Rational Choice Theory, Routine Activities Theory And Deterrence Theory

When discussing the different theories of criminality, there are two distinct schools of thought to highlight. The Classical School focuses on the premise that crime is the result of free will (Siegel & Worrall, 2016). This school of thought was foreran by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. According to the Classical School of thought, people make their decisions based on the balance of pleasure seeking and pain avoidance; this is the concept of hedonism. If an individual believes the benefits of a crime outweigh the possible consequences, then they will commit the crime. This school focuses on the Rational Choice Theory, Routine Activities Theory, and Deterrence Theory. Beccaria believed that punishment should fit the crime, we should all

To describe this, Lombroso coined the term atavism in 1876. Atavism “...asserts that criminals are born— as opposed to made…” (Hunter & Dantzker, 2002, p. 35). Atavistic individuals were believed to have underdeveloped brains, which caused them to, by nature, lack the capability to distinguish between good and evil (Hunter & Dantzker, 2002). According to Lombroso, “...he is still too indifferent to and careless of the lives of others; and he betrays that lack of the sentiment of pity, commonly observed among savage races, which causes them to regard homicide as a mere incident, and as glorious in case it is the outcome of revenge” (Lombroso, 1897, p. 647-648). Lombroso believed that he could identify an atavistic individual from their physical characteristics. Along with atavistic individuals, Lombroso also believed there were criminaloids. Criminaloids are individuals who have criminal traits, but are not born criminals (Siegel & Worrall, 2016). Within the Positivism school of thought lie trait and biological theories. Trait and biological theories claim that crime is caused by inherited and uncontrollable biological and psychological traits (Siegel & Worrall,

Mary Sandin serves as an exemplary character of individuals not being inherently evil. Although she is doing so to protect her family, Mary verbally states her discomfort with what she and her husband are doing when tying up the homeless man. She states, “This is so wrong,” showing that she does not want harm to come unto this man, even though it may save her family (The Purge, 2013). However, this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Mary Sandin’s compassion. After being saved by the homeless man, Mary is given the choice to kill or allow her neighbors to live. Despite the fact that the neighbors were seconds away from murdering Mary and her children, Mrs. Sandin allowed them to live and said she wanted to ride out the rest of the purge in peace (The Purge, 2013). Then, even after Grace attempted to kill her one last time, Mary let her live with only a broken nose to deal with. Another major example of an individual not being inherently criminal would be Homeless Guy, the man Charlie allowed refuge inside their home to. Homeless Guy was hunted, stabbed, and left tied to a chair while the house was attacked by the Fine Gang, by the Sandins. Despite all of the pain and suffering he endured due to the Sandin family, he still saved Mary and her children from being killed by their neighbors and allows her