Gun Trafficking and Straw Purchasing: Rational Choice Theory
This paper examines gun trafficking and straw purchasing through the lens of rational choice theory, arguing that criminal decision-making at multiple levels — from individual straw runners to firearms dealers, lobbyists, and members of the criminal justice system — can be explained by a cost-benefit calculus in which potential gains outweigh perceived risks. Drawing on real cases including the Ramos straw-runner network and the prosecution of gun dealer Iknadosian, the paper demonstrates how weak sentencing, protective legislation, and political pressure from pro-gun lobbyists collectively rationalize participation in the illegal flow of firearms from the United States into Mexico.
- Rational Choice Theory and Criminal Behavior: Defines rational choice theory and its core premises
- Straw Runners and Financial Incentives: Ramos case illustrates cost-benefit straw running logic
- Gun Dealers and Complicity in Trafficking: Carter's Country and Iknadosian profit from illegal sales
- Legislation, Lobbyists, and Judicial Complicity: NRA influence and judicial dismissal enable trafficking
- Conclusion: A Multi-Level Rational Choice Framework: Theory explains complicity across all actor levels
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It applies a single theoretical framework — rational choice theory — consistently across multiple levels of analysis, from individual straw runners to institutional actors, giving the argument structural coherence.
- It uses specific, concrete cases (the Ramos network, Carter's Country, Iknadosian's dismissed prosecution) to ground abstract theory in documented real-world behavior.
- The paper escalates its argument logically, moving from street-level offenders to dealers, then to lobbyists and judges, building cumulative persuasive force.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied theoretical analysis: taking an established criminological framework (rational choice theory) and systematically testing it against a set of real cases at progressively higher institutional levels. This move — from individual actor to systemic enabler — shows how theory can reveal structural complicity that purely descriptive accounts would miss.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a definition and explanation of rational choice theory, then applies it in turn to straw runners, gun dealers, and finally to legislators, lobbyists, and a specific judge. A brief conclusion synthesizes all three levels. The structure is essentially thesis → escalating case studies → synthesis, making it easy to follow the argument's progression from micro to macro actors.
Rational Choice Theory and Criminal Behavior
Rational choice theory is a framework for understanding criminal behavior that posits that when people commit illicit acts, they generally do so while considering their own self-interest. The theory holds that criminals are well aware of the illegality of what they are contemplating and that they weigh a number of factors before pursuing these actions. Such factors generally include what benefits they will incur — and to what degree they will profit — from criminal behavior, which is typically weighed against the likelihood of getting caught. Furthermore, the theory contends that people who commit crime are also cognizant of the nature and degree of the punishment they may face if apprehended. When people decide to commit a crime anyway because they believe there is more of a chance for them to gain than to suffer from an act, it is typically an example of rational choice theory in action.
There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that many of the people involved in the illegal straw running and trafficking of firearms into Mexico and other regions justify their behavior through rational choice theory. What is most interesting about this theory and the level of complicit involvement is that it can be found at several levels of criminality — not merely among the individuals who are caught and convicted of buying and supplying firearms to Mexico. There are numerous documented instances in which firearms dealers, law enforcement personnel, and even lobbyists and legislators may be culpable for the proliferation of guns into Mexico originating from the United States.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.