This article will illustrate three theories: ; deterrence theory, rational choice theory and restorative justice theory. It will describe in detail the policies and connections between theory, research and policy. Deterrence theory can be described as “the principles of certainty, severity and celerity of punishment, proportionality, specific and general deterrence” (Burke, 2009). For punishment to be effective, it must be certain, swift and severe. Certainty is more important than severity in deterring crime. Deterrence theory confirms that if punishment contains these three elements, people will rationally calculate that there is more to lose than to gain from crime (Gordon, 2010). Deterrence works in two ways. General deterrence involves punishing the offender so that he or she serves as an example to other members of society, while specific deterrence focuses on repeat offenders in order to prevent them from committing the act (Burke, 2009). The purpose of general deterrence is to prevent others from considering committing the crime. It has been argued that when the certainty, severity, and celerity of criminal sanctions are high in a population, criminal behavior is low. Studies suggest that the death penalty has been ineffective, while other studies show that more homicides occurred when the death penalty was made public (Pacotti, 2005). Then, comparative research shows that the 5 countries with the highest homicide rate impose the death penalty on average 41.6% murders per 100,000 people, while the five countries that do not impose the death penalty deaths are 21.6% per 100,000 people (Gordon, 2010). Deterrence also has little effect on domestic affairs, drunk driving and shoplifting. Deterrence is well said in a theory but in reality......middle of paper......ender in certain circumstances of a situation. Restorative justice has been widely used, and has some success, to allow those who need to be held accountable without being punished; repairing the damage or paying compensation will restore some degree of harmony within the victim and the community. The program is inconsistent in that it will repair the harm caused to the victim, but many victims are left under emotional, psychological and physical strain, which will lead to further conflict during mediation between the victim and the offender. Overall, it concludes with the idea that some programs can be effective. and has links to his theory; others may be ineffective in deterring, repairing and restoring crime, as well as having a low success rate. Furthermore, in many cases, offenders do not think rationally before committing the act and the crime cannot be deterred, no matter how harsh or lenient the punishment is...