Choice or Constraint
Do young people exercise choice when they engage in acts of crime or are young people constrained or forced to act in socially unacceptable ways?
There are a number of different theories that debate whether a young person exercises choice in committing crime or whether they are forced or constrained by other factors, to act in socially unacceptable ways. The following essay will examine a variation of individual, situational and structural theories that attempt to understand why young people may be drawn to criminality. These theories have an assortment of views on the matter and explore several factors that can contribute to juvenile crime.
Individual theories are those that attempt to explain the inclination to commit crime based on the personal traits of the juvenile offenders. These theories are often focussed around biological, psychological or social reasons young people commit crime as well as the rational decision making that may go into committing a crime (Cunneen and White, 1995, pp.45).
There are some theorists that have put forth the argument that young people choose to commit crime of their own will. Classical Crime theory is an Individual choice crime theory that focuses on individual factors and makes the case that the juvenile actively chooses to commit a crime. The idea behind this theory is that within society there are agreed upon social standards, also known as a social contract (Carrabine et al., 2004, pp.54). The social contract is the desired way an individual should act as not to impinge upon other’s rights and freedoms and the law is set up to protect these civil liberties. A key component of this theory is that the juveniles should be made aware of the law and the punishments associated with breaking the law in order in order for the young person to be able to make an informed choice. Classical choice theory argues that crimes of the same nature should get equal punishment regardless of the history of the juvenile
There are a number of different theories that debate whether a young person exercises choice in committing crime or whether they are forced or constrained by other factors, to act in socially unacceptable ways. The following essay will examine a variation of individual, situational and structural theories that attempt to understand why young people may be drawn to criminality. These theories have an assortment of views on the matter and explore several factors that can contribute to juvenile crime.
Individual theories are those that attempt to explain the inclination to commit crime based on the personal traits of the juvenile offenders. These theories are often focussed around biological, psychological or social reasons young people commit crime as well as the rational decision making that may go into committing a crime (Cunneen and White, 1995, pp.45).
There are some theorists that have put forth the argument that young people choose to commit crime of their own will. Classical Crime theory is an Individual choice crime theory that focuses on individual factors and makes the case that the juvenile actively chooses to commit a crime. The idea behind this theory is that within society there are agreed upon social standards, also known as a social contract (Carrabine et al., 2004, pp.54). The social contract is the desired way an individual should act as not to impinge upon other’s rights and freedoms and the law is set up to protect these civil liberties. A key component of this theory is that the juveniles should be made aware of the law and the punishments associated with breaking the law in order in order for the young person to be able to make an informed choice. Classical choice theory argues that crimes of the same nature should get equal punishment regardless of the history of the juvenile