This essay will explore some of the strengths and limitations of rational choice crime control perspectives, and explain how developmental theories have recently informed our understanding of crime behavior as a developmental process. Rational choice theories have as their starting point the idea that offenders seek to gain some benefit for themselves from their criminal behavior, that they seek to gain that benefit through conscious decisions they make, and that these decisions, no matter how basic, they reveal a measure of rationality. (Cornish and Clarke, 1986) There were several factors that were determined to have an influence on the choice a person might make to commit a burglary, for example they included underlying factors, such as psychological, previous learning experiences, needs generalized, perception Solutions and reaction to random events. Rational choice theory recognizes situational variables and recognizes their importance to specific criminal events. (Cornish and Clarke, 1986) One of the main limitations of this theory is that at its core is the idea of ​​a reasoning offender, therefore it does not adequately take into account the empirical evidence that many criminals commit their crimes impulsively and without “counting the cost” of their criminal activity. Furthermore, this theory does not adequately take into account the pathology that afflicts many criminals and the strong influence they have on the decisions they make. Rational choice theories not only seek to explain the decisions that some people make, but also to help us better understand the decisions that others do not make. We then have an examination of theories of deterrence. Traditionally…half of paper…so parents of these difficult youth do not have the psychological and physical resources necessary to deal with the problems they face (Scarr & McCartney, 1983; Snyder & Patterson, 1987). Furthermore, a child's predisposition may evoke negative responses from his or her environment that could make him or her more vulnerable to criminogenic influences. In this study, (Moffitt, 1993) distinguishes between antisocial behavior persistent throughout life and antisocial behavior limited to adolescence. The latter will engage in criminal activities when such responses appear to be profitable, but will abandon antisocial behavior when pro-social styles are more profitable (Moffitt, 1993). One of the factors that contribute to antisocial behavior limited to adolescence are personal characteristics that exclude them from antisocial peer groups.