What am I not getting about crime?

[Chihuahua]

OP here. To respond to a few observations:

@chappachula

So you never lock your house when you leave, right?
And you leave big piles of cash sitting around, too. After all, there’s no reason to think that a crime is inevitable…

I totally understand the pragmatic angle of this. I understand that crime does exist whether I like it or not, and I totally understand that people who propose measures to curb criminality are responding rationally and pragmatically to an obvious problem. I intellectually appreciate that crime is not going away any time soon, but I really struggle with the question of why it happens in the first place.

@Rachellelogram

You’ve never pounded a series of jagerbombs and regretted it in the morning…

Oh, I absolutely have… And that’s kind of my point. When I attempted to drink the experience was so unpleasant and the next morning so painful that I never wanted to do it again. I recall thinking, “That was definitely NOT as advertised.” And yet I know people who can’t make it through a single day without drinking.

@jsgoddess

And we can figure out points where the law is not evil but breaking the law is understandable and (for some, at least) forgivable. The stolen loaf of bread. Hunting down the six-fingered man who killed your father.

I think the main issue I have with this is that the thieves, rapists, and mass murderers of the world aren’t stealing bread to feed their family. Of all the examples of criminality I have ever encountered, the vast, vast majority are directed at obtaining luxuries rather than fulfilling subsistence needs, and many of them have no material advantage whatsoever.

@Richard_Parker

You’d be surprised the number of such people who end up in jail either for petty offenses or for failing to pay debts accumulated as a result of the offenses.

Obviously, that’s different from drug dealing, which was your point. But it is yet one more dimension of crime that amounts to something more than freely choosing to do wrong.

This is where I differentiate “can’t” from “choose not to.” If a person’s circumstances make it impossible to comply with the law, that is entirely different from a person who actively and deliberately sought out criminal acts. This is also the problem I have with deterministic approaches to crime theory (such as the other posters who mention the unconscious confluence of biological and environmental factors as an explanation for crime. As you observe, there are other categories of criminal who know precisely what they are doing and put forth a great amount of thought and planning.

@enipla

Similar to religious folks that wonder how an atheist keeps themselves from going on criminal, or moral outrages.

That scares me about religious folks. “Is that all that holding YOU back”?

This is something I ponder a lot. I often think that the law is not so much a guide for behavior as it is a standardized list of punishments. I hate to imagine that there are just so many would-be murderers out there who would totally kill somebody if those pesky laws didn’t get in the way.

There have certainly been times in my life that I have felt shit on, abused, or been depressed to the point of seriously planning my suicide. But I can’t think of a material object that I ever wanted so badly that I would maliciously harm someone else to get it, nor have I ever thought that hurting someone else would provide relief from my distress. At least if someone is being harmed (such as, in an abusive relationship) I can understand wanting to fight the antagonist, but the cases that really trouble me are the ones where people go out of their way to hurt someone that has no relationship to them or their needs whatsoever.

[Richard_Parker]

@Chihuahua

This is where I differentiate “can’t” from “choose not to.” If a person’s circumstances make it impossible to comply with the law, that is entirely different from a person who actively and deliberately sought out criminal acts. This is also the problem I have with deterministic approaches to crime theory (such as the other posters who mention the unconscious confluence of biological and environmental factors as an explanation for crime. As you observe, there are other categories of criminal who know precisely what they are doing and put forth a great amount of thought and planning.

I refer you to my first post. I think your model of “choose not to” is outdated by a couple of centuries. Like it or not, science tells us that there is not a clean break between that which is the product of free will and that which is environmentally determined. Instead, there appears to be something of a spectrum.

We know, for example, that people exposed to lead in their youth can suffer from poor impulse control. In some meaningful way they have less “choice” in deciding whether to throw a punch or walk away from an insult. The same thing plays out over many other aspects of personality and decision-making–with many of them coming as a consequence of poverty and exposure to trauma.

This doesn’t mean no one has personal responsibility. That’s a moral category. What I’m talking about here is the empirical question of the extent to which someone “chooses” to commit various crimes.

