The Rational Choice Theory - Essay Example

Criminology

Many sociologists have tried to explain the right perspective of viewing who should be responsible for the commitment of crime using different theories. However, all these theories explain why crime exists in the current world. One of the biggest debates is whether the individual or the society is responsible. In the book, “Criminology today” by Frank Schmalleger, the author argues that individuals are responsible for personal behavior since they opt for crime rather than any other law-abiding courses of action (Schmalleger, 2010). In addition, people are finally responsible to the whole community of which they form part, so if such persons do not act responsibly towards society, they ought to be held accountable by the law. I argue that both the individual and the society are to be blamed for the crime commission because, as much as an individual may or may not wish to commit a crime, there must be some reasons for him to do so, most of which are based on social issues.

Several theories have been put forth to support the concept that criminal offenses are indeed caused by both society and the individual. They include:

The rational choice theory

This is based upon the argument that every person has the capability of using his intelligent thought when committing any crime. Similarly, social behavior is an antagonism of a sequence of behavioral acts that are influenced and conducted by rational people. This indicates that prospective criminals act with the effect of particular beliefs and values of society. Further, the crime actors often calculate what is to be gained or the costs to be incurred when an action is taken and then decide to commit the crime if there is a possibility to maximize the gains or the general utility process (Muncie & McLaughlin, 2005).

There is a supposition that all actors are quite conscious of the means and the values needed to carry out a crime. They first gather, organize, and analyze data so that they can come up with the most practical options. In short, they examine the choices available around them, a process that is then interpreted by the whole society.

The Strain theory

According to this concept, certain social structures push a person to commit a crime. Strain may originate from structural institutions. This refers to the societal-level procedures that are ultimately conveyed down to the crime actors that form part of society. Later, most of them start to view needs based on such structural institutions. The level of circulation or regulation of a particular social system (Muncie & McLaughlin, 2005).In this sense, an individual has to have trouble and friction in trying to achieve the goals and expectations of society establishes the perceptions of a criminal regarding his threats or opportunities. In some circumstances, when these anticipations are so vital to the person, then he or she might be tempted to acquire them through any means possible without solemn consideration of how legitimate the means are.

The Labeling theory of criminology

The theory focuses on the relations between an individual and the people in power or other groups who label someone as a criminal. It is from such relational experiences that actors will construct names, identifications, and images of deviancy, which reinforce and promote unintentionally, the very character they seek to prevent. According to the labeling theory, deviance is never natural in any act, but it is initiated when laws and regulations applied to behavior are regarded as offensive. In this point of view, the interaction between the definers and the rules or the labelers is visualized as processual, from which the claim of a “deviant” label has a number of societal and individual psychological impacts. This means that as soon as one has been successfully tagged as a deviant or a criminal, the label attached may result in a “master status” or dominant label, which is focused upon more than the other characters of an individual. Eventually, a person is molded by this behavior and acts like it, either knowingly or unknowingly (Muncie & McLaughlin, 2005).

In conclusion, both society and the individuals themselves may be responsible for the crime committed. In most cases, individuals commit crimes to respond to any rule, regulation, belief, or expectation of society. Society on the other hand may push an individual too hard, and finally, when the individual lacks a better option, crime is the answer. The criminological theories mentioned are all an explanation of why crime should be viewed from both perspectives. However, no matter the case, an individual found guilty of a crime should be held accountable for his or her actions.