This article addresses the literature on disengagement from the discipline of criminology, an issue normally shaped by the discussion of desistance (the prolonged or permanent cessation of criminal behavior). Like terrorism studies, the methodological challenges in studying the desistence from terrorism in criminology are the limitations posed by cross-sectional as opposed to longitudinal research and the availability of data. However, the article posits that trajectory analysis may be useful tool in terrorism studies as it avoids making parametric assumptions about the distribution of variables under study and uses a mixture of probability distributions to estimate trends. The article then reviewed seven theoretical perspectives from criminology that speak to the issue of desistance from crime and then considered whether each offers insights into the process of desistance from terrorism. The article also highlights the importance of distinguishing individual desistance from group desistance and the wide appeal of rational choice models in criminology. While rational choice theory is a criminology methodology most often applied to terrorism, it is not proven to offer a sufficient explanation in and of itself. The article finds that efforts should focus on a number of things including increasing social bonds with “conventional others”, and promoting alternative strategies to deal with strain and anomie.