Environmental theories on crime have led the way in the establishment of many policies and laws across the United States. As Environmental criminology and Broken Windows theory suggests, when the three ingredients of time place and opportunity are present, crime is more likely to happen. This idea squares perfectly with rational choice theory, or does it not? In this discussion examine how theories of environmental criminology and rational choice theory line up. Do they complement each other or is each hitting on a different concept as to why certain people commit crimes? As a First World Country and leader on so many different fronts, is the United States holistically failing at preventing crime or are Bentham, Marx and Durkhiem correct that crime is essentially unavoidable regardless of the society? What is the missing puzzle piece in your opinion?

Chapters 56 and 60 of the Classics text are within the subsection "Social Response to Crime." While I think they are chronologically misplaced in the ordering of the book, I think the two chapters play on one another in the aspect that police discretion leads to situations of Guilty Until Proven Innocent. Currently within our society we are seeing more and more instances of wrongful conventions at the hands of law enforcement and prosecutors. 

Also Share your thoughts about the connection between the major errors addressed in Chapter 56 in relationship to Police Discretion discussed in Chapter 60. Do not tell me that Police are bad people, but thats a far reach, but how does police discretion, monitored or not, impact and/or help us arrive at the current "Central Park 5" outcomes for so many people?