The essence of the rational-choice perspective is that the individual will take advantage of an offending opportunity if expected benefits exceed expected costs. Although differing in a number of significant ways, the theories of Gottfredson and Hirsche and Wilson and Herrnstein draw upon and synthesize a substantial and diverse literature that links enduring individual characteristics to stable differences in criminal behavior. The authors of this paper argue that theories of stable individual differences are compatible with rational-choice models of crime. Specifically, the authors conclude that instrumental considerations, such as those described in the rational-choice model are expected to be highly salient for "marginal offenders." These marginal offenders are persons whose self-control is not so high as to preclude offending, nor so low that they would offend regardless of the inducements or disincentives. One such instrumental concern is the perceived damage to social bonds, or what the authors call "personal capital." The issue addressed in this discussion is the process by which such personal capital is accumulated and the implications of this for deterrence. The results of the test described in this paper provide generally good support for the proposed theory. 41 references