[velomont]

@Chihuahua

OP here. To respond to a few observations:

I totally understand the pragmatic angle of this. I understand that crime does exist whether I like it or not, and I totally understand that people who propose measures to curb criminality are responding rationally and pragmatically to an obvious problem. I intellectually appreciate that crime is not going away any time soon, but I really struggle with the question of why it happens in the first place.

The challenge is that all of this is ultimately driven by a handful of goo, sitting in a skull, with some electrical activity going on. IMHO it’s rather amazing that there isn’t more crime, lots more crime. Also bear in mind, some handfuls of goo function such that their owners may be mentally ill, some may be unintelligent, some may have been badly programmed (think extremists and various other fanatics) etc etc.

[LSLGuy]

@Chihuahua

…
Oh, I absolutely have… And that’s kind of my point. When I attempted to drink the experience was so unpleasant and the next morning so painful that I never wanted to do it again. I recall thinking, “That was definitely NOT as advertised.” And yet I know people who can’t make it through a single day without drinking.
…

You’ve just demonstrated individual differences. The way you react to alcohol is way out in right field. Like 2% of the population right field. I’m not saying you’re wrong in having that physiological reaction. I am saying you’re wrong in generalizing your reaction to the larger population.

@Chihuahua

…
There have certainly been times in my life that I have felt shit on, abused, or been depressed to the point of seriously planning my suicide. But I can’t think of a material object that I ever wanted so badly that I would maliciously harm someone else to get it, nor have I ever thought that hurting someone else would provide relief from my distress.
…

If you have ever been suicidal you’re also in a pretty small minority psychologically. One that is particularly prone to blame oneself for problems. Which is sort of the opposite mentality to criminals who blame any and everybody else for their problems. Crudely said, you demonstrated that you don’t value you at all. They demonstrate they don’t value others at all. They’re both in effect opinions, albeit largely unconscious ones. And they’re both very much non-mainstream.

To the degree you can (and have) recognized that suiciding yourself over external problems is a mistaken overreaction, you can appreciate the idea of a mistaken overreaction. That’s pretty much what drives criminals. A mistaken overreaction that their “I want” overrides anyone else’s contrary interests.

Said another way, consider a right wing extremist talking to a left wing extremist. Neither can make sense of the other’s thinking because the distance is too great. The reason you can’t “get” criminality is precisely because you’re just about the polar opposite mentality.

[Barbarian]

@Chihuahua

But I can’t think of a material object that I ever wanted so badly that I would maliciously harm someone else to get it, nor have I ever thought that hurting someone else would provide relief from my distress.

[criminal thought on] Who gives a fuck about hurting someone else? Their feelings are not real. I’m not even sure they are real.
If they didn’t want to get robbed, they should have fought back harder.
[/off]

Read up on tribalism and its impact not only on evolution, but how society works. It seems to be a giant hole in your understanding of humanity.

[TriPolar]

Some people have a conscience that will keep them from committing crimes. Only some. For the rest crime is always an option.

[Crazy_Canuck]

I’m not sure if I can explain it to you, as I agree with LSLguy that we are on the far sides of the spectrum from each other, but I figure I’ll give it a go. The big problem in your thinking is that you are assuming that everyone else is as honest as you. I’m sure some people are, but many people are not. The 10/80/10 split mentioned earlier sounds about right to me.

Now, my sense of morality is very … flexible. The only reason I refrain from doing anything is that the risks outweighs the reward. My lawyer would cry if I started confessing shit here, so I’m afraid you’ll just take my word that I have broken many laws over the years. Some of the crimes I committed involved violence, but most didn’t. Not because of moral concerns, but simply due to the practicality that cops care far less about non-violent crimes. For the record, I have never been convicted of a crime.

So now that we’ve established that, I wonder why you think that I give a single fuck about my “responsibility” is to refrain from criminal behaviour? In case it isn’t obvious to you, I don’t. Not even one tiny little fuck is given. If I am willing to ignore laws that the state can punish me for breaking, why do you think an unenforceable social contract will do any better?

Also “people commit crimes because they consciously choose to, with the expectation that the rewards outweigh the risks.” is rarely true. I certainly do that, but IME I’m the exception, not the rule. Most of the criminals I’ve met are poorly educated thugs with serious emotional issues and/or poor impulse control.

