| Abstract: | In daylight, burglars minimized the risks of being spotted by selecting “up‐market” targets with better front cover and low occupancy that reflected the occupants' higher employment levels. After dark, townhouses with less cover were popular despite victims, fewer of whom were employed, raising more alerts. Evidence indicates consistency with routine activity theory, and target strategies appear rational, though shaped by differences in risks and offenders. Lifestyles and routine activities of victims, coupled with daylight and darkness changes, created burglary opportunities. Distinctive daylight and darkness strategies proved attractive to certain types of offenders, so that housing morphology, victims, their lifestyle, risks, rewards and burglar characteristics were distinctively aligned, providing the framework for target and area selection. Theories need to incorporate contrasts in daylight‐darkness and housing morphologies, and relate to offender diversity. |
