Catch Me If You Can is an American film based on the life of Frank Abagnale. The said actor lived with his French parents in New Rochell, New York. After the divorce between his parents, he runs away. As a result, he lacked money for personal use, to the point that he began to rely on crimes against trust to survive. On his 19th birthday, Frank managed to fool many people by falsely posing as a doctor, a pilot, and a Georgia prosecutor. In one particular case, he falsified a Pan Am payroll where he managed to steal $2.8 million. First, the perpetrator conducted check fraud. After many successful theft attempts, he was so skilled that the FBI asked for his help in catching other crooks. His interaction with the police began after his arrest by Carl Hanratty, an FBI bank fraud specialist. After the first arrest, Frank convinced Carl that he was Barry Allen, another FBI agent tracking down the bank fraudster. Frank subsequently left the hotel, but Carl discovered that it was a trick. Unable to track him down, Carl felt foolish and disappointed. Later, at Christmas, Frank called Carl to apologize for dumping him. However, the apology was just malicious. Realizing this fact, Carl promises Frank that he will fail in the short term (Steven, & Jeff, 2002). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay At this point, Frank's tricks now included false identities as a lawyer and doctor. While posing as a doctor, he fell in love with Brenda whose father later discovered his hidden identity. Luckily, Carl tracked him down at his engagement party. Unfortunately, Frank slipped out the bedroom window. Two days later, he arranged to meet Brenda in Miami. However, he noticed plainclothes officers waiting to arrest him. As a result, he fled to Europe. Seven months after the escape, Carl revealed to his boss that Frank was forging checks, hence the need to track him down. After Carl misses permission to visit Frank in Europe, the professionals prove that the fake checks came from France. As a result, Carl tracks Frank to France for arrest. Accordingly, a twelve-year prison sentence was appropriate. As the last part of his sentence, Frank received the privilege of serving in the FBI as a bank fraud exposer. The theory that best describes Frank's criminal behavior is routine activity theory which is closely related to the rational choice model. First, regular activity theory holds that people commit crimes because of the lifestyle they choose. For example, Frank started by stealing money to survive after his parents separated. Many years later, he was still forging checks as this was the essence of his selection. The applicability of conventional theory is based on the rational choice principle that offenders choose to commit crimes based on the profitability of those crimes. To determine profitability, offenders weigh the benefits of a crime against its costs. If the benefits are greater than the charges, the crime is committed. If, however, the costs of crimes exceed the benefits, the crime is abolished. Typically, benefits include stolen money, pleasure from crimes, prestige, or revenge against an enemy. On the other hand, the costs involve prison sentences, shame and fines. For Frank, the benefits of the crimes were visibly higher than the costs, hence the continuation of the forgery. For example, in one case it ismanaged to successfully steal 2.8 million dollars. Despite the use of false identities in many other cases, the risk of arrest was visibly low. For example, Frank easily escaped three arrests despite being an international criminal. First, he successfully fooled an FBI agent into thinking he was another FBI agent chasing the thief. As a result, Frank ran away from the hotel. Later at Christmas he dared to call the FBI agent he had deceived at the hotel. As such, malice indicates that Frank was aware of the low likelihood of a successful arrest against him. In the second case, Frank escaped through the bedroom window while attending an engagement party with his mistress. Two days later he escaped yet another arrest in Miami Beach from where he flew to Europe. Furthermore, Carl was unable to determine the origin of the fake checks until professionals identified France as the country of the crime. Last but not least, Frank ended up working for the FBI instead of being a prisoner for life. Furthermore, he did not repay the money stolen through his many-year-long forgery. Therefore, there is evidence that Frank's criminal behavior was profitable enough to warrant continuity. Another perspective for explaining Frank's behavior is the social context that ultimately shaped his rational decision. The very environment has encouraged bank fraud. Perhaps Frank realized that bank fraud offenders were difficult to catch and even when they did, the punishments were minimal. Evidence of numerous bank fraud cases in Frank's neighborhood is the fact that he helped the FBI catch other crooks (Steven and Jeff, 2002). For this reason the police considered it wiser to leave him free to contribute to the arrest of other criminals. In addition to using these theories to understand Frank's decision to be a criminal, a list of individual characteristics contributed to the negative lifestyle. First, Frank is a grossly dishonest person. From the beginning to the end of the film, he felt more comfortable telling lies than telling the truth. One such case is when her lover's father found out that her identity was fake. Furthermore, he falsely entered his full name in the payroll, in many cases changed his personal name and even deceived the police. The first crime prevention policy based on rational theory is to ensure the presence of law enforcement. In particular, law enforcement depends on the number of police officers, equipment and training. Using Frank's example, the use of counterfeit checks continued due to insufficient law enforcement in terms of numbers, training and equipment. When he was first tracked down to the hotel, Frank managed to deceive the FBI agent because the agent did not have sufficient mechanisms to determine the true identity of the perpetrator. Furthermore, the officer was alone, thus signaling the importance of having sufficient law enforcement. Additionally, Frank escaped through the bedroom window because there were insufficient officers to arrest him. Last but not least, the lack of sufficiently trained officials has made it difficult for the state to combat bank fraud. When matters got out of hand, FBI agents even worked with criminals like Frank to catch other criminals. Another measure put in place to prevent bank fraud is the establishment and maintenance of correctional institutions (Sutherland, 2017). According to the film, Frank's criminal behavior gained momentum from a deviant society that harbors criminal activity. In fact, this is why the police are not.