Digital Computer Crime

INTRODUCTION

This chapter will focus on the causes of digital crime. There are several theories that have been postulated over the past 100 years to explain crime, and there is an emerging body of research attempting to apply these concepts to digital crimes. A theory is an attempt to answer the question “Why?” In this chapter, theories will be presented that attempt to answer the question “Why do individuals commit digital crime?” This chapter will review crimino- logical theories that can explain digital crime, though it is important to note that these theo- retical frameworks were developed to explain crime in general, not digital crime specifically. As a result, support for some of these theories is mixed and require a great deal of investiga- tion. The discussion presented here will present the existing body of criminological research with a variety of offending and victimization practices, as well as examples to demonstrate how a particular theory can explain digital crime.

CHOICE THEORY

According to choice theory, an individual commits a crime because he or she makes a ratio- nal choice to do so by weighing the risks and benefits of committing the act. If the risks (e.g., apprehension and punishment) outweigh the benefits, then the person will not commit the act. The opposite is also true. Choice theory became popular among criminologists in the late 1970s for three reasons. First, the positive school began to be questioned. The positive school was based on the belief that crime-producing traits and factors could be isolated, and treatment could be administered to eliminate or control the trait/factor. However, it was

3 The Criminology of

Computer Crime

▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES After completing this chapter, you should be able to ■ Discuss the tenets of choice theory, including routine activities theory, and its

applicability to digital crimes. ■ Describe the assumptions of deterrence theory and its utility. ■ Discuss the impact of personality disorders on digital crime. ■ Discuss the major social structure theories that apply to digital crime. ■ Discuss the learning and social control theories that apply to digital crime. ■ Describe the relationship between terrorism and political theory.

43

IS B

N 1

-3 23

-0 06

52 -4

Digital Crime and Digital Terrorism, Third Edition, by Robert W. Taylor, Eric J. Fritsch, and John Liederbach. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2015 by Pearson Education, Inc.

44 Chapter 3 • The Criminology of Computer Crime

being argued at the time that these factors and traits had failed to be identified and iso- lated after almost 100 years of effort. Individuals became dissatisfied with the positive school and began to offer alternative reasons for why people commit crime.

Second, the reported crime rate in the 1960s and 1970s increased significantly. This was evidence to some that what was currently being done to control crime was not working. Therefore, some began to look for other means to control the crime rate besides treatment and rehabilitation. Third, the practice of rehabilitation came under attack. 1 In 1974, Robert Martinson wrote an article reviewing 231 studies of prison programs aimed at rehabilitating inmates. Martinson concluded that “with few and isolated exceptions, the rehabilitative efforts that have been reported so far have had no appreciable effect on recidivism.” 2 This finding, which was picked up by the mass media, was used by critics of prison programs to argue against rehabilitation as a pri- mary justification for incarceration. The results of the article are commonly referred to as “nothing works.” Since it appeared that the current efforts had failed, many started to call for a change in judicial policy. Many started to emphasize the need for punishment, not rehabilitation, as the primary reason for incarceration.

Based on these reasons, choice theory and its policy implications became popular. Judicial policy started to change focus, on the offense and not the offender. Choice the- ory argues that since the offender has made a rational choice to commit the offense, the focus should be on the offense committed, not the offender. Policies such as mandatory sentencing and “three strikes and you’re out laws” have become popular in recent years and are based on choice theory. The idea is that the way to control crime, including digital crime, is to have offenders fear the punishment and be deterred from committing the act. Since humans are hedonistic, efforts should be placed on making the risks of committing digital crime higher than any benefit derived from committing the offenses. Those who support the use of punishment to control crime assume that the offender is making a choice to commit the act and can be deterred if the risks outweigh the benefits.

Routine Activities

Routine activities theory is based on rational choice. Routine activities theory was developed by Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson. Cohen and Felson argue that the motivation to commit crime and the supply of offenders are constant. 3 Many would argue that changes in the crime rates are due to changes in the number of motivated offenders. However, Cohen and Felson argue that there is always a steady supply of offenders who are motivated to commit crime: Changes in crime rates are due to changes in the availability of targets and the absence of capable guardians. 4

According to Cohen and Felson, crime occurs when there is a convergence in time and space of three factors:

1. A motivated offender (e.g., a hacker) 2. A suitable target (e.g., a vulnerable computer system) 3. The absence of a capable guardian (e.g., inadequate software protection) 5

All three factors must be present in order for a crime to occur. In sum, when motivated offenders are present, they make rational choices by selecting suitable targets that lack capable guardianship.

This theory can also account for victimization, as they are the other player in a criminal event. Victimization is most likely when individuals are placed in high-risk