Throughout the whole history of human kind people tried to explain and understand the fact of crime. In order to answer various questions concerning the nature of crime, theorists developed hypothesis that supposedly help people to better understand criminals and their actions.

Among the four common theories, which include Psychological Modeling Theory, Anomie Theory, Conflict Theory, and Biochemical Theory, I find Culture Conflict Theory to be the most explanatory and easy to understand. According to the assumption in question, people’s behavior depends mostly on the standards and beliefs of the society. In a homogeneous these norms represent the values of practically all subjects, while in a heterogeneous culture various groups might be oppressed by the will of the majority and have individual, unique values and standards. This the conflict might be divided into primary and secondary, where primary conflict represents the idea that the majority imposes rules on the disagreeing minority, while the secondary conflict illustrates a minority being formed to a have an absolutely different view on values and norms. Such conflicts, and, as a result, crimes, occur when resisting minority is quite organized but is not as sophisticated as the prevailing majority and the essence of the difference is based on cultural diversity. There is sound evidence that in the contemporary world of multiple cultures living together on the same territory no balance or equilibrium can be reached. “There will always be a group in power and that group will impose their values on those subject to that power” (Sociology of Deviant Behavior, 2005).

In essence, I consider Culture Conflict Theory to be the most constructive and valuable speculation that cannot be omitted when trying to understand a criminal or his conduct.