Bank robber chatting with Bill Murray illustrates self-control theory

Fresh from robbing a bank in Tokyo, a robber saw film star Bill Murray and stopped to chat with him! Soon, Tokyo police tackled him (the robber) in mid-conversation.

This is a perfect image to illustrate the essence of the low self-control theory of criminality in Gottfredson & Hirschi's 1990 A General Theory of Crime, an important book that I become aware of through the work of French scholar of the sociology of crime and contributor to the Austrian school of economics (a rare combination!), Renaud Fillieule (see his presentation on praxeology and criminology embedded below). They write on p. 89 that:

A major characteristic of people with low self-control [characteristic of most actual criminality] is a tendency to respond to tangible stimuli in the immediate environment, to have a concrete “here and now” orientation.

Moreover, police caught the man with "a knife and a bag filled with 455,000 Japanese Yen, or about 5,000 USD." Once again, this is a perfect image for Gottfredson & Hirschi's contention on p. 21 that:

Although it may be more glamorous and profitable for law enforcement [and news and entertainment media] to portray an image of crime as a highly profitable alternative to legal work, a valid theory of crime must see it as it is: largely petty, typically not completed, and usually of little lasting or substantial benefit to the offender.

The vast majority of actual crimes are just like this, "petty, not completed, and of little benefit to the offender." This event, too, would have gone mostly unnoticed and unreported, were it not for Bill Murray walking by.

Self-control theory in criminology maps fairly closely to the concept of time-preference in economics (specifically, low self-control would be associated with high time preference). However, the latter is more precisely formulated as a praxeological law; the former more of a specific interpretive framework for understanding behavior patterns.

Here is a fascinating 2012 lecture examining the field of the sociology of crime from a Misesian action-theory perspective.

Comments

[Jason Kelly]

You raise a point I have often pondered: Most crime is just as time and labor intensive as productive work, and carries the additional cost of risking severe punishment. And the payoff for robbery or burglary is usually not that great, so it doesn't seem like a worthwhile endeavor, But if you're unable to discipline yourself enough to do a regular job or provide some service, and you want immediate gratification, I guess stealing seems like the way to go.

[Konrad S Graf]

Jason, For some reason, I didn't get a comment notification on this. Anyway: The General Theory of Crime presents quite a strong case that almost all "really existing" crime does not involve much in the way of time or labor. It is quick and opportunistic. They present the case that the public image of crime being a kind of substitute for a skilled occupation is somewhere around, say, 98% media-invention and 2% reality. The other thing they take on is the idea of criminal specialists. Again, the data show almost all criminals ranging from one type of crime to the next. The specialist is a rarity and when found, greatly exaggerated as a story line (either media or fictional.)