Several people assert that the main cause of crime is an economically disadvantaged background. However, others say that crime is caused by a person's nature. Discuss both ideas and give your own opinion.

It is a common belief that a person makes a crime in society

due to

an economically detrimental background.

However

, there is another argument that individual personality is linked to a crime.

This

essay will discuss both views and suggest my perspective. Some people contend that a detrimental personal nature has a negative effect on the rate of misdemeanour occurrence. It is evident that a person is willing to fulfil his lower life standard via misdemeanour, harming other lives. From the professional standpoint,

for instance

, the major target of offences

as

Correct quantifier usage

such as

show examples

murder and violence is a victim who has a happier lifestyle than others.

This

shows that an unsatisfied mindset with misfortune has led to the crime.

Therefore

,

it is clear that

a natural personality is the main reason for offence in one society.

Nevertheless

, there is another macro view that offence is occurred based on the revolution toward poor economic backgrounds because the government has not invested money in welfare. Many people claim that a lack of subsidies from the government makes the public feel unsatisfied to live in a moral way.

For example

, one survey reveals that people living in a developed city with short monetary support have more tendency to do car theft or goods robbery on the road.

Therefore

,

it is clear that

public revolution toward the government's disadvantaged economic service causes offence. Given the evidence stated above, both personal and social background should be considered as the problem to prevent misdemeanours. In conclusion, I am of the view that misdemeanours could be diminished with both approaches to personal improvement and economic development.