Essay on Approaches to crime prevention

Routine activity theory states that for a crime to be committed, three important factors need to be present including: a motivated offender, an accessible target, and the absence of a capable guardian against a violation. Marcus Felson and Lawrence E. Cohen introduced the routine activity theory in 1979, where they believed that an individual who has these three characteristics gives them a greater possibility of committing a crime. Moreover, situational crime prevention is known as strategies of ways for preventing or reducing the opportunities for criminals to commit crimes that derive from the routines of an individual’s everyday life. Ronald V. Clarke introduced situational crime prevention theory in 1983, where he believed that removing the situation instead of removing the criminal could prevent crime. In this paper, I will be discussing what routine activity/situational crime prevention theory is, and apply two peer-reviewed articles from Google Scholar that test the routine activity/situational crime prevention theory by discussing what the authors are trying to figure out and discuss their findings, and lastly, tie the routine activity/situational crime prevention theory articles to our textbook in hopes to fully understand in depth what the theory encompasses.

The “get tough approach” to crime control has been prevalent since the 1960s. This approach takes the stance to a more firm and no tolerance policy against crime, hence the term “tough” in the actual title. “"Tough" crime control normally denotes more emphasis on police resources, faster apprehension of criminals, quick trials, and more severe sentences for guilty offenders” (Skoler 1971:29). The “get tough approach” emphasizes the need to arrest and punish criminals over rehabilitation and addressing the social factors that underlie criminal behavior (Barkan and Bryjak 2011). Deterrence of other criminals through severe punishments is the primary focus. The “get tough approach” of criminal justice institutions has been under scrutiny due to the outcomes that we will discuss further on. The purpose of this paper is to simply present the pros and cons that have resulted from the “get tough approach” on crime. The paper will try and remain completely unbiased to the “get tough approach” and solely focus on results that have come from said approach. We will begin by discussing the background and history of the “get tough approach” and what led to its development. We will then discuss things such as incarceration rates (US Department of Justice), crime rates (Dilulio 1995) juveniles in prison (Hinton 2015), policies that have been implemented (Shephard 2002), correctional costs, and destabilized urban neighborhoods (Barkan & Bryjak 2011; Black 2007; Mauer 2006) that result

Ron Clark describes situational crime prevention as ‘a pre-emptive approach that relies, not on improving society or its institutions, but simple on reducing opportunities for crime’. He identifies three features of measures aimed at situational crime prevention, firstly that they

There has long been a debate over which, if any, are the most effective methods of crime control. Governments from bottom to top in our nation have poured over the issue with mixed results for as long as there has been a nation. Until very recently deterrence was completely based on fear of punishment. However, recent years have provided us with a more complete understanding of crime and its roots among the more desirable parts of our society, specifically the mind of a criminal. Through the study of psychology, specifically free will, determinism and social identity, we may find that situational crime prevention is a better means to deter crime in our nation.

Summary: This chapter discusses the seven secondary defenses applied to crime after detection. These seven defenses can be split into two categories: discourage and oppose. The four ways which potential victims discourage their attackers: movement away from adversary, communicate ability to escape, distraction, feigns, and startles, and symbiotic protection. The three methods for quick opposition upon attack are chemical and weapon defense, sudden weaponry, and emergency social defense.

Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson (1979) expanded on these principles and introduced routine activities theory as an ecological perspective on criminal behavior. Furthermore, the quintessence of routine activity theory is the assertion that there are three necessary components that must be present for crime to occur: the motivated offender(s) (individuals seeking/able/willing to commit offenses), presence of

Different states in America have varying demographics when it comes to race, income, joblessness, and more, and states also vary when it comes to crime rates. The relationships between economic factors and crime rates are not direct, for example, Alaska has had the 3rd highest median house income but also has had some of the highest violent crime rates in the country. Being able to predict crime rates in a geographical area such as a state is important for public policy and law enforcement regarding making informed decisions. These decisions can help create efficient anti-crime policies. The United States of America was used as the geographical unit of study excluding Alaska, New Jersey, and Hawaii due to missing data. This paper examines which factors related to economics and demographics are linked to the crime rate. Inequality has been theorized to increase crime rates due to ecological factor of crime (Merton, 1938; Shaw & McKay, 1942; Becker, 1968). Certain factors including race are more prevalently associated with inequalities which is why they are included in the analysis.

Deterrence theory of crime is a method in which punishment is used to dissuade people from committing crimes. There are two types of deterrence: general and specific. General deterrence is punishment to an individual to stop the society as a whole from committing crimes. In other word, it is using the punishment as an example to “scare” society from precipitating in criminal acts. Under general deterrence, publicity is a major part of deterrence. Crime and their punishments being showing in the media or being told person to person can be used to deter crime. Specific deterrence is punishment to the individual to stop that individual from committing other crimes in the future. This type of deterrence is used to teach the individual a

The one crime policy that is important for the criminal justice system today is substance abuse in America. This problem has plagued the criminal justice system in America for a long period and it has continued to be a thorn in the side of all parts of the criminal justice system. To fix this their need is a need for substance abuse treatment, which helps in the transition from the criminal justice system. The main reason this policy is important for the criminal justice system is to stop the problem from the source with regard to families and drug patterns that go from generation to generation.

Situational crime prevention constitutes primary crime prevention measure. This is to say that it is aimed at deterring crime before it occurs. Situational prevention, like other similar primary prevention measures, focuses on subduing crime opportunities instead of the attributes of criminals or even potential criminals. It seeks to curtail opportunities for certain groups of crime by increasing the risks and difficulties associated with them and significantly reducing the rewards. Situational prevention is made up of three key elements: a sound theoretical framework, an authoritative methodology for dealing with specific crimes, and a collection of opportunity-reducing approaches (Felson & Clarke, 1997).

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

According to the Australian Government of Criminology (2017), Crime prevention is ‘an effective approach to reducing crime. It is internationally recognised as an important component of a national approach to building viable communities.’ This essay will examine the case of the kings Cross shooting that occurred in 2012, involving the Indigenous community, Sydney police and Society. it will cover the importance of Crime prevention and the strategies in which are ideal to maintain the safety and security of the community and the offender partaking in the crime. This essay will focus broadly on the perspective of Social Crime Prevention, and the importance it obtains to prevent crime from occurring.

The focus of this paper will be based upon different crime prevention strategies implemented by members of the communities, local and government authorities.

     In general the definition of a crime is an act punishable by law, usually considered an evil act. Crime refers to many types of misconduct forbidden by law. Crimes include such things as murder, stealing a car, resisting arrest, possession or dealing of illegal drugs, being nude in public , drunk driving, and bank robbery. Crime is an act that has been timeless and has been committed practically since the start of time. For example, ever since Cain killed his brother Abel (B.C.), people being charged with witchcraft in the 1600’s, prostitution, to the current crimes of modern day(A.D.). Even though crime has existed throughout time it has progressed and branched out taking many types forms.

First of all, the world in which we live in depends a lot on financial