Theories on Crime Comparison - Research Paper Example

Psychological Crime theories s Crime is one of the hazardous human characteristics unnecessary for the advancement of any given society. Though prevalent, crime benefits neither individuals nor the general society. There are many causes and effects of crime witnessed in the various affected societies. Most of the causes of crime are psychological in nature with effects detrimental to the affected individuals or societies. Current research provides an explicit and comprehensive coverage of the various psychological theories attributed to criminal offenses and criminals. Psychological Crime theories Crime and longitudinal criminal activities are synonymous aspects of the various societies. Different societies suffer different or similar forms of criminal activities. The causes of these criminal activities also vary from one society to another. Crime has been very detrimental to the lives, properties and even national resources in general. It is due to the effects of crime that all societies struggle to fight and do away with all forms of criminal activities. Criminal activities, such as corruption, have worked to impoverish the justice systems of the countries involved until poor citizens do not hope for justice any more. Public resources of particular countries have been put into waste as few individuals strive to control them thus denying the powerless what they really deserve. Considering the impacts of criminal activities to the affected societies, philosophers developed interest to study and classify crime in respect to their causes and effects. In bid to come up with a comprehensive classification, the leading philosophers in the field of psychology compressed their studies into “theories”. There are various theories of crime that can help define and describe the actual causes and effects of crime. Developmental crime theory is one of the most known theories of crime (Siegel 2012). According to this theory, individuals start developing criminal desires rights from birth and intensify in the life course as the particular individuals grow. Siegel (2012) indicates that elements like personal factors, economic, social, history and geographical location of individuals can dictate criminal attitudes in the life course of the given individual. In the affirmation of the developmental crime theorists, criminal techniques developed by particular individuals change from time to time during the life course of the particular person. The general life course and age transformation in particular influences social and personal traits that eventually determine the direction of behavioral change in the specific individual. Supporters of the developmental crime theory stipulate that introduction and time frame that an individual spend in criminal activities relies on the way one interacts with the contemporary social factors. There are some personalities who after beginning to indulge in criminal activities, may spend their entire lifetime as criminals. Some individuals may also decide to quit and retire from criminal activities in response to the changing life course. In the depiction of the developmental crime theory, factors that may make individuals indulge or begin to develop criminal motives include their developmental history, especially when the given criminal underwent punitive and harsh conditions in childhood (Farrington, 2005). Siegel adds that parental neglect, rejection and other forms of child maltreatment also constitute the factors that can drive one into heinous criminal activities. According to Siegel (2012), proponents of the developmental crime theory insist that a large number of adult criminals have historical misfortunes of childhood maltreatment. In addition, upbringing of children in larger families that is hard to control and monitor establishes sustainable grounds for the development of future criminals. Single parenting is also another contributing factor in the clarification of the developmental crime theory. The excess love and attention shown to some children with single parents reduce the chances for child correction upon committing mistakes. Furthermore, single parents happen to spend more time working to meet the needs of their families, which reduces the time spent with children and compromises space for detecting and correcting mischievous behaviors in the children as they grow (Farrington, 2005). According to Sharma and Sharma (2006), the level of intellectual development is another factor believed to cause and contribute to individuals developing criminal motives. People with no or lower levels of education have limited reasoning capacity and irrational when it comes to making judgments. Sociological stratification is another potential driver of the development of criminal activities. Social factors closely linked to crime include poverty and unemployment. When a population has a large number of individuals living below the poverty line, that given society is likely to experience a rise in criminal activities as the less privileged will desire to compete for resources, and even rob the rich of their affluence (Farrington, 2005). Individuals who grow in environments where they get exposure to weapons may be tempted to acquire the weapons and try to perfect their criminal usage. Events taking place in the environment are also determinant factors under developmental crime theory that dictates what it takes for one to become criminal (Thornberry, 2005). Children who grow and develop in environment that is synonymous with violence are likely to become violent criminals during their adulthood. When a child is brought up in a family where couples, the parents, keep fighting from time to time, he/she is likely to learn the behaviors of the parents, and adopt them as the right social principles. Thornberry (2005) clarifies that even if the family where a child grows is peaceful, the neighborhood is made of violence and grievous acts, he/she is likely to develop chaotic motives in future. As indicated by Siegel (2013), another elemental theory that describes the psychological causes of crime is the rational choice theory. Rational choice theory posits that individuals act in certain ways with intentions of addressing and satisfying their interests. In the process of deciding their actions, they weigh the implications and standing risks and rewards of commit crime. If they realize that that rewards outweigh the risks, then they automatically commit crime for their greater benefit. In case they realize that the consequences such as being arrested and subjected to punishment outweigh the potential rewards, then they control their emotions and restrain from committing crime. According to the supporters of this theory, offenders get to learn about the impacts of crime when they obtain direct experiences by being punished or avoid punishment. The potential offender can also observe other offenders of the same crime by focusing on whether they undergo punishment, and of what magnitude (Siegel, 2013). Strain theory is also another psychological cause of crime. According to the theory, most if not all people do have similar aspirations and dreams of attaining greater social status during their lifetime. As a result, people keep struggling and fighting to achieve this rear status in life. However, some fail to attain the goals probably due to some mistakes as making wrong choices, or taking wrong path in pursuit of the dreams (Barlow & Kauzlarich, 2010). Obviously, few succeed and tend to dissociate from the so called “failures”. It is this disparity and feelings of failing to meet the society’s expectations that criminals start emerging and developing. The developing criminals start to indulge in unethical practice intended to frustrate the privileged and steal from them as they focus on attaining the same living standards. Labeling is yet another significant theory that influences individuals’ psychology to make them become criminals. The rich and more powerful class of people in a given societies are the ones who dictate the constituents of crime (Barlow & Kauzlarich, 2010). As a matter of fact, rich and powerful individuals view the poor as threat to their social welfare and class status in the given society. For this reason, the rich will use all the means possible to manipulate the ideologies of the poor to suppress them more into poverty. Sharma and Sharma (2006) indicate that tough individuals who try to resist and even question the desires and wishes of the powerful end up being labeled as criminals even at a time that they are just peaceful and democratic. It is due to labeling that the accused individual will decide to indulge in crime as a way of scaring and taking a safe niche within the greedy society. Labeling also has the powers of convincing the remaining members of the society to believe criminal accusations set against a person, and thus dissociate with the accused. When people in the given society run away and detach from the labeled criminal, the victim will fall into psychological depression that will direct him/ her to commit heinous acts in bid to attract public attention and recognition. In conclusion, crime and criminal acts define crucial components of our societies. No society exists without any form of crime. Crimes that transpire in various societies are of different magnitudes, causes and effects on the given society. Any form of crime is detrimental to the given society and this explains the setting up of institutions to eradicate this act. Crimes have seen immense loss innocent lives and destruction of property as well as wastage of national resources just in the hands of a few individuals. To deal with crime, philosophers came up with strategic modalities of studying various types of crimes, causes and ways of solving and handling the various forms of crimes. In that light, social psychologists have compressed expansive details entailing crime into comprehensive frames called theories. Examples of the crime theories in action include the developmental crime theory, labeling theory, strain theory, and rational choice theory among others. References Barlow, H. D., & Kauzlarich, D. (2010). Explaining crime: A primer in criminological theory. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield. Farrington, D. (2005). Integrated developmental & life-course theories of offending. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction Publishers. Sharma, R.N. & Sharma, R. (2006). Child Psychology. Vishal Enclave, New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Distributors. Siegel, L. (2012). Criminology. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning. Siegel, L. J. (2013). Criminology: Theories, patterns, and typologies. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Thornberry, T. P. (2005). Developmental theories of crime and delinquency. New Brunswick, NJ [u.a.: Transaction Publ. Read More