Something as small as a patio chair or a bike can be targets all the way to the contents of a cash register if that is how motivated the offender is. These motivations directed towards suitable targets are not always spontaneous but can be methodically planned out in advance if the offender so desires. In order to be a suitable target someone or something has to be vulnerable. That vulnerability gives the offender the motivation they need in order to commit a crime. Which is why, according to Routine Activities Theory, both of these elements have to be present. If the offender is motivated by any means to commit a crime but is not confident in the vulnerability of the would-be victim theoretically a crime will not occur. However, if a motivated offender finds a suitable target and intends to exploit their vulnerability what could deter them from committing a crime? That question brings us to our final element, element number three. The last element is the lack of a capable guardian. Without a guardian capable enough effectively deter any potential offenders then there would be nothing to stop anyone motivated enough to commit crimes. Guardians are
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.
There is the crime pattern theory that explains how individual’s routine activities affect their knowledge of criminal activities and the above leads to spatial concentrations of crimes in some places. Individual developmental maps determine their regular activities and spaces that are represented as topological features. The routine operations act as nodes or sites where people spend time most of time and criminals will move there depending on the level of security anticipated. The offenders will decide where to attack depending on how well they understand the routine activities of their clients (Carlo, and Marie-Noële, 15). On that note, it is not possible for criminals to just attack a place without evaluating the dynamics of the
Hot spots policing revolves around the idea that crime is focused in small problem locales, and that crime can be more efficiently reduced if police concentrate their efforts on those smaller areas (Papachristos & Hureau, 2012). By stopping crime in smaller areas, it is easy to prevent it from growing in larger parts. Activities like patrolling high crime areas and presence of law enforcement officers in the area are performed will reduced crime (Hot spots policing, 2017, What is the focus of the intervention?). “When authors calculated the overall
Beginning in the 1990’s, crime numbers began to fall and and there are many explanations for the decrease in crime. To begin, the police began using new catching approaches by changing aspects such as an increase in enforcement of nuisance activities. Additionally, they began to invest in their technology and started to identify crime hot spots. The hot spots are where crime is found most often but never recognized.
Summary: Chapter 4: Geoprofilers assist officers with discovering the location of where a criminal resides or the locations they may be going to find their victims. Geoprofiler use two methods to investigate; geographic mapping and /or geographic profiling. Geographic mapping provides a visual map of places that have the highest rates of multiple crimes, drug selling or victimization. Geographic profiling is associated with determining the spatial movements of a serial offender. There are two theories for Geographic profiling; routine activity theory and rational choice theory, both were developed by Paul and Patricia Brantingham.
The integrated patrol strategy brings a community-oriented concept of supervising into play, which law-breaking prevention and reduction efforts are functional on a broader scale, rather than concentrating specifically on a group of people within a particular location. The integrated patrol strategy, also calls for more improved fact-finding processes and data distribution between organizations to help in effective solutions to resolving crimes and chase tendencies and configurations, as well as, the potential to toughen contacts between agencies at all levels. Paralleled to the traditional enforcement strategy which reacted to crime after the fact, and only relating different emphases to certain situations,
In order to fully understand hot spots, you must first understand existing research that is found in scholarly articles. Here are three articles that explain hot spots and their evaluation plan, Policing Crime and Disorder Hot Spots: A Randomized Controlled Trail, Hot Spots Policing with Actively Monitored CCTV Camera and The Effects of Directed Patrol and the last article is Self-Initialed Enforcement on Firearm Violence a Randomized Controlled Study of Hot Spots Policing. Each article measures and operationalizes their own individual’s outcome, for example the first article is dealing with physical and social disorder as
In order for crime to arise according to routine activities theory, there are three necessary components: motivated offenders, suitable targets and the absence of capable guardians. Motivated offenders are simply those who possess the drive to commit a crime. Suitable targets are those items or victims who possess enough attractiveness to a motivated offender to incite crime. Capable guardians are those whose company can protect suitable targets (Cohen & Felson, 1979, p. 588-608). In the overlap where there is a motivated offender, suitable target, and absence of capable guardians, criminal activity will likely conspire (Walsh & Jorgensen, 2018, p. 87-88).
There are three elements of the Routine Activities Theory they are, Motivated offenders, suitable targets, and the lack of capable guardianship. The motivated offender’s element is when an individual routine brings them into contact with a motivated offender, the
Mason has had a difficult upbringing, it has not been a typical or easy life for him. With Mason’s dad not in the picture and his mother dying at age 11 there were very few people that Mason could turn to. Mason living with his aunt and not really seeing her often, who could he turn too when he needed reassurance, comfort or just companionship? According to Cohen and Felson’s routine activity theory has three main factors that must be met which are a motivated offender, a suitable target, and as well as the absence of a capable guardian. This theory focuses on that if there is an opportunity for crime that a motivated offender will seize the opportunity to do so. In the case of Mason that is exactly what he did.
The hypothesis claims that “changes in routine activity patterns can influence crime rates by affecting the convergence in space and time of the three minimal elements of direct-contact predatory violations” and that “the absence of any one of these elements [motivated offenders, suitable targets, and the absence of suitable guardians against a violation] is sufficient to prevent the successful completion of a direct-contact predatory crime.” (1) The authors claim that controls for routine activities, therefore, are essential to maintaining order and keeping the crime rate down. They also note that and understanding of temporal and spatial relationships are key to understanding the changing crime rates. Illegal acts are events that occur in space and time and involve specific persons and/or objects. The spatio-temporal organization of everyday activities is what allows criminals to turn their criminal ideas into reality. Dispersion of activities away from the household has led to a change in the spatio-temporal relationship that increases the opportunity for crime, which in turn increases the crime rate itself.