Category: Homicide

Issues of Homicide: Annotated Bibliography

Annotated Bibliography

Homicide

Adler, F. and Laufer, W. (1993). New directions in criminological theory. 4th Vol. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction publishers, pp. 113 – 117.

This content addresses the possibility that Alcohol and homicide intertwine. Research was conducted by American criminologist Marvin Wolfgang, he found that when studying the social and behavioural aspects of homicide, 64% of homicide offenders and victims had been drinking alcohol. Wolfgang’s study helped stimulate a great deal of research into the causes behind homicide with the development of at least four major theories: Subculture of violence (Wolfgang and Firmicute 1967) Economic deprivation (Lofin and Hill 1974) Deterrence theory, especially involving capital punishment (Sellin 1967; Erlich 1975; Phillips 1980; Blumstein et al., 1978) However, none of the theories suggested that the role of alcohol might play in the explanation of homicide. However, Wolfgang suggested possible explanations into why alcohol and homicide intertwine. A likely role of alcohol in the causation of homicide is that alcohol can drive and sustain homicidal ideations. Alcohol could explain the relationships between geographic regions and homicide rates. Living in South America may lead to a distinct pattern of alcohol consumption, which in turn could help to explain the region’s traditionally high homicide rates. It may be that analysis did show a relationship between social support and crime rates does in fact exist.

Alcohol consumption and poverty rates interact which could also explain the regions traditionally high homicide rates. This distinction however has little to no impact on the interpretation of the effect of alcohol on homicide but the understanding of the effects of regional subculture, poverty or lifestyle. Wolfgang lacks supporting evidence to back his theories within this book. Consequently, alcohol and homicide appear to be related because of the influence of a third variable that has been excluded from consideration. The use of alcohol and criminal activity are incidental to one another, such that both occur in situations where expectations for behaviour have been removed or modified. Evidence suggest that this theory isn’t credible and lacks sufficient concepts in underpinning this theory.

Pratt, T. and Godsey, T. (2019). Social support and homicide: a cross-national test of an emerging criminological theory. [online] ScienceDirect. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235202001927 [Accessed 23 Aug. 2019].

This article addresses macrolevel theories of Homicide particularly the social theory. This theory draws from Braithwaite’s (1989) theory of reintegrative shaming, Coleman’s (1990) discussion of social capital, Cullen’s (1994) development of social support as an organising concept for criminology, Messner and Rosenfeld’s (1997) institutional anomie theory, and Chamlin and Cochran’s (1997) discussion and empirical test of “social altruism” theory. Each of these theories discuss the proposition that communities to nations vary in their degree of cohesiveness, support, shared values and willingness to come to the aid of those in need (Bellah et al., 1985, Cullen & Wright, 1997, Etzioni, 1993, Sandel, 1982, Walzer, 1983.) It’s the variation in levels of social support that are assumed to be related to variation in crime. (Barrera & Li, 1996, Sampson et al., 1997, Timko & Moos, 1996, Wilson, 1987.) These properties of social aggregates have been labelled as ‘social support’ and as ‘social altruism’. The research conducted, composed of 46 nations covering the time period of 1989-1995. The dependent variable being violent crime using each nation’s homicide rate (homicides per 100,000 citizens). The independent variables being Social Support measures: the percent of the nations GDP spent on health care and the percent of the GDP spent on public education. Structural covariates were included to as statistical controls to isolate the effects of the social support index on homicide rates. The analysis did show a relationship between social support and crime rates does in fact exist.

The information and data representations, however, were overwhelming. The article used a large amount of professional jargon making it hard for readers to understand the statistics and results of the research which could have been used for as evidence to support this theory.

Britain’s Rate for Homicide Clearance and Factors Which Affect It: Analytical Essay

Abstract;

This project examines the method of policing agencies in solving homicides in England and Wales. Moreover, I will go into depth about the factors affecting the national homicide clearance rate in England and Wales. Four key points will be analyzed using both primary data collected from a survey of various agencies across England and Wales, as well as secondary data gathered from reliable online sources. These include, briefly, the management of practices, investigative procedures, analytical methods and demographics of the general public affected, and the overall effect these have on the agency’s ability to clear a homicide case. Evidently, the results suggest that there are certain factors that play a bigger part than others.

Foreword;

Though murder and homicide are considered to be different (homicide is defined as “the killing of one person by another”, whereas murder is simply a homicide committed with “malice aforethought”) for the sake of this project they will be one and the same. I wanted to research what the current statistics are in terms of homicides being committed in the UK, and the trend between the amount of homicides being committed to the rate of crime clearance. Subsequently, I wanted to deliberate on why the trends are the way they are – if clearance was lower than the rate of crime, why is this? What affects homicide clearance rate?

It should also be noted that some of the collected secondary data sources are based on data from the USA, however, the procedures for homicide clearance in the UK and the USA are almost interchangeable; i.e. with very few and minute differences.

The solving and subsequent clearance of homicide cases is obviously of the utmost importance for police departments and the communities they protect. Unfortunately, the national clearance rate for homicide in England and Wales has dropped significantly in a very short amount of time – with a decrease of roughly 47% of homicide cases being cleared from an original 77% clearance in Apr ‘06 – Mar ‘07, leading to just a minuscule 30% clearance rate in Apr ‘16 – Mar ‘17, according to the data in the Home Office Homicide Index. This is a shocking figure, but coincides with what BBC News reports: that “only 9% of crimes end with suspects being charged”, and that “nearly half (48%) of investigations are closed”. This raises questions as to why only roughly 3 in 10 homicides were solved in the most recent data provided by the Home Office Homicide Index (Apr ‘16 – Mar ‘17). In a recent article, BBC News reports that the number of homicides being committed has “risen for a fourth year”, which subsequently insinuates that the charge and clearance rate for homicide cases will only decrease further. For example, from the aforementioned Home Office Homicide Index, I have created a graph that shows the trend of homicides left uncleared against number of crimes being committed annually.

Here we can see that there is a direct correlation with the number of offences and the clearance rate. From the graph, it is even more evident that homicide numbers are increasing, and thereby the homicide rate in the UK is at an all-time high. Furthermore, the solve rate is incredibly low and can be seen to be increasing rapidly, which solidifies BBC News’ statement. Popular news reporters such as The Independent (2018) and The Guardian (2018) have both written similar articles that homicide rate will only continue to increase and that there is little chance of returning to the high homicide clearance range from 13 years ago. BBC News has further reported that with the correct funding, investigative procedures, adequate staffing, and better analytical processes many more homicide cases could be responded to and cleared effectively. This conclusion is not strictly incorrect; however, it is unreasonable to say that every homicide case can be solved; many crime scenes have insufficient evidence or are simply discovered too late and subsequently have lost evidence to time. For example, the case of the Jamison family will likely never be solved as the crime scene was left undiscovered for a prolonged period of time and was therefore tampered with by animals and general decay – there was not enough evidence to further the investigation. Furthermore, it should also be considered that crime scenes are rarely orderly, and it is often hard to trek through a timeline in order to create a profile of the offender.

These issues aside, the question remains as to why the homicide clearance rate is so low, and whether or not the police processes that support homicide investigations can be improved.

Research Paper on Causes and Correlations of American Homicide

Throughout this semester in Homicide Gateway Program Seminar I have been enlightened by the United States Criminal Justice System, specifically the causes and correlations of American homicide. This is due to the material our professors have administered to us for the past few months; an example that has undoubtedly benefited our learning could be the student engagement activities. I have personally found these raw learning opportunities to be of value because the sole purpose of them is to help us by providing words of wisdom to improve our future careers. In this paper I am going to concentrate on and develop two causes of homicide both based off of chapter four, “Why We Do It, Theories of Homicide” in American Homicide by Richard M. Hough and Kimberly D. McCorkle, and section two “Theorizing About Homicide” in The Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes by Pamela K. Lattitmore and Cynthia A. Nahabedian; as well as include some smaller references here and there of other scholarly articles. I am specifically going to focus on the Naturalistic perspective particularly Classical and Positivistic explanations along with briefly explaining Spiritistic reasoning.

For the most part, the book American Homicide is based on the United States homicide rates and reasoning; chapter four is the most prevalent on the reasoning side because it explains how and why people kill by the authors discussing certain theories that could be indicators to why murder exists. Expressly, the examinations of the different types of homicide such as the most often kinds of deaths that occur in the U.S. as well as the more suspicious deaths that have become more popular in the United States are explained. I personally enjoyed this book due to the fact that it provided a plethora of real life examples; the “Why Would They Do It?” boxes were especially helpful because the authors provided the audience with distinct homicide cases as well as the specific motivations behind the murders correlating it back to the previous texts. The chapters are also just long enough to inform us, the students, of the subject matter, but not too long to discourage us with all the material given. The authors speak on great authority on the subject matter in which has resulted in a very well written and thought out book.

As for the article The Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes, I found profoundly interesting. This article was established from the proceeding of the 1996 annual meeting of the Homicide Research Working Group in which consisted of nine sections. The particular section that caught my eye was by Christine E. Rasche, the second section, integrating theories of lethal violence. This caught my attention because it is based on the theories of crime that have been exercised throughout the world. Rasche did a fantastic job organizing her thoughts as well as giving brief narrative explanations to what the theories consisted of. Overall this article was very easy to follow and provided me with a lot of information to reflect on and compare to American Homicide book.

To begin, both The Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes section two and American Homicide chapter four solely concentrate on theories that have effected the way we think of crime occurrences and give explanations to why homicide happens. Even though in todays world, some of the theories talked about in The Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes are not as relevant today so they remain unspoken about does not mean they do not exists. For example, The Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes mentioned the criminological theory of Spiritistic explanations; this is a theory that is based off of supernatural forces -such as gods, demons, cosmic forces, etc.- and how those who believe in it state that these forces interfere with their rational thinking. I find this very interesting because it is not often that you hear of people blaming their behavior on a supernatural influence, manipulating them into doing something unlawful.

The most common form of criminological theory in which is explained in both reading, The Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes and American Homicide, is the Naturalistic explanations of Classical and Positivistic “schools of thought” (Lattimore 27). I agree with both these forms of Naturalistic explanation way more than the Spiritistic explanation because it “assumes that things happen in the world because of interactions and interrelationships between natural objects, events, and ideas” (Lattimore 27).

Let’s start off with Classical causes of crimes; I would like to explain that this phenomena is argued through Cesare Beccaria, the most notable inventor of the Classical theories. He stated that people by nature are inherently rational, intelligent, and capable of free will (Houghton and McCorkle 47). This in which backs up the Rational Choice Theory and Deterrence Theory, both explained in a brief article titled Rational Choice, Deterrence, and Social Learning in Criminology: The Path Not Taken* by Ronald L. Akers; this article states that “both theories assume that human actions are based on ‘rational’ decisions-that is, they are informed by the probable consequences of that action” (Akers 1). I completely agree with this because usually when someone commits a crime beforehand they weight out the possible repercussions that could come from their chosen unlawful act and decide whether it is worth it or not. This theory of Classical approaches became very popular over time due to the fact the most people believed it was the individuals responsibility to own up to the crime and not blame it on supernatural influences; although, by the time the 19th century rolled around many began to dismiss the notion of free will and favor another explanation (Lattimore 28).

The newly favorited explanation to Naturalistic approaches would be the Positivistic School of Thought discussed in the book American Homicide and The Nature of Homicide: Trends and Changes and American Homicide. This explains that human behavior is influenced by factors largely outside to control of the individual. Two specific yet different sub-schools live within this the Positivistic approach. The first sub-school is called Individual Determinism; this “assumes that the factors which influence human behavior are largely located inside the individual, either in her physical/biological nature or in his mental/psychological processes” (Lattimore 29). Individual Determinism has four major theoretical subsets within in it: Physical Type Theories – people are positively more involved than criminals-, Heredity and Defectiveness Theory – criminals are either inherited genetically or produced by biological defects-, Mental Deficiency Theories -criminality is due to low intelligence-, and lastly Metal Illness Theories -differ widely but all talk about how the mind functions or misfunctions- (Lattimore 29). All four of these types of theories assume that something about the person himself/herself causes them to behave badly. The second sub-school is Social-Cultural Determinism. This concludes that crime is not due to damaged people more so a damaged society (Houghton and McCorkle 48). Social Structural Theories -there are social structures that cause people to participate in crime- and the Social Process Theories -the cultures and processes within certain structures motivate crime- both have very sound arguments and theories within them yet are still widely criticized; this is due to the primary attention being focused on the lower classes and how certain behavior classify people as criminals (Lattimore 30). I personally agree with both theories because I believe crime depends on the environment it’s occurring in and the values upheld in that neighborhood.

From what we have learned in class, specifically from the Colorado Department of Corrections Division of Adult Parole Panel, I feel both Classical and Positivistic explanations play into crime. Yes I believe human beings are capable of free will and make decisions based on possible consequences as explained in Rational Choice Theory and Deterrence Theory but I also think certain people are susceptible of crime like explained in Social Structural Theories and Social Process Theories. In the Adult Parole Panel, one man explained how he didn’t grow up in the best environment resulting in him turning to things such as gangs, alcohol, and drugs; this represents the Social Structural Theories and Social Process Theories because since he grew up in an area were people were susceptible to joining gangs, whether it be for protection or just to get money, it shows that the social structure, like the unsafe neighborhood, caused him to participate in crime because he had no other choice; as well as how the gangs cultures and processes within that neighborhood motivated the crimes he aided in. According to Differential Association, which is very prevalent within Social Process Theories, describes that criminal behavior is learned from interactions with others and the values that are received during the interaction. “Individuals learn values from a wide range of associates and institutions, such as family, friends, and coworkers and those values either support or oppose criminal behavior” (Hesse). This theory offers possible reasons was to why juveniles, like the adult parolee, join and commit crimes while in a gangs. As for the Rational Choice and Deterrence Theory, the adult parolee explained he understood exactly what he was doing at the time but didn’t realized the repercussions that could come from it.

With that, I feel these theories have enlightened us to have a better understanding of how and why crime occurs, allowing us to be more open minded about certain criminal occurrences resulting in taking a ‘pause’ before we give ourselves permission to be Judge and Jury without knowing the whole story.

Critical Analysis of Homicide and Murder in Shakespeare'[s plays: Titus Andronicus and Romeo and Juliet

William Shakespeare has written many plays, sonnets, and mostly all of them include children. Some of them mercilessly die, and some simply pay for the mistakes of their parents, but why there is not always a happy end? Why children are supposed to die?

In early modern England the mortality of infant and children was very high due to many diseases such as plague, smallpox, nutritional deficiency, poor hygiene, infections, etc. This happened not only to poor families but also to wealthy one.

Personally, I think that all these children’s deaths have inspired Shakespeare to write his plays, even though the causes of death are completely different most of them are ferociously killed. If in Shakespeare’s times most causes of infant mortality was linked to socio-economic problems, bad cultural conditions or pathological into which the child was born and raised, in Shakespeare’s plays children died as the result of the act of revenge, or because they were seen as an obstacle, as an act of sacrifice[footnoteRef:1] or because of the presence of human evil. [footnoteRef:2] The saddest thing is that in both Shakespeare’s plays and in real life the children were innocent. [1: Titus Andronicus wants to sacrifice Tamora’s sons on account of the death of his sons, and by doing this their death will have a sense “To this your son is mark’d, and die he must, / To appease their groaning shadows that are gone”, Shakespeare, William, The lamentable Tragedy of Titus Andronicus, Edited by H. Bellyse Baldon, London 1994, Act 1, Scene 1, 124-125, page 10] [2: Considering the murder of the little princes in Richard III or the murder of Macduff’s son in Macbeth, we deduce that the murderers were the perfect image of an evil and it was in their nature to kill. ]

Every single parent wants to protect their children, to give a better future and to rise them well. Unfortunately, some of the parents misuse their protection. I would like to give an example from the revenge tragedy Titus Andronicus related to a homicide which happened a few months ago in Italy (Ostia).

In Titus Andronicus we face many murders. Firstly, Titus decides to kill Tamora’s eldest son Alarbus “I give him you, the noblest that survives, / The eldest son of this distressed queen.”[footnoteRef:3], and later on in the play Lucius adds “See, lord and father, how we have perform’d Our roman Rites. Alarbus’ limbs are lopp’d, / And entrails feed the sacrificing fire,”[footnoteRef:4], then he kills his son Mutius “What! Villain boy; Barr’st me my way in Rome? [Stabs Mutius.”[footnoteRef:5] as he will not endure opposition especially by one of his sons. Once his madness and power cannot be blocked, he goes on with other murders, as the following lines demonstrates Titus kills Demetrius and Chiron (Tamora’s son) “For worse than Philomel you us’d my daughter, / And worse than Progne I will be reveng’d. / And now prepare your throats. / Lavinia, come, [He cuts their throats”[footnoteRef:6]. Throughout the play, Titus starts revenge to take his children revenge, and not only. Besides, through this volition he demonstrated the preciousness and value of his children. But if the children were so important for Titus then why does he kill Lavinia -which is from my point of view one of the most powerful character in the play? The following passage “Die, die, Lavinia, and thy shame with thee / And with thy shame thy father’s sorrow die! [Kills Lavinia”[footnoteRef:7] perfectly valorizes Titus’ parental authority. Nonetheless, by killing two of his sons, we understand his acting as a protection of the Andronicus family’s honor and that he should particularly protect his reputation. In the end, Titus kills Tamora after she unknowingly ate her sons, as these lines emphasizes “Eating the flesh that she herself hath bred. / ’Tis true, ‘Tis true; witness my knife’s sharp point. [Kills Tamora.”[footnoteRef:8] [3: Act I, Scene I, lines 102-103, page 9] [4: Act I, Scene I, lines 143-144, page 11] [5: Act I, Scene I, lines 290-291, page 18] [6: Act V, Scene II, lines 195-197, page 119] [7: Act V, Scene III, lines 46-47, page 122] [8: Act V, Scene III, lines 62-63, page 122]

Considerably, Titus is the character mostly related to the values of ancient Rome, in which fathers significantly had power of life and death over their children. The play’s revenge raises inevitable questions about the law. Here is presented a world in which people make their own laws.

Now, I would like to analyze the homicide which happened a few months ago in Ostia (Italy), which from my point of view can be compared to the Revenge Tragedy Titus Andronicus. What happened is, that one day a fifteen-year-old girl was walking on the street and two north African boys started to insult her. Afterwards, the girl came home, recounted the occurred to her father and asked him for help. At that point, her father went with an accomplice to the place where the two boys were and he stabbed both, because they harassed his daughter. One of them, 19-year-old died immediately from serious injury, and the second one died at the hospital after a delicate surgery.[footnoteRef:9] As Titus, the father of the girl is not a simply man: he is a person with a criminal record and besides he is the son of one of the affiliate from criminal organization in Ostia known as “Clan Spada”. [9: Mirko Polisano, Ostia, rissa per la figlia di un affiliato al clan Spada: ucciso un 19enne, Wednesday 29 of May 2019,

https://www.ilmattino.it/primopiano/cronaca/accoltellamento_ostia_stazione_arresti_ultime_notizie-4523703.html, [translated from Italian to English, personal translation], accessed on 18 of July 2019]

I would like to point out, that these murders, acts of revenge and madness still happen. Throughout the history the sense of paternity has never changed and personally I think that will never change. As we can see both Titus and the father of this girl wanted in some way to protect their children, but at the same time they destroyed the life of their own children. The power of emotions such as fury, anger and the fact that they could not control themselves led them to commit dreadful and unjustifiable things.

These acts of atrocious violence which Shakespeare included in his play were by many criticized, but what is the most terrible is that these horrible things still occur in present-day. Although we live in 21first century practically nothing changed. Nowadays we live in a very developed world, nevertheless sometimes it seems that human beings get even worse. In his play, Shakespeare highlighted the fact that we are all role-players and by presenting image of Revenge as a character’s technique rather than a reality outside the action, he emphasizes the fact that we are all humans and the revenge is tempting and seductive, because is not a divine will, but an effect of our loss, grief and suffering. What happened to the father of the girl is that he couldn’t accept the idea that someone permitted to address to his daughter offensive phrases, and he took revenge. He committed a terrible thing which transformed him in a monster.

The parents have a decisive role in the life of their children and many times take decisions instead of them. Now, I would like to focus on another problem which we are facing nowadays and linked to what Shakespeare has also written about: arranged marriage and forbidden love.

In Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare highlights the main theme which is Individual versus Society[footnoteRef:10] and Family. In the tragedy Paris tells Lord Capulet and Lady Capulet that he wants to marry his daughter “Commend me to your daughter”[footnoteRef:11]. As we can see from the following lines Lord Capulet agrees contributes to this “Sir Paris, I will make a desperate tender / Of my child’s love. I think she will [be] ruled / In all respects by me […]”[footnoteRef:12]. Lord Capulet sees Paris as a perfect husband for his daughter, and throughout the tragedy we see him as an authoritarian father. Moreover, he also represents the perfect image of a man who rules. Lord Capulet tries to force Juliet to marry Paris, and he shows her the consequences in case she will not agree as the following passages emphasizes: “But, an you will not wed, I’ll pardon you! / Graze where you will, you shall not house with me”[footnoteRef:13] and “An you be not, hang, beg, starve, die in the streets, […] Trust to ‘t; bethink you. I’ll not be forsworn.”[footnoteRef:14] This is a typical example of arranged marriage. Juliet should obey to her father and she is supposed to marry Paris because otherwise her father will not consider her anymore as a daughter. Considering this, it can be said that Juliet hasn’t the freedom of choice, and she cannot choose alone her husband, so she should keep her relationship with Romeo in secret. [10: Romeo and Juliet Themes, Literary Devices, https://literarydevices.net/romeo-and-juliet-themes/, accessed on 20 of July, 2019] [11: William Shakespeare, The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, Edited by Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine, Act III, Scene IV, lines 9-10, page 154] [12: Act III, Scene IV, lines 13-15, pages 154-155] [13: Act III, Scene V, lines 199-200, pages 169] [14: Act III, Scene V, lines 204-207, page 171]

Although Romeo and Juliet love each other very much, their families are arch enemies and their love automatically becomes “forbidden”. This conflict doesn’t allow them to be together and they have to face a tragical end.

Romeo and Juliet show the power of their love from the beginning and that nothing could change their minds. In this tragedy the sentiment of love is very strong, but unfortunately is followed by death. Suicide is the perfect solution, because if they cannot be together in the real life at least they will continue to love each other after they die, and no one will be able to impede them to be together.

According to an Italian website entitled “Just married, by force and not by love”[footnoteRef:15], many international organizations such as ActionAid and Trama di Terre started the initiative to fight against the arranged marriage. The arranged marriage: a common practice which many immigrants such as Pakistani, Maghrebi and Albanian have also maintained in Europe. During a press conference in Italy it was presented the project “If I marry someone then only for love”[footnoteRef:16] and the delegates has declared that they will not allow that someone in Italy will be forced to marry someone against its will. There are many cases, one occurred in Modena, Novi (Italy) where a wife was killed by her husband because she tried to defend her daughter, as she opposed to an imposed marriage. Another tragical case happened in 2006 in Carpi (Italy), where an Indian woman committed suicide, whereas in more than eight cases have been lost the traces of the victims. [15: Famiglia Cristiana, 29 of April 2012, http://www.famigliacristiana.it/articolo/per-forza-non-per-amore.aspx, accessed on 25 of July 2019, personal translation from Italian to english] [16: The original title is ”Se mi sposo è solo per amore”, Reuter Agency]

In Italy alone the practice of women and children being forced into marriage these days involves that many young women and children have to endure physical and psychological violence, segregation, rape, psychological imbalances, sequestration and forced repatriation in the countries of origin. Increasingly, the victims come to a tragical end.

This project aims to oppose the phenomenon of arranged marriages across the creation of a national and international network between professionals and organisations who works in this area in order to share the best practices, and to create new methodologies through formative training targeted at private and public operators.

This phenomenon not only happens in Italy but throughout the world and history, as National Center for Biotechnology Information states [footnoteRef:17] and frequently forced marriages lead to suicide: [17: Saxby Pridmore, Garry Walter, Suicide and Forced Marriage, 2013, The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, March 2013: 47-51, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3743999/, accessed on 15 of July 2019]

Eight cases (two from ancient texts and six from the last hundred years) were located and are presented. Many reports, including one from Yakin Erturk, Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (13), make clear that forced marriage not infrequently leads to suicide, but do not provide individual examples (Walter, 2013).

Saxby Prior and Garry Walter discuss in their article the case of Mitu Molla and Soud Sheikh (They died in 2012), which from my point of view is similar with the Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet[footnoteRef:18]. In both tragedies the causes are “forbidden love” and “forced/arranged marriage”. The impossibility to be together and the fact that the couples couldn’t decide for themselves drove them into the act of suicide. The parental influence from Juliet’s family and Moll’s mother had negative consequences over their lives, because instead of consulting with them they just decide for them without thinking about their wishes and desires. [18: S. Pridmore, G. Walter: “Mitu Molla (16 years) and Soud Sheikh (17 years) lived in neighboring villages in Gopalganj district, Bangladesh. After their affair became public, Molla’s mother took her to a town 200k from her village and married her against her will, to a man twice her age. At this point, Sheikh was at high school in the capital Dhaka.

Two months later, when Molla went home to visit her parents, Sheikh left Dhaka and met her in her village. On Valentine’s Day, they tied their hands together and jumped to their deaths from a mobile phone tower. Sheikh had earlier telephoned his brother to say that they planned to die on Valentine’s Day “to stay together forever”]

As a final part of this essay I would like to analyze Ben Jonson’s poem “On my first son”[footnoteRef:19] in relation to the immigrant children which die every day, and in particular to the death of Alan Kurdi[footnoteRef:20]. [19: Agnieszka Romanowska, Power Point: Seminar 5, slide 49] [20: Death of Alan Kurdi, last updated July 20, 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Alan_Kurdi, accessed on July 25, 2019 ]

In the opening lines of his poem, Ben Jonson highlights the source of his mourning: the death of his son, and the torment that he could see him growing up only for seven years as the following line underlines “Seven years tho’ wert lent to me, and I thee pay,”[footnoteRef:21]. When you lose a child, you lose a part of you, and this grief and sorrow will eat your insides up. Jonson through this poem tries to struggle against his sadness and to get used to his loss, and because when someone dies this is not under our control, he writes this poem thinking that somehow this will give him a relief. Personally, I think that the author in the line two “My sin was too much hope of thee, lov’d boy.”[footnoteRef:22], emphasizes the fact that he sinned, and the boy’s death might be as a sacrifice. He loved his son very much as we deduce from previous line, and he pays by suffering “and I thee pay”[footnoteRef:23]. [21: Ben Jonson, On my first son, line 3] [22: Ben Jonson, On my first son, line 2] [23: Ben Jonson, On my first son, line 3]

Critical Analysis of Causes for Homicide: Gun Crimes Are the Product of Certain Opportunities

Abstract:

Crimes committed with guns are happening daily in our society. The point of this research paper is to collect secondary analysis data on every state in the U.S. to find how their state, federal, and local gun laws could open opportunities for crime and death rates that were committed with firearms. This research will be looking at state gun laws and the main crimes that are committed with guns. The main crimes are homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, rape, and robbery rates. I believe that certain opportunities are in fact the product of certain crimes that are committed with guns. My research results showed that there is evidence that when laws change in different states five relating variables change as well. The five related variables are homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, rape and robbery rates with the use of firearms. Since there is very little and limited evidence on how much the rates change, we cannot make a direct statement that more strict gun laws or less opportunities to obtain firearms will change these rates. The future studies should include face to face interviews with important officials. Also, group focus points with the population that uses their opportunities to commit crime with firearms.

Purpose and Rationale:

The purpose of this research is to see if smart and strict gun laws can prevent gun violence in all 50 states of the United states. Every state has some kind of crime that is involved with guns, making it a problem for the entire country. I think doing research on this topic will give support and information to Local, State, and Federal law enforcement officials. This research information can ease their fight on crimes related with guns. This research is important because, we will be able to establish how policies effect the crime rates. Research will show what gun policies will increase crimes committed with guns like, concealed- carry laws and stand-your-ground laws. As well as increase, it can show what laws decrease gun crimes. Two policies that can decrease gun violence are background checks and bans on people associated with mental illnesses.

This was the problem that I chose because, this is such a “hot” topic in today’s society. America has such a unique problem with gun violence that no other developed country is dealing with. Many of the stats that I will explain proves that more guns in the society means more gun deaths, which is also fueling this research. This problem is very significant because, this is a problem that everyone in the country is being affected by. This makes it very reasonable why I picked this problem over another problem that only effects a small population.

Also, I picked to do research on this problem because, thousands of men, women, and children are killed by guns each year. The U.S accounts for a huge percentage of gun violence in the world making it a relevant topic to research. This topics relevance is very powerful in the society we live in today. Many people do not like to talk about this topic because of the politics but, by doing research on the topic I can bring the politics to a minimum and express the power that the stats hold.

Literature Review:

This problem has been researched before which made it very easy to find multiple data sources to go look at and see what the results were and compare them to mine. My problem fits in with prior research because, I am looking at gun crimes and how they are the product of certain opportunities. The main crimes committed with guns are suicide, homicide, aggravated assault, rape, and robbery. All these crimes have been researched, making it easy to find the rates of them in every state. There are many researchers working on the same problem. With many of people working on this, it opens up a lot of databases that people can go get valuable information from. The opportunities to commit gun violence come from the laws we have on every law enforcement level, from local to federal.

In the Article “GUN RIGHTS OR GUN CONTROL? HOW CALIFORNIA’S WAITING PERIOD LAW CAN PAVE THE WAY TO INCREASED REGULATION” from the Maag Library data base, by Natasha Tran explains how the court determines gun laws and how they decide what is and what is not against the constitution when someone challenges it. Step-1 to the court’s decision is to determine whether or not the policy goes against the second amendment and our understanding of it in the past. The court looks to see if it falls under a small category of presumptively lawful regulatory measures. Also, they look to see if the law goes into a longstanding prohibitions category. This step is looking for a law that does not allow the policy to be passed and if the law can be followed back to the founding person of the law. If a law is found, the court cannot have a debate or analysis of it, it is just upheld.

The Second step comes into play if there is a law that restricts policy but is inside the second amendments boundary. This allows the court to determine the scrutiny of the law. When determining the scrutiny, the court must consider how close the law is to the core of second amendment and how serious the law effects our rights. These steps make it very hard to control guns and laws on them (Tran, 2019).

This research relates to my problem and hypothesis because, these steps are very time consuming and tedious making it hard for lawmakers. These are some of the reasons it is hard to make new gun laws and policies in the U.S. This process is what allows people have opportunities to possess guns and use them in violent and criminal acts. This is important in my research because, this is showing that our laws give people more of an opportunity to commit crimes with gun. Guns laws are becoming harder every year to take less gun’s outs of the society.

State and local governments have intermediate scrutiny which allows them to make gun regulations much easier. However, this gives us less guidance for our countries future with gun laws and allows a lot of space for people to argue and fight the laws. The state and local governments have a lot of power but, since it is not federal law people still can fight the local and state regulations and push that their second amendment was compromised. The court is who determines if the state or local regulations can be upheld or rejected (Barry, C. L., Webster, D. W., Stone, E., Crifasi, C. K., Vernick, J. S., & Mcginty, E. E. (2018).

This is related to my research question and hypothesis because, I must look at the laws in every state and at every level of the government of the state to get real results on the opportunities the people have in the state to commit gun violence crimes. This article allowed me to see how the government looks at laws and how the laws are passed or rejected along with, how the state and local lawmakers can defer from the federal laws.

State laws have the most laws when it comes to guns but, the laws are very cloudy when it comes to explaining to regular citizens. The state laws are very different and more open when comparing every state. There are benefits to having multiple policies in every state because, the states with lower gun crimes can set a perfect model for other states and their governments to join along with their policies. There are disadvantages as well, gun laws at the state and federal level are not the same making it hard when crossing state borders. Some strict laws can be relaxed laws in different states. When running into problems like this the court has a pattern of making the weaker law the standard to go from (Gun Control in U.S,2000).

This article helped me in my research by providing me with the information on state laws and how they are different from federal laws in every state, along with being different with other state laws. This is good information because, I am looking at how different state laws effect the gun crime rates in all the states of the U.S. Also, this article provides how a lot of state laws are made and that is from one state having lower gun crimes making other states realize and begin following their policies making it more uniform across the country.

In the article “The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban on Gun Violence Outcomes: An Assessment of Multiple Outcome Measures and Some Lesson for Policy Evaluation” from the Maag Library data base, Koper and Roth explain, how an assault rifle ban made a huge impact. The most important reason of this ban was for the assault rifles to have a smaller magazine capacity. This was important because, in a large number of mass murders the suspect had an extended magazine allowing him to shoot more bullets faster without reloading (Koper, Roth, 2001).

This article is very relevant to what I am researching because, after this ban it showed that the number of homicides went down when using an assault rifles in crimes. This goes along with what I am researching and how I think more gun laws and regulations will make a decrease in the homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, rape and robbery rates. This article is just one of many articles that help me in my research and hypothesis. It helps by explaining real data that proved gun bans and regulations can help decrease the opportunities for people to be involved in gun related violence.

In the article “Homicide and Suicide Rates Associated with Implementation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act” by J. Ludwig and J. Cook it provides important information how a gun policy reduced suicide rates. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act was passed in 1994. This act gives gun shops the opportunity to perform a computer evaluation of a national system of background checks and waiting periods for the purchase of handguns by citizens that buy from federally licensed firearms dealers. This article found that the Brady Act in fact does have an associated with reductions in the firearm suicide rate for persons aged 55 years or older. They found that it does not have a big effect on the overall rate. (Ludwig, Cook, 2000).

This article is very important because, they found a reduction in suicide rates with a certain older age group. All though the overall suicide rate did not decrease, it does not make this research meaningless. If the act is tweaked out or updated a little, the act can very well have the chance to decrease suicide opportunities by use of guns. This is related to how I am researching the certain opportunities that people have to commit violence with the use of guns.

The article “Violence and public policy” by Franklin E. Zimring explains, how aggravated assault, robbery, and rape have an effect on the overall death rate by the use of guns. This articles results showed that citizens that are victims of robberies will have less resistance if the criminal is carrying a gun but, he found that the death rate is three times higher for robberies at gunpoint. Areas where gun ownership is powerful or popular deaths rates from these crimes are higher than other areas where gun ownership is limited (Zimring, 1991).

These findings are relevant to my research because, Zimring found research on areas that have a correlation between gun ownership and crimes of robbery, assault, and rape by the use of firearm resulting in deaths. His research supports my hypothesis and how I think, the more opportunities people have to commit crime with firearms, it will result in more violence with the use of guns and increasing the death rate.

Theory:

The theory I am studying is rational choice, rational choice theory is a beginning for understanding and formally copying social and economic behavior. The base of rational choice theory is that aggregate social behavior comes from the behavior of individual people, each of these people are making their own individual decisions. My theory relates with this very well, will people that have more opportunities to commit crimes using guns go and commit them? Basically, I am asking, does gun laws and regulations increase or decrease the chances or opportunities for gun violence in the society we live in?

Hypothesis

My hypothesis is, I think gun crimes are the product of certain opportunities. This relates with rational choice theory because, people that have the opportunity to possess guns and do whatever they want to do with them. This makes it very easy to commit gun crimes by their own choice with very little gun laws to stop and prevent them. I made this hypothesis because, in the United States there is a major problem with gun violence. We have a lot of laws that are not strict enough to put a stop to these crimes. When the government and the public talk about gun laws people are in a very grey area because of the Constitution. The second amendment is the reason law makers today are having a problem with what gun laws can be enforced today. The U.S. needs to make laws that will decrease the opportunities for people to commit crimes with firearms. Also, I believe that more gun laws and regulations will decrease the gun related crimes and activities. I think homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, rape and robbery rates will all decrease with more laws.

Research Design:

My research design comes from a quantitative research design that is correlational. A quantitative research design depends on the gathering or collection of data. It is an analysis of numerical data to describe, explain, predict, or control variables and phenomena of interest. A quantitative correlational design explores relationships among different variables. This design does not require the variables to be controlled.

I chose this research design because, this design involves secondary analysis data which does not conflict with any ethical issues or concerns. I’ve been getting my data from many different sites that are reliable and valid. I conducted my research in all 50 states of the U.S. I collected data on the last 5 years of each state and how their gun laws have changed. I had to compare what states had more strict gun laws than others.

Then I collected data on five different variables that could help improve the results of my research. The five variables are homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, robbery and rape rates of each state. The UCR provided a lot of this information but, I also used other government websites that I cited in my reference page. After collecting this information, I started to compare the data to each other. I compared what states gave more citizens the opportunities to commit crimes with guns and how my variables were affected by these opportunities (Uniform Crime Reporting, 2018) (Taking Aim at Gun Violence. (2003).

Sampling:

To get the best results from my research I needed to sample from all 50 states of the U.S. I chose to sample from all 50 states because, every state has different gun laws and regulations making my research realistic if I took data from all the states in the U.S. The UCR gave me most of my information on my five variables I was looking at. The local, state, and federal government statues, laws, and regulations gave me the extra information I was researching.

Measurement:

My rate variables are interval-ratio making my research easier to collect data. This means my variables describe a relationship with the values. The interval measurement is a numbered scale that we can know the order and the exact differences of the values. The ratio measurement is very similar but, this measurement has an exact zero making my results and data open for descriptive or inferential stats.

My five variables are the homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, rape and robbery rates with the use of guns in the U.S. These five variables were chosen because, these five rates in every state have a relationship with the gun laws in every state. If one law changes these rates with change as well. The homicide rate is important because, this rate makes up one-third of all the firearm deaths in the U.S. The suicide rate is important because, it is the most common death by a firearm. This rate has a relationship with the rate of gun ownership as well. Areas with higher gun ownership report more suicide deaths by guns than areas with lower gun ownership (Ludwig, Cook, n/d) (MONSTERS, MYTHS, AND MENTAL ILLNESS:/ n/d)

The next variable is aggravated assault, this variable is important because it shows a relationship with firearms that are committed in assault cases. The next variable is the rape rate, this is a serious criminal act and it becomes bigger when people use a firearm. This variable explains with rates how the gun laws do not affect the legal gun deaths but, is still a problem with gun deaths in the U.S. (Seitz, S. T. (1972). (Safehome.org, 2019)

I used this graph because, it relates to my measurement of my data and how the gun laws and gun deaths have a relationship when looking at the deaths from guns overall. This is just a basic overview of the laws compared to gun violence opportunities that the laws give criminals.

Ethics:

From an ethical standpoint I am researching and gathering a secondary data analysis of aggregate data, meaning my ethical issues are exempt. I showed good ethics in this research paper by citing my sources and not taking other people’s data and claim it as my own.

Analysis:

My research is quantitative correlational research. My main research question is, are gun related deaths and crimes the product of certain opportunities. The certain opportunities that I am researching are looking at the gun laws and regulations in every state of the U.S. I looked at five different variables that have a correlation and relationship with my question. The five variables are homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, robbery and rape rates of every state. I chose to look at these five variables because, they have a relationship with the results from the laws and opportunities people have to commit gun violence. To gather this information, I used many data bases but, the main data base was the UCR. Another data base I used was the Center for disease control and prevention along with many others I cited in my reference page.

Results:

The problem of gun violence is a huge and difficult situation through the state, local, and federal government levels. Many governments agree and support that firearm regulations and laws are a necessary measurement to lower the gun deaths in their state. Other states do not take this stance in the problem and believe more gun laws will not affect the rates of the variables I mentioned. While the stats and facts may express themselves there is no great solution for this problem.

In my research I found that the more opportunities people have to commit gun crimes does not affect the gun deaths in every situation but, it does affect the homicides by certain guns. My research found that laws and regulations do not change the suicide rate overall but, it does change for the population of the age 55 and older that commits suicide. The aggravated assault, robbery and rape rate did change in areas with where there are more ownerships of guns because of less firearm restrictions.

Conclusions:

My research, “Does certain opportunities result in gun violence and deaths by guns” has mixed results. I found that firearm regulation and laws limit the opportunities in some ways but, the lack of strict laws open opportunities as well. There is evidence that when laws change in different states five relating variables change as well. The five related variables are homicide, suicide, aggravated assault, rape and robbery rates with the use of firearms. Since there is very little and limited evidence on how much the rates change, we cannot make a direct statement that more strict gun laws or less opportunities to obtain firearms will decrease gun related violence or the death by firearms rate.

Alternative Methodologies:

Other methodologies for future research would be to perform the research using qualitative research. I think if I did this research again or others research this topic, they should use face to face interviews with the public officials and government officials. This could benefit on more information about the laws and opportunities people have to use firearms. Another method would be to use focus groups to see what groups of people are using their opportunities to commit violence with firearms.

References

1. Barry, C. L., Webster, D. W., Stone, E., Crifasi, C. K., Vernick, J. S., & Mcginty, E. E. (2018). Public Support for Gun Violence Prevention Policies Among Gun Owners and Non–Gun Owners in 2017. American Journal of Public Health,108(7), 878-881. doi:10.2105/ajph.2018.304432
2. Block, R. (2007). Book Review: Ludwig, J., & Cook, P. J. (Eds.). (2003). Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Homicide Studies,11(4), 340-342. doi:10.1177/1088767907306548
3. Gun Control in the United States – Small Arms Survey. (2000). Retrieved from http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/L-External-publications/2000/2000 OSI Gun control US.pdf
4. Gun Laws and Deaths. (2019, April 27). Retrieved from https://www.safehome.org/resources/gun-laws-and-deaths/
5. Gun politics in the United States. (2019, April 29). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_States
6. Kleck, G., & Patterson, E. B. (1993). The impact of gun control and gun ownership levels on violence rates. Journal of Quantitative Criminology,9(3), 249-287. doi:10.1007/bf01064462
7. Koper, C. S., & Roth, J. A. (n.d.). The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban on Gun Violence Outcomes: An Assessment of Multiple Outcome Measures and Some Lessons for Policy Evaluation. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1007522431219
8. Ludwig, J. (2000). Homicide and Suicide Rates Associated With Implementation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. Jama,284(5), 585. doi:10.1001/jama.284.5.585
9. MONSTERS, MYTHS, AND MENTAL ILLNESS: A TWO REDUCING GUN … (n.d.). Retrieved from https://gould.usc.edu/why/students/orgs/ilj/assets/docs/25-2- ODonnell.pdf
10. Redding, R. E., & Shalf, S. M. (2001). The Legal Context of School Violence: The Effectiveness of Federal, State, and Local Law Enforcement Efforts to Reduce Gun Violence in Schools. Law Policy,23(3), 297-343. doi:10.1111/1467-9930.00115
11. Seitz, S. T. (1972). Firearms, Homicides, and Gun Control Effectiveness. Law & Society Review,6(4), 595. doi:10.2307/3052950
12. Taking Aim at Gun Violence. (2003). Jama,290(5), 583. doi:10.1001/jama.290.5.583
13. Tran, N. (2019). 1. GUN RIGHTS OR GUN CONTROL? HOW CALIFORNIA’S WAITING PERIOD LAW CAN PAVE THE WAY TO INCREASED REGULATION. 50(4), 883- 898. Retrieved May 1, 2019.
14. Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. (2018, September 10). Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/ucr
15. Zimring, F. E. (1991). Firearms, Violence and Public Policy. Scientific American,265(5), 48-54. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1191-48