Wrapping up Deterrence/Rational Choice/Routine Actitivities Theories

First, let me congratulate everyone for posting a comment on the blog. Now you know how to do this and how easy it is, feel free to post comments and questions whenever you want and I will probably also give you some additional opportunites to earn activity points for this.

I want to use the remainder of this blog to wrap up what I did not get a chance to wrap up in class this morning. What follows are lecture notes I had hoped to get to, so please read this and perhaps write them out or print them and insert them in your class notes.

In the final analysis, I believe it can be said that Routine Activities Theory is more a theory of criminal victimization than a theory of criminal behavior, because the theory starts with the assumption that there are people motivated to commit crime and does not explain that or address the source of that motivation or inclination.


Finally, there can be no doubt that deterrence theory (and related theories) has had an obvious impact on criminal justice policy. It is generally believe that certain, swift, and especially severe penalties for criminal acts will reduce crime in society. The popular ("knee-jerk") approach of politicians over the past 30 years or so has been to "get tough," which is reflected in such policies as: (1) restoration of capital punishment, (2) "three strikes and you're out", (3) mandatory minimum sentences, etc.

(1) However, looking at the fact of our exploding prison population (4 times higher than in 1980) and seeing that overall crime rates are higher than they were in the 1970s, would lead one to question this theory, among the other critical points we made earlier questioning the view of individuals as rational, calculating actors.

(2) Some other versions of "get tough" scare tactics are programs such as "shock incarceration" or "Scared Straight" which have not been as successful as they were first believed to be. In fact in the case of Scared Straight, follow-up research found that the juveniles who were exposed to convicted criminals in Rahway State Prison in New Jersey and were told about the horrors of their lives and prison were more likely to commit crimes later than the control group of juveniles who did not have this experience. It was pointed out by some of these researchers that: "With the best of intentions, the lifers at Rahway can't transform city schools, poor and broken families, jobless summers." In other words, scare tactics (or exaggerating the costs of crime) can only go so far and are not likely to overcome the effect of other powerful social factors which lead juveniles to engage in crime. All of which tends to undermine any theory based on the notion that individuals rationally weigh the costs and benefits of their actions.

So, this then brings us to Biological theories which we will pick up with on Tuesday (9/25).

Finally, I forgot to mention in class this morning that next week I will be calling on the families to begin making up some exam questions. See you next week....