Describe how these two perspectives could be unified. In so doing, be sure to provide specific examples how to link the two together. At the same time, feel free to point out and discuss areas of each perspective that cannot be integrated. While this question provides you with much leeway in terms of how you want to answer it, all statements must be supported by published research.
The current theories of crime have performed exemplarily in helping interested parties to understand the dynamics of criminality. An interesting question, nevertheless, is whether it is possible to combine various theories to come up with a unified perspective. Such an inquiry is even more fascinating considering that most of the theories seem to contrast each other. Not many scholars have made an effort to integrate the various crime theories. This means that a major gap exists in the literature. To spark a research interest, this report will attempt to combine two theories of crime, namely, the general theory of crime by Gottfredson and Hirschi and Tom Tyler’s explanation for why people obey the law. The paper will also comment on the issues relayed by the two theories that cannot converge.
The general theory of crime by Gottfredson and Hirschi
The general theory of crime claims that self-control triggers crime. According to the theorists, individuals that lack self-control are relatively more physical, insensitive, risk-taking, impulsive, non-verbal, and impulsive (Gottfredson and Hirschi 90). These personalities make low or no self-control individuals engage in criminal acts. The ability of a person to restrain him/herself from crime is the reason for deterrence and not the fear of punishment. The underlying logic, in this case, is that criminal behaviors are on impulse for an individual with low self-control. This is to say that these people will engage in criminal acts without any planning. Besides, they do not have time to consider the consequences of their analogous behaviors (Gottfredson and Hirschi 89). The theorists suppose that the desire for immediate gratification is the outcome that prevents people with low self-control to think about the outcomes of their actions. Contrastingly, if a person has desirable levels of self-control, Gottfredson and Hirschi assert that they will always avoid criminal acts regardless of the prevailing circumstances they find themselves (87). These individuals are cognitive, cautious, and verbal. Besides, they will inevitably evaluate a situation and make a reasonable decision. Perrone, Sullivan, Pratt, and Margaryan...
By purchasing this solution you'll be able to access the following files: