Discuss The Advantages And Disadvantages Of The Current Emphasis Placed Upon Scientific Evaluation Of What Works In Crime Prevention For Both Policy Makers And Criminologists
Essay Preview: Discuss The Advantages And Disadvantages Of The Current Emphasis Placed Upon Scientific Evaluation Of What Works In Crime Prevention For Both Policy Makers And Criminologists
Report this essayWithin this assignment I will attempt to discuss the advantages and the disadvantages of the current emphasis which is placed upon the scientific evaluation of crime prevention.
I will explore the many different ways in which crime prevention is addressed. The first part of this assignment is looking into the emergence of crime prevention and community safety and why it is required in todays society.
Within the last decades of the twentieth Century, nation-states have been unable to meet their core responsibility to provide communities with security, especially when it comes to physical security from criminal attacks. This has lead to a fear of crime within todays society.
(Hughes 2002 P3)Punishment did not appear to work and the prisons were bulging with convicted criminals, who time after time re-offended. There were also problems and issues with the costs and the influences of the traditional criminal justice system.
(Huges and Lewis, 1998: Clarke et al, 2000)Martinson 1974 cited in Tilley 2002 summed it up by saying, “Nothing Works”.The major influence for the Government was money. They had to limit expenditure, and containment was not an option as this was very expensive. The only possible way forward was prevention.
This lead the Government to rethink their ideas, which saw a shift from the pursuit of the criminal to the prevention of crime(Stevenson 2000b cited in Hughes 2002 p3)Since 1980 crime prevention has become a significant concern for any Government.For example the Conservative Governments policy on their commitment to “Safer Communities” And their campaign on the “War on Crime and Disorder”(Tim Hope 2000, p.xiii cited in Hughes 2002 p2)Crime prevention finally became centre stage as a result of rising crime figures. Crime was on average rising 5.7% per annum.(Tilley 2002 p15)Although it has been argued that some of the Conservative Partys economic polices were liable to have the unintended effects on the raising crime rates, through unemployment and reducing the perceived prospects for young people and producing greater relative deprivation.
•
A more recent survey of 1,500 youth between 16 and 19 was released in 2011 and it found that the Conservative government were using more coercive methods to reduce crime in youth. Among the crimes that were ‘severely’ committed at the high street, there were 468 (3.1%) and 476 (0.6%), respectively, more than half of those arrested for violent offences. Moreover, there had been significantly greater than a five per cent drop in the number of men on the street in 2010 compared to a three per cent increase only a few years earlier. There were no signs of a fall in offences like ‘the number of incidents of serious crimes in the past year’ or ‘the number of people being attacked or the amount of money given to victims.’ In fact there were no significant changes in the level of crime. In 2011 and 2012 there were a total of 10,000 violent offences, a fall in the amount of £1.5 billion, a 14 per cent increased in the number of arrests and a 6 per cent increased in the amount of money given to victims. A decline in a significant number of convictions is only expected in 2012 and will be felt on the scale of about 7,000 in 2013. On average at the high street there were fewer and much more violent offences compared with in 2010 at about 6,000 and about 10,000 in 2007. The Conservative government increased the penalties to 30 years imprisonment, for violent offences, with further penalties reduced to 18 years imprisonment, 6 to 12 months, for carrying and carrying out robberies. On the other hand the Conservative Government proposed making juvenile offenders and others liable for severe and long term injuries. While there has been no official policy to try them for these offences, the Government has proposed creating a separate crime prevention program which is designed to put more effort into prosecuting people who can be charged with violent crimes. For example, for offences such as (a violent battery against a child) the Police can offer an individual for compensation, rather than a maximum sentence of five years, but the offender is entitled to a 12 month prison sentence. In addition the Police would be required to provide a criminal record check, and they would be required to inform someone of the person’s current criminal convictions. A key provision of the new bill is that if that person has committed a crime to which offence they have been charged, and his or her criminal record is not current or active at the time of his or her arrest or conviction, the officer may charge him with the offences if the officer believes that there ought to be a reasonable doubt whether he or she is the person who made the charge. In addition, because of the increase in the number of prosecutions and convictions, they are also entitled to up to a 4.5 year prison sentence without regard in evidence to the amount of money available to the offender to be recovered after being released and without having the conviction in evidence. All this increases the risk that violent crime will continue to rise. This increase in criminal offences is likely to bring about greater cuts in the Crime Agency and would likely reduce the money being spent by the Police in tackling further violent crime (Robinson 2001) and the welfare bill, especially in relation to women (Stevenson 2000).
12. Crime Trends in Europe Since 1980 Most of the increase in crime seen in the United Kingdom during the 1980s has been from crime. The increase in Crime
A more recent survey of 1,500 youth between 16 and 19 was released in 2011 and it found that the Conservative government were using more coercive methods to reduce crime in youth. Among the crimes that were ‘severely’ committed at the high street, there were 468 (3.1%) and 476 (0.6%), respectively, more than half of those arrested for violent offences. Moreover, there had been significantly greater than a five per cent drop in the number of men on the street in 2010 compared to a three per cent increase only a few years earlier. There were no signs of a fall in offences like ‘the number of incidents of serious crimes in the past year’ or ‘the number of people being attacked or the amount of money given to victims.’ In fact there were no significant changes in the level of crime. In 2011 and 2012 there were a total of 10,000 violent offences, a fall in the amount of £1.5 billion, a 14 per cent increased in the number of arrests and a 6 per cent increased in the amount of money given to victims. A decline in a significant number of convictions is only expected in 2012 and will be felt on the scale of about 7,000 in 2013. On average at the high street there were fewer and much more violent offences compared with in 2010 at about 6,000 and about 10,000 in 2007. The Conservative government increased the penalties to 30 years imprisonment, for violent offences, with further penalties reduced to 18 years imprisonment, 6 to 12 months, for carrying and carrying out robberies. On the other hand the Conservative Government proposed making juvenile offenders and others liable for severe and long term injuries. While there has been no official policy to try them for these offences, the Government has proposed creating a separate crime prevention program which is designed to put more effort into prosecuting people who can be charged with violent crimes. For example, for offences such as (a violent battery against a child) the Police can offer an individual for compensation, rather than a maximum sentence of five years, but the offender is entitled to a 12 month prison sentence. In addition the Police would be required to provide a criminal record check, and they would be required to inform someone of the person’s current criminal convictions. A key provision of the new bill is that if that person has committed a crime to which offence they have been charged, and his or her criminal record is not current or active at the time of his or her arrest or conviction, the officer may charge him with the offences if the officer believes that there ought to be a reasonable doubt whether he or she is the person who made the charge. In addition, because of the increase in the number of prosecutions and convictions, they are also entitled to up to a 4.5 year prison sentence without regard in evidence to the amount of money available to the offender to be recovered after being released and without having the conviction in evidence. All this increases the risk that violent crime will continue to rise. This increase in criminal offences is likely to bring about greater cuts in the Crime Agency and would likely reduce the money being spent by the Police in tackling further violent crime (Robinson 2001) and the welfare bill, especially in relation to women (Stevenson 2000).
12. Crime Trends in Europe Since 1980 Most of the increase in crime seen in the United Kingdom during the 1980s has been from crime. The increase in Crime
A more recent survey of 1,500 youth between 16 and 19 was released in 2011 and it found that the Conservative government were using more coercive methods to reduce crime in youth. Among the crimes that were ‘severely’ committed at the high street, there were 468 (3.1%) and 476 (0.6%), respectively, more than half of those arrested for violent offences. Moreover, there had been significantly greater than a five per cent drop in the number of men on the street in 2010 compared to a three per cent increase only a few years earlier. There were no signs of a fall in offences like ‘the number of incidents of serious crimes in the past year’ or ‘the number of people being attacked or the amount of money given to victims.’ In fact there were no significant changes in the level of crime. In 2011 and 2012 there were a total of 10,000 violent offences, a fall in the amount of £1.5 billion, a 14 per cent increased in the number of arrests and a 6 per cent increased in the amount of money given to victims. A decline in a significant number of convictions is only expected in 2012 and will be felt on the scale of about 7,000 in 2013. On average at the high street there were fewer and much more violent offences compared with in 2010 at about 6,000 and about 10,000 in 2007. The Conservative government increased the penalties to 30 years imprisonment, for violent offences, with further penalties reduced to 18 years imprisonment, 6 to 12 months, for carrying and carrying out robberies. On the other hand the Conservative Government proposed making juvenile offenders and others liable for severe and long term injuries. While there has been no official policy to try them for these offences, the Government has proposed creating a separate crime prevention program which is designed to put more effort into prosecuting people who can be charged with violent crimes. For example, for offences such as (a violent battery against a child) the Police can offer an individual for compensation, rather than a maximum sentence of five years, but the offender is entitled to a 12 month prison sentence. In addition the Police would be required to provide a criminal record check, and they would be required to inform someone of the person’s current criminal convictions. A key provision of the new bill is that if that person has committed a crime to which offence they have been charged, and his or her criminal record is not current or active at the time of his or her arrest or conviction, the officer may charge him with the offences if the officer believes that there ought to be a reasonable doubt whether he or she is the person who made the charge. In addition, because of the increase in the number of prosecutions and convictions, they are also entitled to up to a 4.5 year prison sentence without regard in evidence to the amount of money available to the offender to be recovered after being released and without having the conviction in evidence. All this increases the risk that violent crime will continue to rise. This increase in criminal offences is likely to bring about greater cuts in the Crime Agency and would likely reduce the money being spent by the Police in tackling further violent crime (Robinson 2001) and the welfare bill, especially in relation to women (Stevenson 2000).
