The crime problem : it is not an either/or solution : an honors thesis (HONRS 499)

This discussion of the crime problem and the possible R39 solutions focuses on two main theories: the deterrence hypothesis and the rehabilitation hypothesis. The deterrence hypothesis states that an increase in expected punishment causes a significant decrease in crime. It also suggests that individuals respond significantly to the deterring incentives created by the criminal justice system (Cooter and Ulen 524). Examples of these incentives include prison or fines. The rehabilitation hypothesis states crime is reduced by devoting resources to job-creation, income maintenance, family counseling, mental health, and other programs designed to alleviate social, economic, and biological causes of crime (Cooter and Ulen 413). Both theories are discussed and weighed as to their costs and benefits. The costs and benefits of each theory are explored on both the effects of society and the offender. Each theory is also explored as to whether efficiency is the key to the crime problem or if there is something deeper that is also involved. Although each of the two main theories deals with different issues, they share a common goal: a solution to the crime problem. Since they share this goal, it could be said that both approaches are not mutually exclusive and the optimal public policy for reducing crime is a mix of the two. The two should be mixed until the marginal productivity of a dollar spent on deterrence equals the marginal productivity of a dollar spends on rehabilitation.