Routine Activities Theory Summary

Routine activity theory presents a systematic approach to comprehending the dynamics of criminal behaviour. According to this theory, three key elements must align for a crime to take place: a motivated offender, a suitable target,

A person is not born as a criminal, it is watched and picked up on by the individual through social influences. The theory can predict whether an individual will turn to a criminal path rather than one that abides by the laws. If a person watches crime be committed and is around crimes and deviant behvavior during their impressionable years, it is much more likely that they will follow in those footsteps and become a criminal themselves. The motivation for crime could be heightened by being low-class or living in a high-crime community. One of the main critiques is that people can be individually motivated.

In this sense, influence of peers is easily a tell-tale sign of future criminal behavior. If a child is less involved with their peers and outcasted the likelihood of the child becoming criminal rises. Aditionally, if a child were brought up in either socioeconomic standpoints, child abuse/neglect plays a significant role in future criminality. A study shows that a child who experienced abuse/neglect were at a 50% higher risk to involve themselves in criminal acts. This goes to show that nature vs. nurture are significant factors in criminal behavior.

In criminology, differential association is a theory developed by Edwin Sutherland proposing that through interaction with others, individuals learn the values, attitudes, techniques, and motives for criminal behavior. The differential association theory is the most talked about of the learning theories of deviance. (DAT). (Sutherland) (Sociological Theories of Crime and Their Explanation on Crime , 2007) Theories of criminality are most commonly derived from human behavior.

This theory clearly rules out the effect of inherited or innate factors, and the last is the cognitive theory, which is based on how the perception of an individual is manifested into affecting his or her potential and capability to commit a crime. (Psychological theories of crime) Relating these theories to the case under study, it’s clear that the behaviour can be traced most times to faulty relationships in the family during the first years of

Criminology uses many theories to study crime, such as Social bond theory, Control theory social, containment theory etc. Social bond theory includes a various forms of social attachment theories. Attachment is a complicated process starting at birth with a maternal connection. This premature form of joint sets the standard for an individual's future attachments to friends, family members, co-workers and lovers. Control theory suggests a responsibility towards one's behavior.

The second theory was Differential Association Theory, which explains that criminal behavior is the result of learning processes, meaning that a child learns positive attitudes towards criminal behavior from parents, close family members, and their close

Reasons et al. , (2016) found that, “offending and victimization are a consequence of multiple risk factors,

A study concerning integrated theory where data used came from two waves of surveys that contained multiple life domain, offending, and demographic measures, examined if life domains could predict victimization with contemporaneous effects, lagged effects, interactive effects, and a measure of prior victimization (Gubb, 2015). The results from the research found a significant level of support for the fourth hypothesis, the temporal ordering of victimization and offending. The most consistent and important findings discovered related to peer domain, offending, and prior victimization variables. The research pointed to the influence of a reduced model where victimization might be predicted generally by facets of routine activity theory and involvement in risky lifestyle (Gubb,

People living in urban areas had much higher rates of crime than people living in suburbs and rural areas. Those who live in single family homes have lower rates of crime than people living in apartments (National Crime Survey). To summarize, our chances for violent victimization are more controlled by what we do than by

“The theory of social disorganization states a person’s physical and social environments are primarily responsible for the behavioral choices that a person makes. At the core of social disorganization theory, is that location matters when it comes to predicting illegal activity. Shaw and McKay noted that neighborhoods with the highest crime rates have at least three common problems, physical dilapidation, poverty, and a higher level of ethnic and culture mixing. Shaw and McKay claimed that delinquency was not caused at the individual level, but is a normal response by normal individuals to abnormal conditions. Social disorganization theory is widely used as an important predictor of youth violence and crime.”

Violence against women has been present in the United States and around the world since the formation of patriarchal family structures. This type of family structures advocated for the implementation of traditionalist gender roles. In the twentieth century, the patriarchal family structures are still enforced by many cultures in the United States. The sociopolitical repression against women led to the increase of domestic violence rates in different racial and ethnic groups. Historically, men were entitled to work in order to bring resources to the family (Breadwinner).

Again, these factors can include age, race, sex, choice of residents, or even normal daily activities, such as traveling to work or school. This theory emphasizes that criminal victimization follows those who do not use their intelligence and rational thought in the social environments (Lifestyle, 2011). Empirical evidence has shown that risky lifestyle activities, such as drinking, using drugs, and frequenting bars or clubs, may put individuals, particularly women, at a higher risk of victimization (Henson, Wilcox, Reyns, & Cullen,

Lifestyle and routine activities play an important role in how a person becomes a victim.(Burgess, Regehr, & Roberts.2013.pg78-79).Vicitims put themeselves in dangerous situation by involoving in high risk activities. These activities can be club dancing, repeat jogging at the same park, or as simple as take the same route to work everyday. It creates vunerability and subjects to being prey by revealing predictible where abouts. It is argued that past victims are repeat victims but in reference to Hentig gender, sex, intellect, and strength makes you avaliable for victimization whether the individual was a prior victim or not. On the contrary, crime related events which is non-routine activities can be a diaster.

Victimization can only be committed when a motivated criminal meets a suitable target in the absence of a capable guardian (Miller, 2012). On the contrary, the absence of any of these elements can be sufficient to prevent victimization from taking place (Branic, 2015). Crime and victimization is the outcome of an opportunity that presents itself during social activities that take place on the streets on the daily basis. This theory is thus significantly associated to the case study in the following