Now, you mentioned feeling shit on and depressed. That’s a good start, but what you really need to add to the mix is anger. Get angry at the society that’s shitting on you. Get angry at and start hating the people who society is rewarding. Let that anger and hate flow through you. Why should you play by society’s rules when it’s shitting on you? Add a hint of entitlement … It’s not fair that they have more than you. Boom, you now have the moral justification to take what you want.

Does that help you understand?

[Kaio]

The “just don’t commit crimes” model fails to account for:

–poverty, and the desperation that comes from not having your basic needs met. If there’s no work in the legitimate economy, and you still need to pay rent and eat, selling drugs/knocking over a corner store starts to look more attractive.

–toxic masculinity, racism, homophobia, etc. the way people are socialized, and how our media and our culture perpetuates these ideas/attitudes. If men must be be tough and aggressive to be considered “real men” by their peers and women are just commodities for men, that makes sexual assault a pretty short trip down that train of thought. If college-aged boys don’t understand what consent is, what it is not, and therefore what rape is, that opens the door for date rape and things like Steubenville where the witnesses didn’t say anything because it wasn’t violent so they had no idea it was rape (seriously). If gays/Muslims/whoever are “less than” or threatening to “our way of life,” violent retaliation to that supposed “threat” isn’t a surprise, either.

–political rhetoric has a part to play in the above point, too. See Trump, Cruz, the recent glut of anti-trans bathroom panic legislation (it’s illegal to PEE now? FFS). blah blah blah… The rhetoric over the last several years has basically come out and said that it’s okay for people to be openly racist, homophobic, transphobic, sexist, etc. The social censure for openly expressing such attitudes is weakening. So if it’s okay to SAY you hate [pick your marginalized group], if it’s okay to try to take their legal rights away, is it that much of a mental leap to get to beating them up (or killing them) is also okay? Good luck stuffing that genie back into the bottle.

–international politics and the way countries meddle in each others’ affairs. The USA has a habit of saying “We don’t like this leader of [Middle Eastern country] so let’s give weapons to [other Middle Eastern country] who don’t like them either.” Then leadership changes and [other Middle Eastern country] is now our enemy, not just the enemy of our enemy. Or we send troops into someone else’s country for our own agenda, we make war, have some “collateral damage,” and what the citizens of that country remember of the US is they’re the ones who sent the drones that bombed Mom’s house. As far as they’re concerned, we committed crimes against them first.

etc. etc. etc.

You’d like crime and terrorism to be black & white, but it’s not. It’s complicated. You want people to stop committing crimes? You’ll need to address all those systemic issues first.

[wonky]

@jsgoddess

And we can figure out points where the law is not evil but breaking the law is understandable and (for some, at least) forgivable. The stolen loaf of bread. Hunting down the six-fingered man who killed your father.

So maybe crime and the law aren’t completely, 100% cut and dried. But you and I would undoubtedly agree that most of the crime that occurs in most of the places Dopers live is not this sort of crime. But does any of it resemble this sort of crime in some ways? I think some of it does. I think lots of people are desperate. Some of that desperation is their own fault, sure. They were stupid, or careless, or lazy, or are just plain fools with bad judgment, and they might think they have nothing to lose. And I think the crimes are usually not a good solution to the desperate predicament, when it exists. But people with bad judgment are known to make bad choices. That’s what bad judgment is.

So, foolish people getting caught in circumstances, perhaps of their own making, that make them feel desperate. I bet that accounts for a nice chunk of crime. Not all of it. Probably not most. But I think it’s a chunk.

@Chihuahua

I think the main issue I have with this is that the thieves, rapists, and mass murderers of the world aren’t stealing bread to feed their family. Of all the examples of criminality I have ever encountered, the vast, vast majority are directed at obtaining luxuries rather than fulfilling subsistence needs, and many of them have no material advantage whatsoever.

You mean like when I said “But you and I would undoubtedly agree that most of the crime that occurs in most of the places Dopers live is not this sort of crime”?