The debate over whether crime is caused by individual or social factors presents a complex issue. Robust defenders on both sides offer strong arguments but the answer may lie in harmonious integration of both views.
On the one hand, advocates of crime as a result of poverty argue that it is related to providing their basic needs. Fundamentally, impoverished people struggle to fulfill their primary needs: food, clothes, and housing. As trapped in severe conditions, they would make instant and easy choices such as stealing to obtain basic needs. In addition, living in poverty continuously could lead people to face social problems, for example, limited education opportunities significantly essential to gain high-value job choices, consequently, their opportunities to improve life are missed. For instance, in Indonesia, as a developing country, most thefts come from people living in vulnerable financial situations.
On the other hand, proponents of crime as a result of a bad person’s nature believe that criminals are caused by genetic factors. This view often relates to criminal behaviors: aggression and lack of empathy, originating from individual factors, to despoil their victim resources. It is supported also by some studies finding that people’s behaviors are derived from parents including bad characteristics, aggression for instance. Unfortunately, most criminals have aggressive behavior to intimidate their victims.
In my perspective, while both views offer valuable insights, crime actions likely require a combination of factors: social and individual. It is possible that certain individuals might have some criminal behavior but their actions may be influenced by external circumstances, such as poverty and social inequality.
In summary, even though bad behavior is inherited genetically, crime actions may be influenced by social issues. The viable conditions for people to commit crimes may be affected by bad individual behavior and strengthened by social problems.