Burglars on the Job: Streetlife and Residential Break-Ins.

• Author: Moran, Richard

The roots of rational choice theory trace back to the classical school of criminology and to the work of great eighteenth and nineteenth century philosophers Cesare Beccaria and jeremy Bentham. I Both men were mainly interested in the control of crime through the manipulation of penal sanctions rather than the direct observations of criminals or the analysis of aggregate crime data. Firing adherents to the free will philosophy that was fashionable in Enlightenment Europe, they believed that man could determine his own destiny by the use of reason and knowledge. These early criminal law and penal reformers defined crime in legal terms and regarded the offender as morally guilty because he had freely chosen to commit a criminal act.2

Today, more than two hundred years later, the main tenets of classical ideas on crime and punishment have been dug-up, melted down, and recycled for a modem audience. Rational choice theory, which is really not a theory but merely a research methodology or perspective, seeks to restore the central operating assumption of classical criminology: criminals are rational and, much like the rest of us, consider the likely consequences of their behavior before deciding on a course of action. An interesting if painfully obvious insight to be sure, but one for which there is at best mixed empirical evidence.3

2. BACK TO THE FUTURE

   In the late 1960s, a future Nobel Prize winner in economics, Gary Becker, ignoring with apparent glee the long tradition in economics of linking crime with capitalism and changing economic conditions, proposed an artless cost-benefit analysis of criminal behavior as the basis for the allocation of scarce resources in law enforcement.4 Edward Banfield, an urban policy analyst, boldly asserted that when the probable costs exceed probable benefits, an individual will not commit the crime."5 james Q Wilson, a political scientist, advocated a similar approach, complaining that the 'root cause' explanations favored by sociologists, psychologists, and social reformers had failed to lead to useful modes of intervention.6 He proposed an abandonment of the last 100 years of criminological research and the adoption of a classical punishment/deterrence model.7 The central goal of his new policy-driven criminology was raising the cost of crime and lowering its benefits.8 The fact that this binary system of criminal motivation had all the intellectual sophistication of a game of tic-tac-toe seemed to enhance rather than diminish its appeal.

   To policy makers and funding agencies desperate to do something about crime, the proposition of putting more criminals in jail for longer periods of time to reduce the crime rate seemed simple enough.9 Today, after almost twenty-five years of steady growth in the jail and prison population, from .3 million in 1970 to 1.5 million to-the crime rate is finally beginning to decline.10 Is this a long awaited validation of our policy of raising the costs of crime through massive imprisonment, as rational choice advocates might claim, or merely the result of demographic or social changes?

   However, a closer look at this policy of massive imprisonment reveals that violent crime has remained steady or risen slightly even as rates of imprisonment have soared. The experience of California and Texas is instructive. During the 1980s, California's prison population increased by 192%, while Texas' increased by only 14%. By the end of the decade, however, both states had experienced a 21% increase in violent clime. After spending nearly three billion dollars to build and operate prisons, California has little to show for its expenditures, except a modest reduction in property offenses."

   If increasing the cost of crime has had any effect, it appears to be limited to property crimes, mostly a drop in burglary rates. Burglars On The job provides a detailed explanation of the limits of rational choice theory as a basis of public policy.12 The book suggests that the slight drop in burglary is more likely due to an incapacitation effect or a switch among burglars to armed robbery than it is to a recalculation by street criminals of the costs and benefits of crime.

3. STUDYING ACTIVE BURGLARS

   For criminologists accustomed to pouring over statistical abstracts or manipulating data on a computer screen, Burglars on the job comes as a welcome relief Theories of crime arise out of other theories or computer-generated statistical models, each time getting further and further away from actual subjects. Field research helps reintroduce criminologists to the criminal, reminding them of the critical importance of the offender's perspective in the study and control of crime. In this remarkable book, Richard Wright and Scott Decker provide a clear and penetrating peek into the lives and crimes of street criminals, a glimpse into the real world of crime.13

   There is very little quality street ethnography conducted today. Many criminoloDATEs consider it too dangerous, expensive, and time consuming. Others believe that active criminals would not talk with researchers, much less share with them the tricks of the trade. The authors have proven the latter myth. On the contrary, once assured of confidentiality, most burglars welcomed the opportunity to speak with professional researchers about their skills, strategies, and achievements in the world of crime.14 Also, the chance to appear in a book, if only anonymously, was a powerful acknowledgment of their competence as burglars.

   Burglars on the job pentlits the reader to understand how street criminals think, not only about crime but how they approach life. Good street ethnography affords a view of decision-making in the day, to-day lives of offenders. More importantly, it unravels the complex connection between their lives on the street and the crimes they commit in a way that no statistical study or armchair theory could capture.

   The offenders in Wright and Decker's book are residential burglars who refer to themselves as hustler-s, always on the lookout for the chance to make a buck. This is a meaningful distinction because if given the opportunity, nearly all burglars commit other crimes. The book is distinct in criminological research in that it reports on active burglars, people still on the streets engaged in episodic burglaries, and not convicted criminals behind prison bars.

   Most research on burglars has focused on prison inmates. Such research is problematic because not only are the burglars failed criminals, but their incarceration may affect what they say. No matter what the assurances, all inmates think that what is said to an interviewer will somehow get back to prison officials and perhaps influence their chances for parole. For example, almost all inmates tell interviewers that they have learned their lesson and that they plan to go straight upon release, although some have continued to commit crimes while behind bars. Retrospective interpretation may also distort the inmate's statements; looking back, the inmate constructs a different perspective of his behavior than when he was on the outside and committing crimes.15

   By studying residential burglars in their natural setting, Wright and Decker are able to explore the limits of rational choice theory. Criminals do make choices, but those choices are bound by emotions, culture, and mitigated by routine. Deciding to commit a crime is not the same thing as selecting which box of breakfast cereal to purchase, or where to go for lunch, even if these decisions share many of the same characteristics.

   The authors conducted field research for eighteen months in St. Louis, Missouri, from 1989 to 1991. They employed two research sites: a predominantly black neighborhood, and a neighborhood inhabited by mostly poor whites. Both sites can be characterized as inner-city neighborhoods with a robust streetlife.16

   Snowball sampling helped locate active burglars. Although difficult at first, the authors were able to hire an ex-offender, Street Daddy," to recruit subjects. Street Daddy is a wheelchair-bound former thief who retains a solid street reputation. Through a referral system, and the promise of a.$25.00 payment,17 Street Daddy provided the authors with 105 active burglars, 75% of whom had never been convicted of burglary. Two-thirds of the sample averaged ten or fewer burglaries a year, while 7% averaged fifty or more burglaries per year.18 The subjects included eighty-seven males and eighteen females. The inclusion of females is unusual, especially for this kind of research.

4. THE DECISION TO COMMIT A BURGLARY

   In the last fifteen years, rational choice theory has been the dominant explanation for residential burglary. Rational choice theorists focus exclusively on the objective characteristics of the immediate criminal situation, and leave little or no room for the role of subjective influences such as emotions. For Wright and Decker, the question is [H]ow and why mental states are related to the pursuit of material gain so that a crime results. [While not entirely rejecting rational choice theory, the author-s ] ... contend that this cannot be done adequately...