The Socially Bounded Decision Making of Persistent Property Offenders Neal Shover and David Honaker
The decision making process of persistent property offenders works basically in two ways. First, offenders don’t consider or barely consider that there could be a consequence for being responsible of certain kind of crimes. Second, there is something called “Life as a party”, which basically means that the offender carries a lifestyle that he or she cannot afford, therefore he or she commits crimes or borrows money from significant others, which in the future probably are going to avoid contact with the offender. This summary will try to explain the points mentioned above. The rational choice model sustains that offenders choose crime from other possible courses of action when the reward is in their self-interest. On the other hand, cognitive psychologists, economists and professionals from the criminological mainstream define crime as a choice; they have the assumption that “the decision to commit a criminal act springs from the offender’s assessment of its anticipated net utilities”. Apparently offenders don’t use a sensible cost-benefit analysis while deciding either to commit crime or not. They underestimate the consequences and overestimate the possible rewards, and they barely think about other alternatives before opting for crime. Also alcohol and other drugs diminish the concerns of penalties in offenders. There is a term “life as a party” that alludes the idea of the enjoyment of good times. Offenders usually effort to maintain that kind of lifestyle, therefore they commit crimes in order to be able to experience activities they find pleasurable. In the other hand offenders also commit crime in order to avoid circumstances they perceive as threatening. Property offenders usually spend most of their gains in alcohol and/or in other drugs, usually the gains are not used to cover basic expenses. Part of the gains is usually spend on ostentatious...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document