<p>Criminological theorizing over the past half century has shown little convergence or integration. Three strands of criminological theory can be identified: dispositional approaches (emphasizing self-control, social learning, biological, and morality theories), ecological theories (emphasizing the crime consequences of dysfunctional communities), and opportunity theories (focusing primarily on places and artifacts that enable or facilitate crime). The discipline’s progress has not resulted in a convergence of theoretical propositions. This article offers a potential route toward reconciling these approaches, provisionally termed the Unstructured Spare Time model of crime. It begins with an overview of relevant criminological theories and highlights enduring tensions between individual- and opportunity-based approaches. It then reviews previous integrative efforts, noting their contributions and limitations. The Unstructured Spare Time model is introduced as a conceptual bridge among these traditions. The model posits that unstructured spare time, at the level of individuals, geographic areas, and time periods, is shaped by personal factors, broader social changes, and the spatial organization of cities and towns. This unstructured time, in turn, influences both individual readiness for crime and the availability of crime opportunities. The model advances a dynamic view of how time-use patterns mediate the relationship between personal traits, community conditions, structural factors, and exposure to and engagement in crime. Its central contribution lies in focusing explanation and, by extension, prevention and intervention strategies on a single, observable factor: unstructured spare time. The article summarizes empirical support from recent studies and concludes by outlining directions for future research and refinement of the model.</p>