Is crime a rational choice? Give specific examples for your discussion.

Rational Choice Theory states that offenders seek to benefit in some way from their offending behaviors. Rational in this case means proving to be more beneficial than detrimental to the offender. In other words, the offender would see the crime as worth the risk. It is impossible to do things without thinking, even though we commonly state that we do so. Every action that we commit has a thought pattern associated with it. Rational Choice is founded on the belief that there is a right and a wrong and rationality is the ability to make things seem as right so they can be committed with “good” or rational conscience.

When an offender is about to commit a crime, such as a store robbery, there are often many decisions and considerations that the offender has thought about beforehand. Which store is easiest to rob? Which store has the most money in its cash register? How will I get into the store? How will I get the money away? When considering the answers to these and other questions, the offender is trying to provide a rationality for the crime that is about to be committed.

This is what I have so far.... (essay question from class, everything I write will be shared!)
Rational Choice Theory is quite interesting now that I have taken the time to actually read about it. As I was browsing someone said that rational choice theory doesn't take into account those things that are irrational, such as emotions. My argument would be that an individuals rationale does not have to adhere to convention, what is considered normal, or what someone else would consider rational in a given situation.

For example: Tanya sees her boyfriend of three years walking into a hotel room with a girl that has mentioned how much she adores Tanya's boyfriend. Tanya's reaction: Chase them down, beat down the girl until she in unconscious, and later get her brother to beat her (now ex) boyfriend till he is unconscious. Tanya's Rationale: He hurt me, she hurt me, I must make them feel this same pain the only way I know how.
See how Tanya definitely acted through her emotions? Yet, she did it rationally... well, what she felt was rationale. Tanya's boyfriend (Jason) would react in quite a different way by immediately leaving the relationship and the city and never speaking to Tanya again. However, that would not say that Tanya was irrational and Jason was rational. Someone could say they were both irrational! The weakness in my argument would be that from my point, there would be no room for irrationality. Everyone could explain their own rationale for any situation. "Hi, my name is Bonnie, I killed my father Clyde because he killed my dog." Bonnie definitely provides a rationale for her action, but I would say that it was quite an irrational action....
however... where is the line between rational and irrational??
PHILOSOPHY! Another day! I am going back to work on my paper...