Several findings clarify self-control’s ability to explain crime. First, self-control does not equally explain specific categories of crime, nor is it a universal predictor. Second, self-control’s explanatory power may be inflated. Third, consequences, risk, and opportunity attained significance in five of six equations in explaining crime. Study limitations and areas needing to be addressed in future studies are presented and discussed. Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) developed self-control theory. The theory argues that people who engage in criminality suffer from low self-control that is stable over time, is formed early in life, predisposes offenders to a life of crime, and is manifested in personality problems. More than 50 tests of the theory have been conducted, and it is one of the most influential theories of the past decade. However, despite supportive theory findings, issues remain unresolved. This study addressed recent concerns and included variables such as risk, consequences, criminal opportunity, and interaction term, and bond controls in one complete test of the theory. It addressed whether support for the theory is overstated by analyzing two waves of data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), and it assessed the theory’s ability to explain different types of deviance. Tables and references