Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare contrast routine activities theory
Factors affecting criminal behaviour
Factors that cause crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Compare contrast routine activities theory
The routine activities theory of crime, developed by Cohen and Felson, focuses on the events of a crime and the relation of factors that led to the causation of the crime or suitable targets (Miro, 2014). Moreover, the theory shifts attention from the offender to the opportunities for crime presented by everyday routines (Osgood, Wilson, O’Malley, Bachman, Johnston, 1996). Therefore, instead on searching for an offender’s motive, factors such as the absence of a guardian, social change, or vulnerability, contribute to the explanation of the crime.
Cohen and Felson identified the likely offenders as young males, no stable employment, has had medical problems, failed in school, and who have had traffic infractions (Miro, 2014). The routine
On March 17, 1942, John Wayne Gacy was born in Chicago, Illinois. When he was younger, he was involved with activities such as boy scouts and odd jobs around his neighborhood. It is said that while Gacy wasn’t popular, he was well-liked by those people who knew him (Taylor, Troy). Gacy’s father was an alcoholic and would often abuse Gacy and his siblings if they were thought to have made trouble. His father would also abuse his mother. When Gacy was playing on a swing set at age 11, he was hit in the head with a swing. After this, Gacy would suffer from blackouts. However, when Gacy was 16, the doctors found that blood clots in his brain were the cause of his blackouts and, with medicine, they were able to stop the blackouts. When he was about
Osgood, Wayne et al., Routine Activities and Deviant Behavior, American Sociological Review, Vol. 61 no. 4, August 1996, pg 635-655.
...azerolle &ump; Piquero, 1998; Piquero &ump; Sealock, 2000) as well as non-offending populations, including youths (Agnew and White, 1992; Aseltine et al., 2000; Brezina, 1996; Paternoster and Mazerolle, 1994), college students and adults (Mazerolle and Piquero, 1998; Broidy, 2001). The theory has also been examined across gender (Ganem, 2010; Broidy and Agnew, 1997; Eitle, 2002; Hoffman and Su, 1997; Mazerolle, 1998; Hay, 2003; Piquero and Sealock, 2004) and race (Jang and Johnson, 2003), and for property crimes, and other deviant behaviors.
Routine activities theory has three major components that are all necessary for crime to happen. The first is a motivated offender. Second there must be an available victim and lastly, there needs to be lack of capable guardianship. This theory can easily be applied to Mason’s scenario to describe why he has done what he has. Mason’s mother died and is now living with his aunt who he isn’t close with. They live in an undesirable part of town and she works all the time to support her two kids and Mason. This shows the lack of capable guardianship. Mason poor school performance, detention, trouble interacting with teachers, and hanging around other kids who commit delinquent acts as contributed to him being a motivated offender as well as his drinking alcohol and smoking
Crime and Everyday Life chapter two, The Chemistry for Crime outlines the various components of a crime. Noting that offenders are just one small element to any crime. In all honesty offenders are a variable waiting for time that all the elements are in place. Violent, predatory crimes only occur while an absence of guardians around a target. Clarke named the check list for a target or hot product as, concealable, removable, available, valuable, enjoyable, and disposable. Equally, fights develop in the absence of peacemakers and a present crowd. Illegal sales crime all depend on the setting that offers coverage and removed management. The Chemistry for Crime argues that everyday life tempts as well as diminishes the potential for crime, influencing
III. Summarization of Routine Activities Theory A. Definition of routine activities approach. According to Cohen and Felson (1979), routine activities approach relies on three main conditions to rationalize crime. These conditions need to coincide in the same space and time in order for a crime to occur: a motivated offender, suitable target and the absence of capable guardians to deter crime. The authors utilized human ecological theory to examine social structure, and how such coincidences take place and cause crime in daily life.
Essentially, through a process of conceptual integration, different aspects of each theory can be used in conjunction to compensate for what each individual theory fails to explain, and thus can further both the scope and policy utility of the theories (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001). For instance, low self-control theory asserts that low self-control is the cause of crime all the time. This may be true for some criminals, but many criminals, like those involved in white collar crimes, do not adhere to the principles of low self-control. In addition, while low self-control theory is useful in explaining why individuals may act in a certain way, it does not explain the situations that must be met for a crime to occur (Brunet, 2002). On the other hand, routine activity theory describes the situational factors that must be present for a crime to occur, but it is more difficult to apply this theory to sexting because the offender and victim do not necessarily have to meet for the crime to occur (Wilsem,
Mulder, E., Brand, E., Bullens, R., & Van Marle, H. (2010). A classification of risk factors in serious juvenile offenders and the relation between patterns of risk factors and recidivism. Criminal Behaviour & Mental Health, 20(1), 23-38. doi:10.1002/cbm.754
Situational theory believes that offenders are often opportunistic therefore; it aims to limit the opportunities that offenders have to participate in criminal behaviour (Morgan, Boxall, Linderman, Anderson 2012). This particular crime prevention strategy incorporates a range of measures that emphasise targeting very specific forms of crime in certain circumstanc...
The field of criminology and victimology is guided by explicit theories that are formulated and developed over time. I have chosen two theories I would like to discuss. Routine Activity Theory and the Lifestyle Theory have played a leading role in making individuals victims of crime. These individuals are not influenced in just the same way; but one of which is certain in similarity is the result, which happens to be crime. In the essay below, the two theories will be compared in relation to how they influence behavior and lead individuals to crime.
Criminal activity occurs on a daily basis and these crimes may consist of serious offences or less serious offences. Based on the routine activity theory, it specifies that there are three elements of a crime: a likely offender, a suitable target and an absence of guardian against crime. When a motivated offender approaches a suitable target, the offender seizes the opportunity and allows the target to become a powerless victim (Felson, 1987). Most crimes occur in the three social domains: at home, leisure or work. These areas are a essential part of our routine activity, hence when we are placed in a situation where we are vulnerable to crime, we feel fear and thus we take preventative
Since the moment we understood the action, mankind has struggled with the control of crime. Thousands of dollars and hours have been poured into research on the different aspects of it, and how to contain it. Many theories surfaced in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries on where crime came from, but it wasn’t until sixty years ago (Siegel) when the victims of crime were brought forward to be studied. Victims of crime have an important role to play in the activity, although the vast majority of them do not wish to be in the position they are in. If that is the case however, how did they get there in the first place? How did victims become part of the crime process? Over the years four theories have emerged: The Victim Precipitation Theory, The Lifestyle Theory, The Deviant Place Theory, and The Routine Activities Theory.
In recent times it seems that the victims are getting blamed for being victimized. People get murdered trying to stay in shape or going into a gas station to get a drink. I know when I was younger and I hung out with a questionable crowd, I was always getting in trouble. When I stopped hanging around those people I stayed out of trouble. (R. Jewett, 2016) According to the definition of routine activities theory, she was to blame. She chose to put herself in that situation. It doesn’t seem fair to blame the victim for something bad happening to them. It seems like there is nowhere that is safe anymore. (R. Jewett,
Crime is nothing new to us in our society. Abnormal social behavior, crime to be included, have been tried to explain by people throughout history. Going back some 3,700 years ago, was the first effort to control bad behavior, ...
National robbery rates are informative, but it is sometimes unclear whether they fluctuate with nationwide economic changes, drug trends, or some other pattern. Another lack of research would be to obtain what effects things like sports, family, and home activities has on adolescents and young adults for possible future criminal behavior. Knowing which of these activities contribute or lessen the risk of future delinquency would be greatly beneficial. Overall, routine activities theory has been and will continue to be a great option to use to help understand, prevent, and control crime.