These theories all explain deviance in terms of the individual's social relationships.
Rational choice theory is the theory that people commit crimes by choice of their own reasoning and will and not by force. Strain theory is the theory that people commit crimes based on the strain and stress of their emotions. Both theories are very similar
... people commit crimes and are not limited to one aspect like the original theory. For example, Merton strain theory just looked one aspect of blocked opportunities to unable achieve economic success. Differential Opportunity theory helped explain the different illegitimate means that causes people to commit crimes for example poverty and high concentrations of youth living in slums (Murphy & Robinson, 2009). Agnew General Strain theory takes a micro approach into looking at the different types of strain that causes people to commit crimes (Lilly et al.2010). Even though these theories explain certain aspects of what causes crime, it does not explain the sole cause of why criminal behavior occurs or why one commits different crimes. However integrated theories are helpful to understand certain aspects of why people commit crimes and engage in deviant behavior.
In today’s society, one will find that there are many different factors that go into the development of a criminal mind, and it is impossible to single out one particular cause of criminal behavior. Criminal behavior often stems from both biological and environmental factors. In many cases criminals share similar physical traits which the general population do not usually have. For example criminals have smaller brains than properly adjusted individuals. However biological reasons cannot solely be the cause of criminal behavior. Therefore, one must look to other sources as to how a criminal mind is developed. Social and environmental factors also are at fault for developing a person to the point at which they are lead to committing a criminal act. Often, someone who has committed a violent crime shows evidence of a poorly developed childhood, or the unsuitable current conditions in which the subject lives. In addition if one studies victimology which is the role that the victim plays in the crime, it is apparent that there are many different causes for criminal behavior. Through the examination of biological factors, in addition to the social and environmental factors which make up a criminal mind, one can conclude that a criminal often is born with traits common to those of criminals, it is the environment that exist around them that brings out the criminal within them to commit indecent acts of crime.
Lombroso observed both criminals and non- criminals by their physical abnormalities, such as physical measurements and examinations. He concluded that most prisoners show the same physical abnormalities, which supported his claim that they were of the same criminal type. Abnormal characteristics may have included; large jaws, high cheekbones, large ears and extra toes and fingers. Lombroso claimed that these physical ‘stigmata’ indica...
Different schools of thought propose varying theoretical models of criminality. It is agreeable that criminal behaviour is deep rooted in societies and screams for attention. Biological, Social ecological and psychological model theories are key to helping researchers gain deeper comprehension of criminal behaviour and ways to avert them before they become a menace to society. All these theories put forward a multitude of factors on the outlooks on crime. All these theories have valid relevancy to continuous research on criminal behaviour.
After Comte and Darwin developed their theories about the world, they were followed by several criminologists who also believed that science could answer many of the problems that were present in society, particularly in the field of criminology. One of these men was Cesare Lombroso, who was the first to actually focus on criminology as a science (Adler et al 2012). Lombroso believed criminals could be identified because of physical differences between them and non-criminal members of society (Adler et al 2012). In order to recognize these people he created what he called the "atavistic stigmata" which are characteristics exhibited by humans who were less developed (Adler et al 2012:66). Individuals who exhi...