On Topic: As others have said, it depends on the criminal. Some are malicious, some are poor and just trying to get by, some grew up in the life and just don't know anything else, some are trapped in the life and can't get out, some have honest to god mental diseases that compel them to act out, some don't know any better, some are in a desperate situation. There's more motives than there are stars in the sky.
Though most of them are of the desperate/stuck in the life/whatever category, as that education and better social programs do considerably more to stop crime than more cops, but that's socialism and fuck that communist static.
On Locks: We lock the doors because criminals are, like everybody else, lazy. If they're in a neighborhood, and one house has the windows open? Well guess which house is getting robbed. Pro-tip: It's not the one with the security fence.
By the same measure, if they try your door and it opens, they're going to walk on in and take your shit. If they try it and it doesn't open, then they may try another house or just kick it in (which is noisy and increases the chances they'll be caught).
Even alarm companies don't really deter criminals because the alarm is going to get them caught. A determined thief can disable alarms and still get in, or can just smash and grab faster than police response times. However, a sign that says your house is protected by a security system is going to make your house safer because, well, if you're a criminal, who are you going to rob? The people whom you have to go through a whole to do to avoid their security system, or the people whose door you can just kick open and be done with it? (This is, incidentally, why just stealing a security company sticker and putting it in your window is nearly/just as effective as actually buying an alarm system).
On Lord of the Flies: It's a writer trying to make a point about how humanity sucks and we're all just monsters barely restrained by society. Considering he was from the UK, this is not a surprising conclusion for him to come to, however that doesn't make his opinions any more valid than Ayn Rand. Were he correct in his assumptions, then advanced civilization would have been unlikely to spring up in the first place.
|