Crime Prevention Is A Rather Elastic Term

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.

In crime, there are two types of prevention, Situational and Social crime prevention. Situational crime prevention makes it harder for people to commit crimes without being caught. Situational strategies of crime prevention may include CCTV cameras which are great for proving that a person committed the crime but do not stop the crime completely. Soial crime prevention strategies include putting children into schooling to prevent them from living on the street and committing

Situational and social approaches to crime prevention are both proactive where they anticipate and prevent crime but are different in the way on how crime is prevented, each having their own strength and weaknesses. In this essay, I will briefly talk about what is crime prevention and how situational and social approaches are derived, followed by providing a critical comparison of situational and social approaches by first explaining what is situational and social approaches to crime prevention, the differences between the two approaches, their strength and weaknesses and lastly, to show understanding that besides situational and social approach, there are other approaches to crime prevention.

To begin with, criminal justice is a system that is designed to maintain social control, which means it is a necessary aspect of every society since “Laws are the conditions under which independent and isolated men united to form a society” (Beccaria, 1764: 16). In order words, crime control deals with the methods that are taken by a society to reduce its crime. As a matter of fact, there are various crime control strategies from community policing to risk assessments. In addition to the different tactics for controlling crime, there are several theories that not only attempt to explain the causes of crime, but also outline different ways to handle offenders; for example, deterrence, rehabilitation, and even retribution.

Mentioned the impact on the victim, society and communities and the transport police but could do with more detail and facts or references statistics.

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

Reiman and Leighton comprehensively begin the discussion of crime by outlining their main objectives, establishing the immediate problems surrounding crime control in America, and setting the groundwork for their premises. In recent years, the crime rate in the United States has declined. This decline is generally attributed to ‘tough on crime’ and mass incarceration policies, but the authors are quick to assert that other variables--economic, social-- are greater contributors to this decrease, with the ‘imprisonment binge’ only actually contributing a small amount to the decline. These strict crime enforcement policies might have a small impact on crime prevention, but criminologists are concerned with the potential effect such policies might have on criminal justice procedures--promoting profit rather than safety-- and endangering citizens’ rights (particularly those considered minorities).

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.

Just by reading your local newspaper, you will find that a number of crimes happen in your own community. Recently, in a local community in Virginia a 25-year-old man was charged with murder and robbery, when he shot a 55-year-old man who was out walking his dog around 9:40 PM. Police report that the victim was approached by the suspect, shot the victim and robbed him and then fled the scene. Police were given the description of the man they saw fleeing the scene. It was also reported that the gun used in this crime was stolen from a car in a local neighborhood (Aric Alexander Smith). Not all crimes are preventable; sometimes criminals are determined to commit a crime for one reason or another. In this case, it may not have

The concepts of the rational choice theory. Within the rational choice theory you have subcategories. General deterrence, specific deterrence, and Incapacitation. General deterrence is the idea that crime can be controlled by increasing the real or perceived threat of punishment. According to the general deterrence theory not only is the likely hood of punishment a deterrent but also the sentence will be harsh. This should in theory lessen criminal activity. So basically the certainty of punishment combined with the swiftness and severity of punishment will be the contributing factors of reducing crime rates.

Following this study, there were two derivatives of the Chicago School theory (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). The first is the situational crime prevention theory, this theory examines the opportunities to commit a crime which is attributed to Robert Clarke. The theory placed an emphasis on poorly designed structures, moreover, the

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).

According to Paternoster and Bachman (2001), “the rational choice perspective was explicitly developed to assist policy thinking,” aside from, “every act of crime involves some choice by the offender and that he or she can be held responsible for that choice and can legitimately be punished (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001, p. 34).” A successful example of the rational choice theory illustrates as Paternoster and Bachman (2001) points out, “that studies of the victims of serial killers and rapists through Rossmo’s (1995) geographic profiling, which is bases on findings from environmental criminology (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1991) in that most crime is committed within activity spaces of offenders

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

Crime exists everywhere in the world – in rural and urban areas in many countries, in the East and West, and among all types of people. This has led many government officials, especially those in urban areas, to focus largely on the reduction of crime among their respective constituencies and has led others to speculate on the factors that influence the amount of crime and how those factors can be controlled. Crime has been around since man and there is no doubt that it will continue to be around, until there is an existence of a perfect world. But for now, we