Routine Activites

Routine activities theory suggests that in order for a crime to be committed, three main elements must be present. There must be a suitable target, the lack of a capable guardian to prevent the crime and, a likely offender must be present (Hagan 2008). A suitable target does not only apply to a person, but to objects and locations as well. Routine activities theory posits that even though there might be a suitable target, the crime will not occur unless there is an absence of a capable guardian (i.e policemen, security systems, or other forms of “watch schemes”) that could prevent the crime from occurring. Finally, once there is a suitable target and the lack of capable guardianship, a likely offender must be present. Routine activities theorists argue that crime is not an extraordinary event, but instead, occurs when these three elements are assembled by “the nature of normal everyday patterns of interaction (Hagan 2008: 156).” Furthermore, according to routine activities theory, victimization serves as a function to the exposure of the three elements which are correlates to a person’s lifestyle (including community settings and demographic variables. In most studies, routine activities theory has been used to assess victimization risk but, as this paper will show, it can also be a theory used to determine how one’s lifestyle and predispositions affects the likelihood of that individual's use of self-protective measures.

A little past midnight on Tuesday September 14, 2009, John Pontolillo, a 20 year old Johns Hopkins University Student took his 3-5 foot long samurai sword and fatally struck an alleged burglar, Donald D. Rice, inside his garage (New York Times 2009). Hours preceding this event, Pontolillo's apartment had been burglarized and several items were stolen; a crime that had occurred quite often in the neighborhood within the past few months. It is reported that once Pontolillo heard sounds coming from his garage, he grabbed his sword and went to the...