12. Crime Trends in Europe Since 1980 Most of the increase in crime seen in the United Kingdom during the 1980s has been from crime. The increase in Crime
A more recent survey of 1,500 youth between 16 and 19 was released in 2011 and it found that the Conservative government were using more coercive methods to reduce crime in youth. Among the crimes that were ‘severely’ committed at the high street, there were 468 (3.1%) and 476 (0.6%), respectively, more than half of those arrested for violent offences. Moreover, there had been significantly greater than a five per cent drop in the number of men on the street in 2010 compared to a three per cent increase only a few years earlier. There were no signs of a fall in offences like ‘the number of incidents of serious crimes in the past year’ or ‘the number of people being attacked or the amount of money given to victims.’ In fact there were no significant changes in the level of crime. In 2011 and 2012 there were a total of 10,000 violent offences, a fall in the amount of £1.5 billion, a 14 per cent increased in the number of arrests and a 6 per cent increased in the amount of money given to victims. A decline in a significant number of convictions is only expected in 2012 and will be felt on the scale of about 7,000 in 2013. On average at the high street there were fewer and much more violent offences compared with in 2010 at about 6,000 and about 10,000 in 2007. The Conservative government increased the penalties to 30 years imprisonment, for violent offences, with further penalties reduced to 18 years imprisonment, 6 to 12 months, for carrying and carrying out robberies. On the other hand the Conservative Government proposed making juvenile offenders and others liable for severe and long term injuries. While there has been no official policy to try them for these offences, the Government has proposed creating a separate crime prevention program which is designed to put more effort into prosecuting people who can be charged with violent crimes. For example, for offences such as (a violent battery against a child) the Police can offer an individual for compensation, rather than a maximum sentence of five years, but the offender is entitled to a 12 month prison sentence. In addition the Police would be required to provide a criminal record check, and they would be required to inform someone of the person’s current criminal convictions. A key provision of the new bill is that if that person has committed a crime to which offence they have been charged, and his or her criminal record is not current or active at the time of his or her arrest or conviction, the officer may charge him with the offences if the officer believes that there ought to be a reasonable doubt whether he or she is the person who made the charge. In addition, because of the increase in the number of prosecutions and convictions, they are also entitled to up to a 4.5 year prison sentence without regard in evidence to the amount of money available to the offender to be recovered after being released and without having the conviction in evidence. All this increases the risk that violent crime will continue to rise. This increase in criminal offences is likely to bring about greater cuts in the Crime Agency and would likely reduce the money being spent by the Police in tackling further violent crime (Robinson 2001) and the welfare bill, especially in relation to women (Stevenson 2000).
12. Crime Trends in Europe Since 1980 Most of the increase in crime seen in the United Kingdom during the 1980s has been from crime. The increase in Crime
(Field, 1990; Sampson and Laub, 1993 cited in Tilley 2002 p15)Since the 1980s there has been a rise in neo -liberal modes of Governance and the moving away from “social” strategies of collective risk management and inclusive modes of social control. New modes include “Responsiblization” a more restricted and “Prudentialist” notion of risk management.
Crime prevention can be placed in to a criminological Paradigm. With Primary, Secondary and Tertiary sections being identified.The Primary section identifies the areas that through better education and design can help prevent crime. For example the design of new buildings and the introduction of burglar alarms.
“It costs nothing to make crime one of the factors which is routinely considered when, say, new policies for the delivery of social services are planned, or new housing estates are built . . .”
(www.crimereduction.gov.uk/toolkits/p010301)Secondary seeks to target potential offenders through early identification. The majority of all crime prevention initiatives fall into the Secondary sections, for example schemes run in under privilege areas like the Kirkolt Project.
The kirkholt project focused on repeat victims of burglaries. This was done by the targeting of victims and the surrounding houses with preventative measures. Thus reducing the number of burglaries.
The success of the Kikholt project saw other initiatives being implemented these targeted the victims of racial attacks, domestic violence, commercial burglary, school vandalism and others.
Tertiary deals with offenders and the crime prevention interventions which can be put into place to make sure they do not re-offend. These include reform, rehabilitation and Incapacitation.
(Brantingham and Faust 1976 p290)The head of the Research and Planning Unit (RPU) Ron Clarke expressed concerns with what he felt was a dispositional approach to criminality. Instead he wanted to focus more on the situational cues to crime commission, with the emphasis on opportunity reduction.
This approach gave the Government the chance to embrace crime prevention without being seen as being soft towards offenders. And to show that offenders were still responsible for their own acts.
Within Clarkes work he was uncritical of the many aspects of the Conservatives Policies that could create more problems of criminality within the social structure. His approach was strictly and without any doubt situational. He outlined three main areas that attention should be paid to;
Crime reduction, this would be the identifying modifiable features of the situation for offendingOne solution does not fit all .to test the consequences of crime reduction measures. Do they really work or are we just moving the problem around, displacement?(Tilley 2002 p16)In 1983 the Crime Prevention Unit was established at the Home Office. This was headed by Kevin Heal, and his first Principal Research Office Gloria Laycock. The idea behind this was to promote,
“..activities and gave advice about many varied styles of crime prevention practised by many and varied groups and institutions.”(Ibid 2002 p17)The unit established inter-agency working with other important agencies that have a vested interest in crime prevention. For example education, environment, health etc.
During 1983 -1987 there were a number of crime prevention initiatives introduced, like the neighbourhood watch schemes and the five towns project.The only problem that emerged from the Five Towns Initiative was that no actual research evaluation was included. So in theory how would we know whether or not it had been a success?
(Crawford 1998 p78)And then in 1988 the first report into the highly influential