Category: Crime

Who is involved?

Co-founder Lozanne and Joe Wamback they partnered with York University to provide the best research environment for compassionate and understanding future all Canadian. We have Psychology professor Jennifer Connolly who is the immediate past director of the Larmash center for research on violence and conflict resolution. Lamarsh center act as an intermediate of clinicians and the research program to provide new insight into effective counseling. Stephen Fleming is a member of the Canadian Crime Victim Foundation (CCVF) advisory committee. Linda Hyatt is a director-treasurer. Directors at large include Julian Fantino who is the commissioner of emergency management, Senator Consiglio Di Nino, Senator Raynell Andreychuk, Ben Soave, Chief Supt. RCMP, Ret, Chief Armand LaBarge, York Regional Police, President, Ontario Assoc. of Chiefs of Police. Advisors are Priscilla de Villiers, Cst. Karen Burnell RCMP (Ret.), Dr. Marty McKay, and Sean McKay.

How many people?

Seventeen people are involved.

Do they work with other NGOs?

Yes, they work with other NGOs across Canada example is NOVA (national organization for victim assistance).

When was it founded?

Joe and Lozanne Wamback founded the Canadian Crime Victim Foundation (CCVF) during the summer of 2002. The couple formed the foundation after a 1999 near-fatal assault on their 15-year-old son Jonathan, who is currently studying English and French at York. They worked hard to overcome the imbalances in Canada’s criminal justice system and provide for victims of crime. Throughout that period, Joe drafted basic human rights for victims of crime and his objectives for change. In late 2002, the Canadian Crime Victim Foundation (CCVF) held its initial meeting, appointed a Board of Directors, and subsequently applied with the Federal Charities directorate to create a national organization dedicated to crime victim support and positive change to victim services and legislation. On December 16, 2002, the Canadian Crime Victim Foundation (CCVF) received approval as a Canadian Registered Charity.

Where do they operate?

It is based in Canada and it works with all levels of NGOs and Government agencies to implement balanced justice. What are their goals? Is to promote “client-centered” victim service, strive to remove the linguistic, financial, physical, social, or cultural barrier. To provide more access those are equal for people of all abilities and create equal rights for victims of crime in Canada.

What are they seeking to achieve?

To educate all service providers who interface with victims of violent crime, including police officers, justice system personnel, victim service providers, and front line staff on victims’ needs, both immediate and long term. This education entails:

• support to police, social services, medical services.
• support the volunteer community at large, to proactively address the special needs of the victims in the development and delivery of victim services.
• Participate in the development of programs and services for the assistance of crime victims both at the provincial and federal levels of government as well as assist and participate in government investigative committees.
• Assist in providing equal educational opportunities to victims of violent crime.
• provincial and federal governments including legislators in the development of laws, policies, and programs, assisting victims of crime in Canada.
• Research, to provide reliable competent data on the status of crime victims, their needs, long term viability of programs, necessary programs to assist victims of violent crime.
• Assist in providing equal educational opportunities to victims of violent crime.
• create awareness, including general public awareness of victimology and the shortfalls within victim services with a focus on proactive, positive change for victims of violent crime.

Assist all levels of governments, public add private service providers with a clear understanding of protections needed and services required by those victimized by violent crime and that they are heard at public and private hearings on issues about legislative change and victim assistance.

Create awareness; including general public awareness of victimology and the shortfalls within victim services with a focus on proactive, positive change for victims of violent crime. They conduct research, to provide reliable competent data on the status of crime victims, their needs, long term viability of programs, necessary programs to assist victims of violent crime. They assist in providing equal educational opportunities to victims of violent crime. To promote and increase the knowledge of the Canadian and the United Nations Statements and Principles of Justice of Crime and the impact of victimization and the special needs of crime victims. Establish awareness of the rights of crime victims. Present, promote, and encourage anti-bullying initiatives among the youth all over Canada.

What is their mission statement?

Their mission is to “support, empower and provide resources to victims of crime and to effect positive change in addition to providing service to victims in Canada”( Canadian Crime Victim Foundation,2010,p.2). What do they do? They cooperate and partnership with public based services and programs in providing to victims. They educate police officers and front-line staff on victims’ needs. According to Canadian Crime Victim Foundation(2010),” they help the police (with victim consent) and the officer in charge with immediate crisis intervention, counseling, follow-up, assistance with criminal injuries compensation, trial assistance, minimization of re-victimization and referrals to supportive agencies”(1). They focus on assisting in or creating fundraising and/or awareness campaigns and programs to assist crime victims in their community and province. Working with the victims, establishing anti-violence, and anti-bullying programs at schools. Volunteering to assist those in need, specifically crime (bullying) victims, families, and siblings. Awarding scholarship to qualifying students who have demonstrated leadership in creating or participating in anti-violence or anti-bullying initiatives, have challenged the status quo and have shown a consistent, positive contribution to the welfare of staff and students and their community.

How are they active?

They are active through; creating community awareness & education, Supporting and counseling victims in Canada, Crime scene aftermath management, cooperation and partnership with public based services and programs. Educating police officers and frontline staff on victims’ needs.

How are they structured?

Directors head it and Officers Linda Hyatt MBA, CA – Director and Treasurer (Markham, Ontario). Linda is a principal with Ernst and Young and the Director of Process and Technology for the Tax Operations group within the firm. Directors-at-Large; they include Julian Fantino who is the commissioner of Emergency Management, Senator Consiglio Di Nino, Senator Raynell Andreychuk, Ben Soave, Chief Supt. RCMP, Ret, Chief Armand LaBarge, York Regional Police, President and Ontario Assoc. of Chiefs of Police. There are four advisors; Priscilla de Villiers, Dr. Marty McKay, Cst. Karen Burnell RCMP (Ret.) and Sean McKay. Trustees: John Jonson, LLB, Partner, Johnson Clonfero.Bruce Davis Chief of Police, South Simco Police Service. Speakers Bureau: Joe Wamback co-founder and chair, Lozzaine Wamback-co-founder, and victim support chair. Jonathan Wambalk is an anti-bullying advocate; Maria Jone is the survivor and child advocate.

Reference

Canadian Crime Victim Foundation. (2010).In the news. Web.

Introduction

This article is jointly authored by scholars with a special interest in social research. The article addresses the issue of problem-oriented policing. According to the authors, past research has indicated that problem-oriented research yields good results.

However, very few studies measure the actual impact of problem-oriented policing in controlling violent street crime. In this study funded by the National Institute of Justice, the researchers investigate the impact of problem-oriented policing in Jersey City. The authors of this article recognize that problem-oriented policing is upheld by both stakeholders and academics. This study focuses on areas with concentrated crime activity. In addition, the authors state that problem-oriented policing could be effective in controlling small crimes such as drug peddling, burglaries, and prostitution.

Main Body

According to this article, the purpose of this study is to generate more information on the effectiveness of problem-oriented interventions in controlling violent places. The research employs a block-randomized experimental design. This experimental design is used together with qualitative data to investigate the impact of problem-oriented policing on New Jersey’s prime locations. The authors begin by conducting a literature review on crime-control strategies.

The study then describes these strategies in relation to crime hot spots. The article then provides a discussion of the reviewed literature as well as its evaluation. The authors then conduct a statistical study on crime activities in Jersey City, New Jersey. This methodology is appropriate in measuring the effectiveness of problem-oriented policing.

The article emphasizes the importance of location when addressing problem-oriented policing. The reviewed literature reflects on the importance of “place” in relation to this study. The reviewed literature also focuses on the issues of neighborhoods and crime prevalence. These issues are often exemplified by abandoned or poorly lit streets. The reviewed literature also examines the factors that promote crime in certain areas while adjacent areas remain virtually crime-free. In addition, attention was paid to studies that focus on crime clustering. Crime and criminal activities are also dependent on social and economic activities.

The sampling of this study also focused on studies that address the means of violence control in problem areas. This sampling was quite a substantial managing to cover research that spanned over a period of ten years. One of the most significant studies used in this literature review is a previous study focusing on the Jersey City Police Department. The reason this particular study has a big impact on the article is that it provides similarities in population, location, and crime statistics in New Jersey.

The article uses a randomized experimental design. This design was effective because the study incorporated 12 out of 28 randomly paired locations (Braga et al., 1999). This allocation procedure accurately represents a random experimental design. The qualitative assessment of data used in this experiment is well laid out and easy to synthesize. The article aligns each of these 12 pairs of locations with their most prevalent problems. In addition, the prevalent crime is correlated with the dynamics of the place and its physical characteristics. This makes this study reliable and easy to substantiate. The evidence offered is very relevant in relation to the study’s main objective.

The study makes use of control groups in its research design. In each of the 12 pairs of places picked for the study, one place serves as a control area while the other one serves as a treatment area. This design ensures that the study identifies the actual impact of employing problem-oriented policing in a particular area. The control places make it possible to measure the impact of using problem-oriented policing in a certain area. To reduce the instances of threats to internal data validity, the officers in the Violent Crimes Unit only engaged community members through informers.

The statistical analysis of the study’s data does not focus on the impact of any specific problem-oriented initiative. However, the analysis focuses on the impact of the entire problem-oriented policing approach. Therefore, the evaluation does not dwell on the varying effects of the implemented initiatives. This statistical analysis used the concepts of likelihood ratio, parameter estimates, and deviance analysis (Braga et al., 1999).

The results of the analysis indicate that places where problem-oriented policing was implemented witnessed considerable gains. The authors cite several statistics to prove the paper’s hypothesis. This analysis structure leaves very little room for error because the authors are able to account for data validity by taking into consideration internal and external validity issues.

Conclusion

The article concludes by stating that the Jersey City Police Department recognizes the benefits of the problem-oriented policing program. The authors are also quick to note that crime was not displaced but reduced in the studied areas. The authors acknowledge that for the gains of this program to be sustained, a lot of effort is required from the police department. The authors’ conclusion is an accurate summation of the study. However, the authors fail to focus on the implications their findings have on a national level.

I found this article to be an insightful study on community policing. The authors are able to present an almost-accurate study on problem-oriented policing. The study’s simplicity ensures that the authors do not deviate from the subject matter. I would recommend this article to all the stakeholders of policing matters. The amount of effort described to the stakeholders in this study is a lot to handle but the results are encouraging.

Reference

Braga, A. A., Weisburd, D. L., Waring, E. J., Mazerolle, L. G., Spelman, W. & Gajewski, F. (1999). Problem‐oriented policing in violent crime places: a randomized controlled experiment. Criminology, 37(3), 541-580.

Causes of organized crime

In order to assess what are the causes of organized crime, we have to begin by assessing what organized crime is. But here we encounter the first big problem. As to date, there is no clear and widely accepted definition of organized crime. There have been several attempts to try and define organized crime but all of these attempts have not produced the desired consensus. Nevertheless, there have been positive steps made in this regard. Among investigators, there is a rising consensus on what constitutes an organized crime. They have determined four pillars, principles, around which a criminal organization is formed. Understanding these four principles will enable us to understand the roots of organized crime. These principles are that the criminal organization first of all should be a continuing organization, one that operates rationally and for-profits, it does this through the use of threats and force if necessary and, finally, it uses corruption as a means of maintaining immunity from law enforcement.

In fact, it would seem that a criminal organization operates as a business firm. Many authors would agree that actually, a criminal organization is a criminal enterprise that rationally works for profits from illicit activities. Furthermore, the criminal organization achieves these results by exploiting criminal opportunities which are:

• Those that provide easy access to illegal funds without creating high risks;
• And those formed by motivated offenders;

Thus, we can conclude that the causes of organized crime can be attributed to the opportunities presented to conduct illegal activities and benefit from those more than you would benefit from conducting legal activities.

Another source is the efforts that criminals themselves make to expand and enhance their profit activities. They realize that organizing and working in groups can achieve better results than what they can achieve alone.

Difference between people smuggling and human trafficking

People smuggling cannot be defined only as the crossing of the borders from one country to the other without having a visa or permission. Smuggling is also to move goods, products, from one country to the other without paying custom taxes or registering them. This is a big difference with human trafficking.

Human trafficking is to move people to another country and sell them as they were products, not human beings. In fact, most of the people that are trafficked are used for cheap labor resources or for sex labor slaves. Horribly they are even used for human organs trading. That is the most horrible aspect.

So, the difference between smuggling and human trafficking is very big. Nevertheless, they have in common that criminal organizations are those who are behind both of them. The criminal organization makes smuggling to introduce in the market of another country products which may be illegal and which will make them lots of profits. Drug smuggling is a good example of this. Or they can smuggle legal products but introduce them in the other country without paying custom taxes and fees so that they can sell them cheaper and profit more.

For human trafficking criminal organizations are famous for trafficking young girls and using them for sex slavery. This is far worse than smuggling products because these are human beings we are talking about…

The phenomenon of security is highly cherished in the modern world due to the existence of high volumes of information, which require protection and continuous monitoring. Despite the clear understanding of the term security, the overall aspect is complex and implies the need for a sufficient theoretical background to determine the functioning of this aspect. In the context of this essay, the correlation of security with ‘broken windows’ and situational crime prevention theories will be described to highlight the complexity of the term. In the end, the conclusions are drawn to summarize the key findings and determine the importance of the definitions to the understanding of the conceptualization of security.

In this case, ‘broken windows’ theory implies that the prevention of the insignificant crimes contributes to the decline in the rise in wrongful and dangerous behavior in the community while “tolerating minor physical or social disorder in the neighborhood encourages serious violent crimes” (Greene, 2007, p. 112). It states that the initial and potential cultivator of the problem has to be diminished to avoid the development of adverse consequences in society.

Meanwhile, the primary function of security is to ensure safety and prevent crime from occurring (Purpura, 2013; Chen et al., 2009). It could be said that the conceptualization of ‘broken windows’ theory interferes with the initial goals of security while emphasizing that security is an original solution to the issue. Meanwhile, its scope has to be detailed to eliminate the occurrence of insignificant disorders and crimes and increase the overall safety of the community.

In turn, the situational crime prevention theory has to be described to understand its correlation with the principles of security, and it implies modifying the overall attitude about the commitment of the crime while underlying its wrongful actions and lacking the beneficial outcomes for the potential criminal (Gilling, 2005; Fisher & Lab, 2010). It could be stated that this approach views the improvement of the prevention strategy from the psychological and social viewpoints and highlights the importance of social opinion in the decision-making of the individual.

In this case, this framework has a connection with the ‘broken windows’ theory since it reflects the need to address the core of the problem, but the functioning methods tend to rely on different aspects such as social behavior and attitudes. In this case, the described theory complies with the initial intention of security and addresses the need to pay vehement attention to the common societal beliefs and values.

In the end, it remains apparent that the described theories have a reflection on the functioning and conceptualization of security while depicting the various approach to prevent crime. In this case, the ‘broken windows’ theory determines that the security manager has to pay vehement attention to details, as the insignificant disorders could be regarded as the primary drivers for the occurrence of the dangerous crimes.

In turn, the situational crime prevention theory supports the initial concepts of the ‘broken windows’ approach, but it has a tendency to prioritize the significance of the attitudes of the individuals to create a perception of a crime as a wrongful act. A combination of these theories highlights the aspects of security, which have to be monitored and improved on a regular basis to upsurge the overall level of protection and safety. It could be said that the described approaches could serve an important role in the development of the guidelines for the overall minimization of crime.

References

Chen, Y., Dimitriou, T., & Zhou, J. (2009). Security and privacy in communication networks. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

Fisher, B., & Lab, S. (2010). Encyclopedia of victimology and crime prevention. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Gilling, D. (2005). Crime prevention, policy, and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Greene, J. (2007). The encyclopedia of police science. New York, NY: Routledge.

Purpura, P. (2013). Security and loss prevention: An introduction. Waltham, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Elite crimes are acts committed by the rich and those who are financially well in the society. This type of crime is usually involved by the heads of corporate, governmental and non governmental organizations. Such persons are highly respected and hold high social status in the society and the organizations they head. These crimes are also referred to white collar crimes. It usually involves carefully planning and scheming to steal from public coffers for personal gain. That is why such crime cannot be detected easily. They can have a lot of negative effects to the organization because a lot of money can be stolen. The transactions in the deal to steal money are usually very complex and too remote from the common human criminality. People who are affected most by the scam are the customers in business organizations while in government organizations are the common man. For example the people are affected economically when money meant for improvement of infrastructure is embezzled by the leaders (Crewe and Lippen 128).

There are various reasons why people in the organization result to elite crime. Some of the reasons include jealousy, anger, greed and revenge. Occupational crime are committed to promote personal interest through altering records i.e. fraud and overcharging. Corporate crime occurs when staff commits criminal acts like price fixing, advertising falsely, and ghost workers and the like in order to benefit themselves and the company. The urge to continue with criminality is encouraged when the rewards are handsome and steals successfully without being got. Research reveals that an individual who steals for that first time and escapes without being got is likely to repeat the vice. But if an individual steals for the first time and he is got and punished he is likely not to repeat the vice again. Such a person would likely quit the act of criminality.

Punishment of an individual when he commits crime discourages people from indulging in criminal tendencies. Punishment involves a person being detained in prison, rejection and rebuking in the society, beating in some circumstances and administering workloads to the offenders. Offenders of elite crime are not easily got because of their economic wellbeing and their must be enough evidence for that individual to be prosecuted in court of law. Some people also commit crime because of the opportunity available to commit the crime. The probability of a person committing crime in an area full of security agents is low, hence availability of security agents deter an individual from committing a crime. The risks involved in crime also determine whether the crime would be committed or not (Hagan 154)

Conflict theory analyses that cases of crime are the social and economic that are in disagreement within society. Those who are in power are said to be favored by the criminal justice system and they set laws that tend to be in operation on their behalf hence the laws put in place to control those who are less privileged in society. According to Karl Marx (1818-1883), the capitalist control the economy (bourgeoisie) they control the means of production and others (the proletariat) were the laborers in the farms of the wealthy. Those who are in power steals and they are not arrested while the poor when he steals they are arrested for longer time. Theft of chicken might lead one to be arrested for longer time than a person who steals millions through illegal tendering process. The laws also protect the powerful from physical attacks by the poor. This theory emphasizes that there is inequality in our society and those who are poor are in conflict with the rich. Those who are in authority would always commit crimes but they can go away without being arrested because the law favors them. In the process of the legal rights of low class in society might be neglected. Those who are in the middle class are also struggling to reach at the top and tend to side with the rich hoping to rise to the top.

A lot of theorists have recommended what can be considered elements needed when committing a crime. The elements considered are motivation, skill, and the opportunity to commit such crimes. People who commit elite crimes have all the elements needed to do so hence executing it perfectly. They have the opportunity because they are the once dealing with those issues at hand. Elite crime is difficult to control due its complexity in handling the criminals involved in the crime. The perpetrators are usually people who are in power and the laws tend to protect them. They also use their authority to manipulate the outcome of the court proceedings in order to walk out of courts free.

However elite criminals are usually followed upon when they are out of power. For instance when a person retires or is sacked from the position he holds in an organization he is usually arrested and charged for the past offences. The majority of these people are the head of states where the president is above the law. But there are other ways to discourage elite crime. Media has played a crucial role in revealing the crimes leaders commit. By exposing such people they would be subject of condemnation by the public hence most of them feel ashamed of their corrupt ways and would not repeat the mistakes again. When media exposes such a person also the image of that person would be tarnished and would never be elected or appointed again to hold any public office.

Hiring of external audit firms would also help in reducing crime in an organization. These people acts as independent watchdogs’.This people would account for every penny in governmental organization and other private firms. When certain amount money is found missing serious actions should be taken to whomever responsible for that docket. That is the leader of that section. Everybody should be held accountable for the loss to keep people checking on themselves. There should also be legislation that gives those who are employed , clients or the public a role in supervising their own money often be updated in order to keep in check the records of the organization. If money is embezzled then the people would know easily and it would shape the behavior of the criminals (Siegel 158).

Laws should be put in place not in favor of the rich alone but should apply to everybody regardless of their social status. A person who steals more money should be arrested and jailed for longer time to deter others from doing the same things. Although there is no evidence that imprisonment of the offenders reduces crimes statistically, of course such individual when he is in jail the crime is already prevented.

Works cited

Crewe, Don and Ronnie Lippen. Existentialist Criminology. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2009

Hagan, Frank. Introduction to Criminology: Theories, Methods, and Criminal Behavior. 7th ed. New York: SAGE, 2010

Siegel, Larry. Criminology. 10th ed. NEw York: Cengage Learning, 2008

There is a general belief by most Americans that by increasing the severity of punishments to crime offenders, there is a likelihood of crime rates going down. The same idea is shared by the judicial system which has opted to impose severe punishments to criminals. Nevertheless, there are conflicting views and opinions over the degree of punishment which should be leveled against law breakers. A critical point of discussion which has been explored by sociologists lies on the two major types of crime namely those committed on the streets and those perpetrated by elites in offices and government departments. A sociologist by the name Edwin Sutherland observed that crimes committed by elites are even more serious in terms of cost that the popularly known street crimes. His publication of the book White Collar Crime gave a lot of insight on this type of crime. He further emphasized that even if street offenders were severely punished, it would not positively reflect on the desired gains bearing in mind that the causes of crimes remain deeply rooted in the society and equally unresolved.

On a similar note but with a different perspective, Hagan in his publication “White-Collar Crime in a Global Economy” emphasizes that the major beneficiaries of social crimes are those who perpetrate it at the corporate level under closed doors and therefore instilling severe punishment on such offenders may just be history repeating itself. Other restrictive methods need to be used to avoid possible criminals from carrying out acts of crime.

On the other hand, sociologists have differed substantially on criminological framework. There area myriad of conflicting theories which have attempted to explain why people engage in crime and whether severe penalties may serve as the solution to the challenge posed by crime. There are more laws which are pin-pointing street crimes than those offences committed by elites. This is in itself a big loophole in the attempt to impose strict punishment on offenders. The criminal justice system has equally sidelined its judgment by giving harsh sentences to street criminals than elite offenders. This historical position assumed by the justice system has not yield ed any positive fruits in the fight against crime in general. Additionally, it is only first time offenders who may be moved by severe sentences but those who have been in the crime scene for long just harden up.

The argument advanced by conflict theorists states that the many laws imposed on street offenders are mainly to be the gain of the elites. There are well organized groups who have keen interest in controlling criminal gangs. Therefore, the execution of strict laws on street offenders may as well be an exercise on futility unless the root causes are keenly investigated. Moreover, there are very minimal arrests involving white collar crimes. This has created a negative perception on the entire society due to the selective application of the justice process. Moreover, Rosenfeld and messner suggest that it is important to give more attention to regulation of crime rates rather than merely addressing the menace at the judicial level.

The article which was written by Wilson and Kelling gives radical proposals on how laws should be administered in regard to controlling crime rates in the society. They argue that there is dire need to maintain law and order in the society and not just dwelling on the sentence process after criminals have been apprehended by the long arm of the law. This argument again tends to distance itself away from the popular notion that severe punishment may adequately address an d resolve the rising crime rates.

For many years, there have been several cases of dead people throughout the world that are pending due to lack of identification of the diseased. For instance, Milwaukee County has a record of numerous deaths in years and are currently being handled by the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner’s Office. Some of these cases can be traced back to the 1970s and involve anonymous adults, infants, and fetuses that the Medical Examiner’s Office was not able to recognize over the years or even trace their relatives.

In an endeavor to identify the deceased individuals as well as their family members, the medical officers have taken some steps which might help them obtain recognition of the deceased individuals as well as the families in question to inform them of their family member’s demise and thus clear the associated cold cases. Such identification can be made by visually recognizing the deceased person or through a photograph of the deceased taken after the demise.

Moreover, taking photographs of the deceased person’s distinctive tattoos, dental aspects, and other outstanding features can also be used in making an identification (McLaughlin par.1). The officers may also use scientific means of identification such as DNA analysis, determining the race and sex, or even evaluating the fingerprints or dental records of the deceased taken before their demise.

This has been achieved by using modern internet facilities where the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has launched a website dubbed ‘The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System’ (NAMUS). Through this website, the law enforcement agencies and the Medical Examiner Offices, can feed information regarding the unidentified individuals into the NAMUS database and probably compare them with the information of missing individuals, which has also been fed into the NAMUS database (McLaughlin par. 2).

All the cases on this website are entered into NAMUS and are made available for public viewing. In case anyone has any information about the unidentified individuals listed on this website, he/she is asked to contact the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner’s Office using a given number where they can talk to an Investigator who is always available.

Even though this may sound ghastly, this seems to be a tremendous way that the unidentified human remains can get the justice that they too much deserve. However, some anthropologists argue that viewing the photographs of deceased individuals may be traumatizing to some relatives. To take care of such people, the Milwaukee venture arranged this site with great care. The website has two pages containing graphic content caution before anyone can observe the deceased’s photographs. This was meant to ensure that these photos are only available to those who have thoroughly exhausted comparing all other leads (McLaughlin par. 3). After all, any grieving family that has reported a missing person would rather find out their loved one even if dead rather than living with the trauma of never knowing whatever happened to them.

In conclusion, it is predicted that there are at least 40,000 cases of unidentified deceased remains in the United States of America. However, the grassroots approach has significantly contributed to the identification of several people as well as inspiring other agencies within other places, which include Atlanta and Canada, to come up with their own websites. Indisputably, with the formulation of these agencies throughout the nation, it is likely that more cases will end up being solved and thus bring as much resolution to as many families as possible. For this reason, the NAMUS website, as well as other similar upcoming websites, is absolutely worthwhile. In fact, I would recommend the creation of such agencies not only in all counties in the United States of America but also in all nations of the world.

Works Cited

McLaughlin, Eliott. “Milwaukee Hopes Images of Dead Can Heat Up Cold Cases.” 13.m CNN.com. 2012. Web.

The classical theory of crime explains that crime is committed on a person’s free will. This means that crime is a rational choice made by a person and they are in their full senses when committing it. In this theory the criminal is fully aware of the consequences of the crime but chooses to commit it. The biological theory on the other hand explains that committing crime is hereditary and that a criminal may possess criminal genes. This means that crime can be genetically transferred from the parents to the child. According to Eric See, the biological defects that a person possesses may also contribute to the crime. A person whose parents are criminals inherits the behaviors (See, 2004).

Schmalleger states that the classical theory suggests that criminals can only be identified after committing a crime (Schmalleger, 2001). This means that criminals have no marks or body features to associate them with crimes. Whereas the biological theory suggests that criminals can be identified from their genetic make up in their DNA structure. The character of the criminal is also used to identify them. However, it has not yet been scientifically proven that human being posses the criminal genes and are transferable. According to the classical theory crime can be prevented by introducing some laws and imposing punishment for failure of compliance (Rafter, 2008).

Crime can also be prevented through the environmental design. This means making the potential targets of crime unattractive since crime is a rational choice. On the other hand, crime is part of the criminal’s genetic composition; it becomes difficult to prevent it according to the biological theory. This is because the genes cannot be removed nor can crime be prevented by just simple punishment. This is because the individual has defects or abnormalities in his or her biological make up, any form of deterrence or punishment will not change their behaviors (Schmalleger, 2001). It may instead be prevented by putting them under medication, isolating them from the society or sterilizing them to prevent the defective genes from being passed to the future generation.

The best theory to explain criminal activities is the classical theory. According to the theory crime is committed out of ones own free will and is a rational choice (See, 2004). Most of the criminals are aware of the law and the consequences of their crimes and this is the reason why they hide after committing a crime. The criminals isolate themselves from the society and conduct their crimes without anyone’s knowledge. In most of the cases crimes are prevented by simply enacting laws and imposing punishment (Rafter, 2008).

. This clearly suggests that crime is a person’s choice. The biological crimes cannot be prevented by the law or punishment which is not the case in real sense. If for example a criminal is caught and his fingers are cut, chances are that the criminal will not commit the crimes again. This is a choice that one makes. Classical theory of crime can be verified by simply observing the behaviors of criminals. Their crimes are rationally planned and executed. They commit the crimes and hide from the law because they are aware of the punishment.

Conclusion

Crime is an illegal act which has some severe consequence. Committing a crime is a person’s free will because of these consequences. This is best explained by the classical theory of crime. However, in some instance crime may be hereditary. In this case it is explained by the biological theory. The classical is the most relevant theory because most of the crimes committed are out of a person’s free will with full knowledge of the punishments. The crimes are rationally planned and well executed.

References

Rafter, N. (2008). The Criminal Brain: Understanding Biological Theories of Crime. New York, NY: New York University Press.

Schmalleger, F. (2001). Criminology Today -An Integrative Introduction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice- Hall.

See, E. (2004). Criminological Theories: Introduction, Evaluation, and Applications. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Company.

Abstract

Security in universities has become a major concern in most parts of the world, with female students registering higher victimization levels compared to their male counterparts. Although most learning institutions share these experiences, it is worth noting that security in campus varies from one university to the depending on mitigation strategies put in place. Colleges expose students to a completely new setting with unique challenges and expectations. Unlike at home where children are guaranteed security with their parents and family members, students are surrounded by new friends whom they may not be sure of being safe when they are around them. Consequently, many are shocked by the news around campus warning them to beware of high crime rates and to watch out for their security. Based on recent crime cases in campuses, there is fear variation based on gender differences among various students. This research paper examines the issue of fear of crime in campus and its variation between the sexes. The research further explores reasons behind these variations and measures which ought to be adopted in addressing the issue amicably.

Research hypothesis

Female students have a higher rate of fear of danger in campus than males. This is based on a number of factors which have been discussed in this research paper.

Literature review

Crime in campus has drawn the attention of many people around the world including leaders, educationists and authors. With increasing crime rates in most institutions of higher learning, stakeholders have taken it upon themselves to establish the causes of these alarming trends and possible understanding as to why ladies experience a lot of fear of victimization. This section of the research summarizes previous findings related to crime in campus with special emphasis on measuring the variation in fear between men and women as they are exposed to dangers during their study time in campus. To achieve this target, this research compares data and information from different authors in order to provide comparative information drawn from different authors around the world.

According to research, there is the need for alarm in cases where the security of students in campus is compromised or threatened. Even though there are fewer cases of shooting in most campuses, there are several forms of violence that students have to confront frequently while in session. With many campuses and other learning institutions recording low levels of fatal acts, it has to be double emphasized that some acts of violence are quite common in campuses around the world and cause fear among female and male students (Fisher 85). As a result, security has become a point of concern for most campuses with administrators finding ways of guaranteeing students security when they are away from their parents.

Despite high-security level, female students still experience high levels of fear of assault. This is considered as an abnormality since students needed to worry about succeeding in their studies and not about issues of criminal vulnerability. Understanding the fear among students is imperative since high levels of criminal fear may significantly affect their performance. Additionally, educationists and university management have to address the issue of unfounded fear to allow students settle in campus. It would be easier for preventive measures to be put in place to eliminate crime occurrence and reassuring students of their security through monitoring of events.

In addition, fear of crime in a campus has become a broad issue in the society. Violent incidences in campus include the fear of assault by friends or strangers, hate crimes and the fear of students being victimized of becoming casualties (Schafer 285). According to Del Carmen et al. 2000, there are certain changes that occur among students after they have experienced violent actions in campus. However, this approach was never applied since it was impossible to tell the time and place where the violence might have occurred. In a 2000 research, Del Carmen and his colleagues further note that crime is a common problem cutting across countless destinations.

Although the research conducted by Del Carmen and his colleagues was done among college students, the same could be observed in another campus setup. According to their findings, exposure of criminal activities to the public makes most students to feel insecure and vulnerable to more fatal actions (Del Carmen et al. 23). Furthermore, there has been an increase in criminal activities as illustrated by their research conducted in 2000 in which 9% of the participants represented an increase while perceived risks also recorded an increase of 5% with a higher magnitude being conceived among female participants (Del Carmen et al. 23, 2000). Occurrence of violence in campus usually puts the media in a dilemma because of the perceived impact that the information would have on students, their perception and fear while in school. The argument affirms that violent news in campus alters levels of being afraid (Heath and Gilbert 379).

Importantly, sociologists argue that any research that investigates a crime in campus has to incorporate major factors, which contribute to fear among students before and after violence has occurred. McConnell asserted that crime emerged as a social problem when President Lyndon B. Johnson mentioned that crime and fear of crime was already a public problem to deal with (McConnell 22). Although this was uttered in 1960s, there has been enough evidence to support the fact that crime in campus has continuously hit higher levels, a reality that could be attributed to wider societal issues. Since the time when crime data became public, in 1970s, many students have recorded higher fear percentages than before (Ferraro 669). However, some students note that the level of fear in an individual does not always reflect a corresponding likelihood of being victimized or experiencing an assault. For instance, a lot of researches done affirm that female students have higher levels of fear of criminal danger compared to their male counterparts who are perceived to be more prone to becoming crime victims. As such, documentation has integrated indicators of the general fear of victimization among students in campus.

While everybody may be at risk of being attacked by criminals, the fear that accompanies this notion makes it impossible to overcome the inner feeling and perception of being attacked at any given moment. For example, when serial killers are planning to attack, the fear of people automatically shoots up than when crime is occurring randomly in different parts of the city or country. In his 1996 survey, Ferraro supported the above analogy by identifying sexual assault as the main source of fear among female students in campus and other women elsewhere. It therefore means that female students feel sexually insecure as compared to other forms of victimization, which may take place in campus and its environs.

Consequently, Ferraro emphasized the need of comprehending risk interpretation procedures (Ferraro 670). In his 1996 analysis, Ferraro argued that there was need to have risk measured independently of fear in order to have substantive results. This is based on the fact that the degree of fear among students is normally generated by several offenses, and it is vital for a model to be developed that puts into consideration such cases. Moreover, ecological and personal characteristics affect the way individuals respond to fear and the perceived likelihood of victimization. These factors further determine the mode of adaptation, as people tend to master their security by addressing existing psychological fears. Since security is quite essential for everyone in the society, it has been found that majority of people are always fair when interpreting risks, which emanate from digested information (McPheters 47).

Another question that has been analyzed is the comparison between the fear of being attacked and the crime itself. Does a student who has fear suffer a lot compared to the one who has experienced an assault? Regardless of the case, it suffices to note that fear of victimization has its unique dangers that may differ from known effects of real crime in campus (Fisher 85). Aside from gender differences with regard to fear of crime, it is documented that age also affects the way people respond towards crime with those below the age of twenty five being at a considerable higher risk.

In general, the issue of crime in campus encompasses an array of discrepancies with several proposals indicating the causes of increasing criminal behavior in campus and possible ways of dealing with it. The research done by McConnell in 1997, focused on common characteristics of students with fear of crime in campus together with some of the areas that generated this fear. During the research, it was clear that most affected students had perceived victimization especially when they were alone. Due to the fear, many adapted to the environment by locking their cars and maintaining company to avoid loneliness that was believed to render a majority vulnerable (McConnell 22). According to Fisher and Sloan 2003, there are several characteristics of campus crime that have a direct impact towards campus policing. Among these include students attacking their colleagues, presence of “hot spots” in campuses, alcoholism and property crimes (Fisher and Sloan 633).

Fear of crime is expressed in various fashions, with the disregarding of the actual crime setup. If a person fears crime, he or she is more likely to alter demeanor to become less vulnerable. Research done by Beeler (1991) at 701 universities and colleges reported that students experienced an increase in fear regarding the concern of campus safety in the United States. Fear of danger in campuses and universities has become highly spotlighted by media. This has left the public with the impression that campuses are not safe for students (Fisher 85). As discovered by many, gender plays a major role as it shows clear differences in the levels of fear between female and male students (McConnell 23). Ladies are reported to have higher feelings of being unsafe because they are always afraid of sexual victimization.

Methodology

Data and information used for the synthesis of this paper was principally collected through primary methods. However, literature review was important for the purpose of support and comparison basis with research findings. Journals from reputable and renowned authors and scholars were used for literature review in order to obtain an authentic basis of explaining crime in campus and how it varies among students based on their gender differences. From the journals, it was possible to identify research trends regarding the issue and comparing the views of different experts who were motivated and influenced by varying situations to unravel the truth behind criminal behavior in campus.

As the part of primary methods of data collection, interviews were conducted as part of primary method of data collection. The sample was done at Ohio State University by 44 students, with every student interviewing three interviewees. The interview comprised of two questions, which were considered to be more important in understanding gender-related variations in explaining fear of criminal danger among campus students. The validity of my survey questions was tested by interrogating a couple of students in my class to capture the degree of their understanding. My first question was aimed at confirming the gender of the respondents since the information was to show gender differences with regard to criminal fear among university students. The second question was designed in a manner that could allow all the interviewees to understand its meaning and provide substantive responses, relevant and useful in analyzing the hypothesis. Quota sampling method was applied at this stage of data collection. According to the instructions given by the lecturer, every student was required to interview one male and female student together with a black student within the university.

Research questions

In sourcing information about crime in campus the two questions which were posed were:

1. What is your gender?
2. How afraid are you of going out alone on campus at night?

Effectiveness of the methodology

The sampling method was non-random with a likelihood of being unreliable. In order to get information that was needed, students who appeared friendlier were given preference and approached for interviewing. As a result, campus students did not get equal opportunities to share their views and experiences regarding campus crime. However, the quota sampling is useful when time is limited, and the budget is very low. The total sample consisted of 44 students, with every interviewee interrogating three answerers. Out of the five people who were selected for interviewing, two declined to participate arguing that they had busy schedules and urgent matters to attend to. The other three were very cooperative, and they did not have any problem or difficulties in understanding the questions during the survey.

The first question was useful in dividing the students into two groups as defined by their gender orientation. The question was also important in knowing the number of male and female students who participated in the survey. This was due to the fact that expected results were to be useful in establishing the magnitude of fear of criminal danger with regard to their sexual orientation. Similarly, the second question was beneficial in measuring the amount of fear among university students. By using a scale of 1 to 5, it was easy to ascertain existing fear variations. In answering the two questions, it was possible to gauge fear levels among students and apply them compiling the results.

Results analysis

The total number of students who participated in the entire survey was 132. Out of this number, 65 respondents were male and the remaining 67 female. This implies that 50.76% male students and 49.24% female students were interviewed as summarized below.

During the survey, females who took part were more than males. This difference could affect our results since an equal number of both sexes were required to establish an unbiased comparison. 131 students answered the second question about the fear in campus using the scale of 1 to 5 and only one student answered the second question as “not applicable.” The table below shows the number of students and their scale from 1 to 5.

Table 1.0

From figure 2.0 and table 1.0, 34.85% of students in campus are not afraid, which is the highest percentage in the scale and only 9.09% of students are very afraid in campus. Whereas the rest lay between little bit afraid, neutral and kind of afraid. This high percentage of people who confirmed not being afraid to walk at night alone in campus indicates high security at the Ohio State University.

To check out the truth in the hypothesis which says that females have higher rate of fear of danger than males, the scale was divided by gender to find out the group with the highest rate of fear as shown in the table below.

Table 2.0.

In this table, we find that 58.46% of males in campus are not afraid of walking alone at night in campus and only 11.94% of females fall in the same category. Additionally, 16.42% of females are really afraid comparing to 1.54% of males who are afraid, whereas, 32.84% of females are kind of afraid compared to 3.08% of males. The results show that females have higher rate of fear of danger than males. These results support the hypothesis of the research as illustrated in the figure below.

Conclusion

From the analysis above, it is evident that crime in campus is a major problem affecting many institutions in the United States and other parts of the world. With several fatal cases having been witnessed in the past, the topic has received massive coverage from all walks of life, including political leaders, educationists and security officers. Although security in universities evolved to some reasonable levels in 1970s, there is no doubt that campus crime has taken a new dimension (Scott 204). While such discussions dominate countless debates, the effect of crime in campus cannot be overlooked. A major concern as demonstrated by this survey is fear, which dwells among students.

Due to violence which has occurred in campus or discussed, most students have developed fear towards the danger of being assaulted while in campus. In supporting the hypothesis of this research it was clear that this fear occurred with differences in magnitude depending on the gender of the victim (McPheters 48). Accordingly, there is a high rate of fear among female students as compared to male students. This is so although male students are likely to become victims of crime. The existing disparity is caused by the fear of being sexually assaulted among female students while in campus. It is imperative for all stake holders to join hands in fighting crime in campus and ensuring mental stability among students.

Works Cited

Beeler, Karl. “Campus Safety: A Survey of Administrative Perceptions and Strategies.” National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, Inc. (1991): 1-44. Print.

Del Carmen et al. “Fear of Crime on Campus: Examining Fear Variables of CRCJ Majors and Non-majors in Pre- and Post-Serious Crime Environments.” Journal of Security Administration 23 (2000): 21-36. Print.

Ferraro, Kenneth. “Women’s fear of victimization: Shadow of sexual assault?” Social Forces 75 (1996): 667–690. Print.

Fisher, Bonnie, and Sloan John. “Unraveling the fear of victimization among college women: Is the “shadow of sexual assault hypothesis” supported?” Justice Quarterly 20 (2003): 633–659. Print.

Fisher, Bonnie. “Crime and Fear on Campus.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 539 (1995): 85-100. Print.

Heath, Linda, and Gilbert Kevin. “Mass Media and Fear of Crime.” American Behavioral Scientist February 39.4 (1996): 379-386. Print.

McConnell, Elizabeth. “Fear of Crime on Campus: A Study of a Southern University.” Journal of Security Administration 20.2 (1997): 22-46. Print.

McPheters, Lee. “Econometric analysis of factors influencing crime on the campus.” Journal of Criminal Justice 6.1 (1978): 47-52. Print.

Schafer, Joseph., Huebner Beth, and Bynum Timothy. “Fear of Crime and Criminal Victimization: Gender-Based Contrasts.” Journal of Criminal Justice 34 (2006): 285-301. Print.

Scott, Hannah. “Stranger Danger: Explaining Women’s Fear of Crime.” Western Criminology Review 4.3 (2003): 203 – 214. Print.

During its history, crime analysis, as a profession, has evolved greatly in its definition. But, I would define crime analysis, or criminal intelligence analysis, as a law enforcement function that describes analytical means and procedures followed in studying criminal activities, and trend correlations, the way they impact a certain jurisdiction, and how police agencies handle them. Information on trends can assist law enforcers to allocate resources effectively, and help detectives in spotting and arresting criminal individuals. Crime analysis is also involved in developing techniques to curb crimes, and making crime-fighting strategies.

Crime analysis is the function of crime analysts who are professionals recruited from all levels of law enforcement. It is the work of crime analysts to assess the basics of a crime (an offender, a victim, and the location) and give an analytical product which is used to handle such offenses and assist incarcerate the offenders, and the accomplice (International Association of Crime Analysts 2004).

Just like policy analysts, claim analysts, market analysts, or stock analysts, crime analysts provide information (though in this case to law enforcers about crime, disorder, police activity, calls for service), all intending to assist the agencies to undertake their work effectively. The crime analysis process applies quantitative data analysis techniques, for instance, detectives reports are studied using narratives. However, I think there is some misunderstanding on the purpose of a crime analyst. Some see it as the role of a crime analyst to go to the crime scene and carry out an investigation, but this is the work of criminalists or detectives.

So why analyze crime?

• It helps to optimize the utilization of scarce law enforcement resources
• To inform the law enforcement agencies on the general and particular crime patterns and series in a continuous and timely manner
• To have an objective means to access crime problems locally, regionally, statewide, nationally, and globally within and between police agencies
• To be proactive in detecting and curbing criminal activities
• To achieve the law enforcement demands of an evolving society
• Crime analysis gives vital information to the judicial system, which assists in giving evidence pertinent to a given case, and information that criminals can be brought to book and convicted.
• Crime analysis at the corrections level assists law enforcers in detailed inclusive documentation of prisoners, parolees, and those pardoned, to help them avoid conviction of the innocent.

Crime analysis can take place at four different levels. There is tactical, administrative, police operational, and strategic crime analysis, but we will look into the strategic crime analysis.

Strategic crime analysis is intended at adopting operational strategies and seeking resolutions to enduring predicaments. It describes the trend correlations, predicaments, and impacts. Strategic analysts examine the long-term seasonal positive and negative variations in criminal activities or variances in traits of crime. These trends show the direction of movement of criminal activities and reveal variations in crime incidences in a given jurisdiction or geographical location. Thus, help law enforcement agencies to monitor unusual criminal activities over particular limits or given seasons or time.

It identifies unusual society situations and enables the law enforcers to be more effective and efficient by corresponding the expectations of their job with a mode of delivering services. This analysis subdues and eradicates persistent predicaments, and helps in community policing or “community-oriented policing.”

Strategic crime analysis provides information to crime prevention officers, community-oriented policing officers, planning and research, and community outreach programs. The strategic crime analysts and these groups coordinate in identifying the entire trends in certain jurisdictions of crime, create an action plan to address any problems, and coordinate to decrease the overall crime in given regions, developments, complexes, or generally in the jurisdiction.

The strategic analysis aims at providing information for functional decision-making to managers or policymakers, to alert and support the managerial decision takers in coming up with strategies to organize their institutions to be able to deal with any dangers posed by rising crimes. This is done by allocating resources to curb criminal activities, scheduling patrols, improving crime-mitigating processes, or distracting the criminal groups (International Association of Crime Analysts 2004).

Though financial achievement is not the main objective of public sector agencies, particularly law enforcers, strategic crime analysts work towards a sustainable goal, that is, the entire eradication of criminal groups. Strategic crime analysts give “exception reports” which inform on the “exception,” the continuing trend in certain criminal activities categories, victim categories, or target locations. Any deviation from the norm will be the focus of “exception” reports.

Reference

International Association of Crime Analysts. (2004). Exploring crime analysis. Overland Park, KS: IACA.