Felson (2002) explains that crimes that require specialized access resonate with the routine-activity theory. In this context, routing official duties serve as an opportunity for unofficial misbehavior. Because crime needs access, every offender strives to solve a problem on how to access the target. The problem can be solved using three distinct strategies. First, the potential offender may take advantage of identified activities that cause vulnerabilities. Second, the offender may attempt to exploit personal ties to advance committing the crime. Finally, the offender may exploit specialized access to information regarding the target.
A bank robbery is an example of a property crime. Following the routine activity theory, the perpetrators of the crime are motivated offenders. They are motivated by the need to possess valuable they do not rightfully claim ownership. In the case of a bank robbery, burglars are motivated to access money from the bank without having deposited similar amounts. By using force to access valuables that are not theirs, property criminals transgress the law. The victims are the cashiers in banks and individuals who have access to safe houses. They have direct access to finances. They offer potential burglars the likelihood of succeeding in their burglary mission (Williams, 2016). Having contact with the victim enhances the success of the mission. For burglars to make a move, they always ensure they have an escape strategy. Notably, they strive to ensure their security is top of their priorities. In that case, the absence of guards may create a conducive environment for the occurrence of crimes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Murder in an example of a violent crime. In the case of murder, the offender premeditates to cause bodily harm to the victim. Similarly, following the routine activity theory, the perpetrator of the crime is the motivated offender. The individual has to be motivated by aggression towards the potential victim. Motivation serves as a reason for the need to commit the illegal act (Pizarro, Corsaro, & Sung-suk, 2007). For such a crime to materialize, the perpetrators must set up an effective way to conceal potential evidence. Particularly, perpetrators of such crimes will execute the mission if the target is in the presence of a lot of witnesses and protectors. In both cases, the routine activity theory is applicable in an inductive way. It started with observations and then a generalization the applicability of the theory.
References
Felson, M. (2002). Crime and Everyday Life . Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publishing.
Pizarro, J.M., Corsaro, N. & Sung-suk, V.Y. (2007). Journey to Crime and Victimization: An Application of Routine Activities Theory and Environmental Criminology to Homicide. An International Journal of Evidence-based Research, Policy, and Practice , 2(4): 375-394.
Williams, M.L. (2016). Guardians Upon High: An Application of Routine Activities Theory to Online Identity Theft in Europe at the Country and Individual Level. The British Journal of Criminology , 56 (1):21-48.
