Situational Crime Prevention Research

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.

Throughout this whole term we have learned numerous roles of the criminal justice profession. How on a macro level law enforcement has made points to serve and protect, all the way down to the micro level of society. Men and women risk their lives every day to make sure that the law is obeyed, and their community is still held together. In the following paper you will see how the criminal justice profession helps on an individual and societal level. But what does each level mean you may ask, well let’s break it down a little. Individual need is person to person with the law, where societal is in the community of the law enforcement. The first individual need are assaults in and around bars. "The proliferation of bars in many communities

There are numerous different types of strategies for crime reduction. These include crime prevention tactics which are suitable for whole societies, and also forms of punishment which are suitable for individuals. Crime prevention strategies include situational crime prevention, environmental crime prevention, and social and community crime prevention.

This learner thinks that once the organization or system can understand the causes and the behavior of violence crime within their neighborhood, then they will be able to add measures, step, or both to prevent this type of behavior within their communities/neighborhood and apply them skillfully. Therefore, this learner will explain the main tenets of the perceptions of violence within a community as it relates to public safety leadership, and explain the reasons behind this learner’s perception, and evaluate the credibility. We will also take a look at what types of challenges the public safety field has when dealing with violence’s. Once that is addressed we will evaluate whether the personal perceptions of violence has changed, or is it reinforced, and try to gain an understanding how one might address ethical implications of perceptions of violence for professional practice in the public safety field which will help us when ethical or unethical matter come up within our organization. That when it does we will have some form of guide to follow to address these issues.

Situational crime prevention grounded in the reasonable choice perspective in that it controls no less than one segment to change the open entryways for wrongdoing and in this manner change the essential authority of potential blameworthy gatherings. To the extent standard activities theory, situational wrongdoing abhorrence can be viewed as the parts by which controllers (i.e., guards, put chiefs, and handlers) dishearten wrongdoing. Over the span of late decades, pros and criminal value specialists alike have used the strategies for situational crime prevention to fathom wrongdoing issues, make interventions, and survey the reasonability of those mediations. Situational wrongdoing foresight was proposed to address uncommonly specific sorts of wrongdoing by efficiently controlling or managing the incite condition in as enduring a way as could be normal considering the present situation, with the explanation behind decreasing open entryways for wrongdoing as observed by a broad assortment of blameworthy gatherings. Situational crime prevention strategies focus on sufficiently changing open door structures of a particular wrongdoing by growing the undertakings, extending the threats, diminishing the prizes, reducing inductions, and removing pardons. All finished, situational crime prevention techniques change the event decision by modifying the liable party's impression of a specific criminal open entryway. Regardless, it should be seen that a blameworthy gathering's

Crime prevention programs can be differentiated through examining the classifications applied to these programs and policies. Crime prevention activities can be divided into three categories: (1) primary; (2) secondary; and (3) tertiary. (Welsh and Farrington, 2010, p.2) Primary prevention of crime requires that the improvement of the general well-being of individuals and communities be measured while secondary prevention emphasizes children and youth at-risk for becoming offenders of victims of crime while tertiary prevention includes "measures directed towards those who have already been involved with crime or victimization." (Welsh and Farrington, 2010, p.2)

Situational crime prevention theory has to components; 1) reducing the opportunities needed for the commission of crime, and 2) increasing the likelihood of getting caught. Oscar Newman’s book, Defensible: Crime Prevention Through Urban Design centered around urban development,

The basic research methods and data analysis is the foundation in policing. Although they do not stop or eliminate crime, it gives the agency data to identify problem areas. This information is vital when gathering data for crime statistics in areas where the crime rate is high. There are certain questions that law enforcement agency must ask when they are attempting to identify problem areas (Blevins, 2013). Police departments have to address the issues and must answer specific questions that are geared toward the five W’s which include who, what, why, when, and where. These questions stem from what type of crimes are being committed? Who are the crimes being against and who are committing the crime? What is known about the people committing

Criminality and victimization are affected by globalization; the rapid growth of urbanization; and economic recessions which reinforce concerns about safety and security. Governments have a key role in developing overall policies, and in promoting, coordinating and supporting crime prevention. On the other hand, personnel with different skills and roles in crime prevention, whether police officers, judges and prosecutors, probation officers, social workers, health service, researchers, civil society organizations and communities, all play an important role in crime prevention project development and implementation (Shaw, et al, 2010, p.xx).

According to statistical analysis, neighborhood crime programs are effective in reducing criminal activities. The data show a crime reduction effect of 16 to 26 percent National crime prevention council. (2012). The popularity of the neighborhood programs has continued to increase over time with about 41 percent of Americans estimated to be living in communities covered with neighborhood watch. From the report, this was the biggest form of organized crime deterrent program in United States (Bennett, Holloway, & Farrington, 2008).

Crime is a complicated study that police forces have engaged in more in recent decades to determine the best methods for managing its occurrence. Methods of management run the gamut from old fashioned relational policing in which the officer gets to know a certain group of people intimately by walking a prescribed route through neighborhoods, to the much more modern idea of containing crime by using different technological and scientific methods. The main issue with the different modes of crime management is that they are all effective to a certain degree, but it is difficult to determine to what extent. There have been studies conducted to see what is the most effective means of minimizing crime, but the general finding is that it is largely dependent on time and location. No one method has been gauged to be completely successful, so it is difficult to know which one to use.

I would have to agree with situational crime prevention theory that crime can be prevented or at least limited if people would routinely change their activities approach criminality. In my opinion, an individual’s everyday routine habit, such as leaving their vehicle doors and homes unlocked gives an opportunity for criminals to commit crimes presented by the physical environment. (Bohm & Vogel, 2011) “ The situational crime prevention theory expresses reducing the physical opportunities needed to commit a crime and increasing the risk of being caught” (Bohm & Vogel, 2011, p.76). The presumption of the situational crime concept relies on the hypothesis that more opportunities lead to more crime, simple crimes attract more offenders, and such existence of easy opportunities makes possible for a life of crime.

Crime prevention embodies a range of volatile social issues. These issues encompass public safety, mass media response, and political strategies which induce intense public debate and criticism, especially during an age in which the world is engaged in a “war on crime”. Given the role of policy makers in crime prevention, effective strategies are hinged on a consideration of all these issues rather than singular measures focused on isolated strategies. This facet of policy implantation is attracting growing attention as a viable source of crime prevention substituting traditional criminal justice mechanics. In fact, a significant fragment of criminological literature is receding from a dependence on criminal justice

The truth about crime prevention is more complicated –less utopian than some liberals would like, but far more promising than conservatives will admit. Prevention can work and that it can be far less costly, in every sense, than continuing to rely on incarceration as out first defense against violent crimes. Instead of simply insisting that prevention is better than incarceration, then, we need to pinpoint more clearly what kinds of prevention work—and why some programs work and others do not, the most encouraging efforts share important characteristics; there are reasons why they work, whether the ‘target' population is abusive families, vulnerable teens, or serious juvenile offenders who've already broken the law. Likewise, there are

Businesses that use a cash drawer, can be particularly susceptible to employee theft. Cash is always a higher temptation because it is easy to take and easy to hide and difficult for employers to trace. Still, there are quite a few processes that can be put into place to dissuade employees from stealing and from the business. A few options include: