Effects on Crime Rates during the 1990s Compared to the Period of 2000 to 2010 - Research Paper Example

? Effect (s) on crime rates during the 1990s compared to the period of 2000 to [Academic level] Effect (s) on crime rates duringthe 1990s compared to the period of 2000 to 2010 Crime stories dominate the TV news everyday. Crimes and violence are a worldwide phenomenon Well, it is not surprising anymore. In fact, since 1960s crime rates in the United States rose steeply at an alarming level as noted by Newsweek magazine in its February 27, 1967 issue. (Magazine Articles from 1967) Some experts ascribed crime rates rise to social breakdown in the family, the church, neighborhood, and any other invisible bonds coherent in a community. Some other attributed it to economic crisis and poverty, the influence of abuse in alcoholic drinks. the influence of excessive violence in films and videos, and the lack of respect for authority and the law. Yet, Douglas McDonald and Peter Finn (2000) noted that “use of illegal drugs began to be more widespread in the late 1960s, and that the increasing integration of the world’s economies has also expanded opportunities for organized criminal enterprises to traffic in drugs more efficiently and with less risk, to support terrorism, and to commit theft, often in a massive scale.”(p. 1) The effect of the drugs may lead to horrendous criminal activities. Aside from this, since drugs are very expensive, addicts frequently resort to crime such as burglaries, assaults and ambushes, to pay for their habit. However, McDonald and Finn also noted in their review article that in the period of 1960s, “the Federal Government had emerged to be more active in crime control”. Namely, ”in the Safe Streets Act of 1968, the US Congress defined the Federal Government’s responsibility for carrying out a coordinated national fight against crime;” due to “widespread urban rioting, anti-war activities, and increasing lawlessness…Congress responded by passing the Safe Streets Act of 1968, which established the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration;” due to “emerging epidemic of crack and powdered cocaine abuse and its associated violence…Congress responded again, passing the Crime Control Act in 1984 and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988.” (p. 2) These provisions may considerably affected the crime rates that it presented a downfall in the record of its rates during the 1990s. Based from the records compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, wherein levels of crime are measured by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, the national overall crime rate has been decreasing since 1991. Their listed categorized reasons for the decreasing rates are: effective strength of law enforcement agencies; administrative and investigative emphases of law enforcement; policies of other components of the criminal justice system; citizen’s attitudes towards crime; population density and degree of urbanization; variations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentration; economic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability; cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics; family conditions with respect to divorce and family cohesiveness; stability of population with respect to residents’ mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factors; modes of transportation and highway system; climate; and crime reporting practices of the citizenry. (Marowitz, 2000, p. 1) For easier analysis of the factors that affect the decreased in crime rate, FBI’s crime data, the United States Crime Index Rate, classified crime rates into two major components, which are property and violent crime rates. Violent crimes categories, crimes committed against people, are murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault, while property crimes include burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. (Marowitz, 2000, p. 3) Marowitz (2000) analysis on the statistics record of United States Crime Index, by the year 1960-1998, burglary rate’s decrease was seen from 1986 to 1991 but was paralleled by concurrent increases in the larceny-theft and motor vehicle theft rates, which give the idea of a shift of property crimes from residences and commercial areas to motor vehicles. However, as he observed, by the early 1990s, the rates of all seven types of crimes were decreasing. (p. 4) In fact, according to the National Crime Victimization Survey, that the property crime rate had dropped by 61 percent by the year 1998 from the year 1975. It also noted that burglary rates dropped dramatically from 1975 to 1998 by 65 percent, from 110 per 1,000 households into relatively low rate of 39 per 1,000 households. Also, a remarkable record of decline in theft rates, from 424 to 168 per 1,000 households, and motor vehicles thefts from 20 to 11 per 1,000 households. (McDonald & Finn, 2000, p. 12) Since then, US crime rates have continued to fall and keep on capturing attentions from commentators and analysts, each one giving its own perception regarding the underlying factors that possibly affect its decreasing rates. An article in Nation Homepage mentioned that some experts attributed the decrease in crime rates” as a result of the strong economy in the 1990s and the prevalence of tougher sentencing laws.” (“Violent crime rate in America”, 2002) Economic rise, however, may not be considered to be the main factor that affect the decrease in crime rate since violent crime does not vary systematically with the rate of unemployed. Presumably, not all unemployed were engaged in crime-related activities. However, economic rise might influenced crime rate decreased in indirect way. With strong economy, it could facilitate more budget for the government for implementing policies that will prevent and reduce crime. Like what is reported by McDonald and Finn (2000), that “during the past three decades, the Nation’s criminal justice agencies have implemented a wide range of approaches designed to reduce violent crime, drug abuse and drug trafficking, and crimes involving firearms. One of these developments is the increased number of police officers on the beat, the Justice Department’s Community Oriented policing Services (COPS) Office alone has helped local law enforcement agencies hire additional police officers and sheriff’s deputies.”(p. 24) I strongly believe, that above all other factors enlisted by the commentators and analysts, the increased number of police officers, distributed widely, in the streets, suburban areas, most especially in commercial areas, with strict implementations of improved regulations and laws, and with the benefits of modern technology, like computerized surveillance cameras, is the major factor that affects the decreased in US crime rates. Economist Steven Levitt reported that “between 1991 and 2001, the New York City police force grew 45 percent, an increase three times greater than the national average.” On his own perspective, he believed that increases in the number of police officers are effective in reducing crime, and he estimated that with the large expansion of the police force in New York City, there would be a reduction in crime as high as 18 percent more than the national average, even without any change in policing strategy. (p. 173) In fact, in his review journal, on his discussion of the “Four Factors That Explain the Decline in Crime”, he listed the “Increases in the Number of Police” as the first factor. He stated that the common political strategy in battling the rising crime is to hire more policemen. He also noted that “a number of recent studies have addressed this endogeneity problem with a wide variety of identification strategies and reached the conclusion that more police are associated with reductions in crime.”(p. 176) US crime rate continue to diminish according to United States Crime Index Rates Per 100,000 Inhabitants statistics records. By the year 1990, with the population record of 248,709,673, the recorded total crime rate of 5,820.3 per 1,000 inhabitants, wherein 731.8 was the recorded violent crime and 5088.5 for property crime. In ten years, by the year 2000, the record shows that there was a total crime rate per 1,000 people of 4,124.8 for 281,421,906 population, wherein violent crime was 506.5 and 3,618.3 for property crime. The decrease is remarkably high. Especially by the year 2009, the record shows that in 307,006,550 population, an astonishing rate of 3,465.5 for the total crime rate with 429.4 as recorded for violent crime 3,036.1 for property crime. (United States Crime Rates 1960-2009) While other noted factors might be accountable also in such astounding record of fall in crime rates, however, the police officers, in its increased population, might be considered as the forefront in the line of battling crimes, since the government first line of defense in combatting crime is by using the police forces. With policemen around, the people are more secured and unworried. Increased number of policemen may not directly reduce crime rates, but presumably, more policemen at random motorized patrolling around the vicinities may improve chances of catching suspects, and may also rise awareness for the criminals that will tend them to withdraw from criminal acts. Patrolling will be more effective if the policemen have upgraded police information and communication system. According to an article entitled Police Strategies, “patrol remains the backbone of police operations.” The article also mentioned that police officers may sometimes patrol on foot and most of the time by riding in cars. It added that patrolling on foot is more advantageous on the part of the people, since it enables close contact with them, making them less fearful of crime and improve citizen’s attitudes towards the policemen. However, car patrolling is more efficient in covering the vicinities. With the police cars traversing randomly through the streets within the vicinities will create the feeling that the police are everywhere. (Police section, para.2, 3) Therefore, while both types of patrolling, on foot and by cars, present advantageous factors, these two types are both deemed necessary to prevent crimes. The same article noted that “in the 1990s, the police adopted the so-called ‘proactive policing strategies’, in which police officers stimulate actions instead of waiting for calls.” (para.1) This proved true that increased police forces, with its policing strategic implementation, had the major effect in the downfall of crime rates from the year 1990s up to 2010. Since, police forces, with its ‘proactive policing strategies’, have greatly effected the decline in crime rates, it is reasonable to pursue and enhance the system of policing strategies. As mentioned in the article, “proactive police operations focus on the concentration of crime in certain offenders, places, and victims, and also include using decoys, going undercover, raiding, relying on information, stopping and frisking suspects, shadowing repeat offenders, policing repeat-complaint locations, and saturating an area with police to maintain order.”(Proactive Policing section, para.7) Obviously, assigning more patrol police in places where needed most is a very reasonable approach, since crime is not uniformly scattered throughout a certain vicinity. Solving crimes absolutely may not be possible. However, controlling and preventing crimes, as we have seen and experienced, is possible, yet, with government’s active implementation of its policies that have proven effective. While other commentators discredit the police force as the major factor that influenced the reduction of crime rates, still, police force is the forefront of the government when it comes to battling crimes. So, evidently by enhancing and strengthening our police force, crime rates may tend to continue in its declining rate. More than policies are needed to strengthen the police force. This requires more budget for hiring more policemen, for training and equipping them. But even then, the positive results outweigh the expenditures. The respect and trust of the citizen to our law enforcers, and to the government as well, are remarkably worthy and more valuable than in any other positive results of having lesser crimes in our society. References CliffsNotes.com. Police Strategies.(pp. 1,2,3,7). Retrieved Aug 09, 2011 from http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/Police-Strategies.topicArticleId-10065,articleId-9953.html Levitt, S. D., (2004). Understanding Why Crime Fell in the1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Decline and Six that Do Not, (pp. 173,176). Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(1). Retrieved Aug 09, 2011 from http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUnderstandingWhyCrime2004.pdf McDonald, D., Finn, P., (2000). Crime and Justice trend in the United States During the Past Three Decades, (pp. 1,2,12, 24). Abt Associates Inc. Retrieved Aug. 08, 2011 from http://www.abtassociates.com/reports/CJTrendsThreeDecades.pdf Magazine Articles from 1967. "US Crime, a Renaissance," Newsweek, 27 February 1967, 31-33. Katz v. United States (1967). Retrieved Aug. 08, 2011 from http://www.soc.umn.edu/~samaha/bill_of_rights/katz_magazines.htm Marowitz, L. A., (2000). Why Did the Crime Rate Decrease Through 1999? (And Why Might it Decrease or Increase in 2000 and Beyond/), (pp. 1, 3, 4) CJSC Research Series. Retrieved Aug. 08, 2011 from http://ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/misc/why/2sec12.pdf Nation Homepage. USA Today, (2002) Violent crime rate in America continues steep decline.. Retrieved Aug. 09, 2011 from http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-09-crime_x.htm United States Crime Rates 1960-2009. Retrieved Aug 09, 2011 from http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm Read More