The Nature of a Violent Crime - Case Study Example

Violent Crime Introduction Human beings should live with each other amicably. They should coexist with one another regardless of their background, social, and cultural identities. However, this has been overlooked because of their diversity in character and behavior. This has enabled the law enforcers to step up measures that can avoid infringement other people’s rights and interests. Self interests and other vices such as greed and selfishness have made people turn against each other and commit acts that deny fundamental rights to others. Such acts that go against one another’s rights are known as crime. One of the violent crimes in society is rape. Rape is a sexual intercourse between persons without the consent of one of the parties. Lack of consent indicates that the act was done against his or her will hence a denial of one’s rights. Victims of rape undergo trauma as a result of the assault. This indicates that sexual should occur when both parties are in agreement, and lack of objection should not be used as consent. Rape is classified in various dimensions such as gang, marital, incest, war, child sexual abuse among others. Rational choice theory According to Baumer & Gustafson (2007), man is a reasoning creature that weighs costs and benefits, which lead him to make a choice. It suggests that crime is a study of nature on the extent, causes, and how criminal behavior can be controlled among people, and society at large. Since man is a reasoning actor, this theory suggests that for one to commit rape, he makes various considerations. They include the cost and benefits of rape. This is because, before one commits rape, one will look for an appropriate environment, the dangers of the act before taking action. According to rational choke theory, the offender will consider if the benefits of rape outweigh the penalty, then one can go ahead and commit the crime. Surveillance of authorities and chances of being caught may reduce the spread of rape. This because the offender will be able to identify the risks involved, which may deter him or her from committing the crime. Therefore, according to tins theory, the law enforcers should step up their efforts in fighting crime such as rape. Surveillance of police is a massive boost to crime prevention. It discourages the public from involvement acts that may infringe other people’s rights and interests. This indicates the reason why marital rape cases are minimal in reporting. They are less reported since the offended feel to protect their marriage and hence suffer trauma as an effect. This choice of reporting by those abused reduces the chances of prevention (Baumer & Gustafson 2007). From this theory, human beings are shown to be opportunists who take advantage of others and circumstances. For example, in a spousal rape, the husband or wife will weigh options, and if he realizes that the partner may keep quiet of the abuse, one may go ahead and rape his spouse. Husbands have shown to be aggressive towards their wives. Wives are forced to submit so as to create satisfaction to their husbands; such women may not enjoy the act and as a result, rape will have occurred. Anthropologists argue that human sexual behavior is a sexual combat where the masculine are aggressive. In this playing combat, the male are identified to be the hunter while the female becomes the hunted. As a result of this theory, the female hides her passion so as to allow the male become aggressive in the process of sexual arousal. With this, the male takes advantage of this weakness, to penetrate without the consent. This shows that the male feel that the lack of objection to be an idea of consent. This may happen with a female who involve with a male that may be younger or economically lower. The male in this case will feel subjective to the female in regard to their social position or materialistic possessions. People may commit crimes that have no material gain but do so to fulfill their sensual desire such as rape, apply the choice theory. Trait theory According to trait theory, offenders have outside influences that make them commit a crime. Therefore, this theory indicates that biological and physiological factors can influence an individual to commit a crime. This suggests that some individuals commit crimes; like rape against their personal will. The environment commands them to behave and develop characters that may be antisocial. The theory advocates that rape offenders should not punished for their activities since the cause be outsourced. A woman walking on the street with tight clothing may arouse sexual feelings to men. Such men can rape the women because of the environment the female has created. According to trait theory, such an offender should not be punished, because the situation led him to commit the crime. However, the theory argues that measures of handling such situation s should be developed so as to avoid rape. Crime is not responsibly on an individual, but to the society because causes of crime may be outside an individual’s ability. It has been suggested that trait theorists look at environmental factors that cause criminal behavior in an individual. It argues that the chemical imbalance in the brain may make an individual commit crime. It indicates that the male has hormonal imbalances in their systems, which make them think irrationally. This explains the acts of crime and attitudes of criminal behavior. The trait theory suggests that, when children are brought up, they imitate their mentors and guardians (Baumer & Gustafson 2007). Adults act as role models, who children learn to behave and develop attitudes that affect their future life. This suggests children who are brought in a hostile environment of crime contribute to their behavior in the future. Such children will find it normal to commit a crime since acts of crime have been part of life. Parents and guardians who seem comfortable in crime extend the same to the young ones who may adapt in adult hood. Children who are raised in insecure environments such slums and low cost estates, where rape and drug abuse is normal, will find it normal to commit a crime. This is because it contributes to their lifestyle. When they grow up they may develop criminal behavior such as rape. This shows that judging an individual criminal act needs a deep search in his past. This should be done so as to get clues why the crime of rape was committed. Acquiring information on the past life of a criminal helps in creating preventive structures that may rehabilitate this person. This can assist in reducing acts of rape in the society. However, trait theory has been attributed to an excuse to commit a crime. Social structure theory Criminal behavior is identified as a conflict between groups of different levels in the society. Those who are in power tend to dominate subjects. They are seen to have won, which makes others minor and losers. This is because social structures in the society state various levels of humanity in regard to their position and material wealth. The low class is seen to be undermined by the middle level. This makes individuals involve in acts of crime so as to be identified. The rich do not want to relate with the poor children of the rich are discouraged to interact with the poor. Such discrimination opens the door for criminal behavior since they see each other as enemies. They feel they are not worthy to live hence they become negative to others in the community. The poor lack the support and encouragement from the rich. This makes one bitter hence resulting to criminal behavior so as to meet their daily needs. This shows that the gap between the rich and the poor in the society creates a conflict in the society. The disadvantaged gang up against the rich and through this, social structure explains criminal behavior (Baumer & Gustafson 2007). It is through such gangs of social groups that crimes of rape can be identified. A male interested in a female identified with a different social group may be denied access. Secondly, the male may be denied an expression or his feelings because of his social group. For example, a male from a disadvantaged family may despise by a female from the rich. This male may feel humiliated and his ego trampled. Therefore, to neutralize these feelings, the male may result to rape as a revenge for his feelings, which shows criminal behavior. On the other hand, a male from the rich social class may be interested in a female from the low class. This man may use his social status to abuse the female. The female may lack ground to defend herself because the aggressor comes from a powerful family. As a result, the female’s objection may be undermined since the male feels that he has a right to do what he wants because of his social identity. This may lead to sexual intercourse without the consent of the female hence criminal behavior of rape. In conclusion, analyzing cause of crime is significant in prevention policy. It helps the society to realize the causes of criminal behavior and come up with measures of reducing crime. Nevertheless, studying human behavior becomes challenging with the dynamic world of technology. It also becomes difficult for researchers to draw up definite conclusions because participants vary in social and cultural background, behavior, and experience. It has been suggested that trait theorists look at environmental factors that cause criminal behavior in an individual. It argues that the chemical imbalance in the brain may make an individual commit crime. However, this may weaken the law and make offenders of rape take advantage to involve in criminal behavior. This shows trait theory is an excuse to commit a crime. The paper indicates that the rational choice theory is applicable in crime prevention and rehabilitation. It involves an individual to analyze the costs and benefits of committing rape. With costs being more than the benefits, then the rate of crime will be contained. Reference Baumer, E. P. & Gustafson, R. (2007) “Social Organization and Instrumental Crime: Assessing the Empirical Validity of Classic and Contemporary Anomie Theories,” Criminology 45(3): 617–664. Read More