Criminal Theories of Robbery - Essay Example

www.academia-research.com Sumanta Sanyal Criminology: Theories on Robbery d: Criminology: A Comparative Study on Prevalent Theories on Robbery Abstract The study introduces robbery as a crime with Canadian statistics that support that robbery is a violent crime that affects a large part of a country's population. It presents the demographic prevalence of both offenders and victims. It treats the subject of urbanization which has direct links with enhancing criminality and why this is so. It next treats two theories: Pattern Theory and Routine Activity Theory. It points out the salient features of each theory before entering into a discussion that demonstrates that pattern theory is more inclined analyzing the crime from the offender's qualities while the routine activity theory is more inclined to study criminality from the aspect of the victim's susceptibility. This is even though both theories profess to be ones that posit their assumptions based on the criminal event - human ecology. The study ends with advice on how the inclusion of all people from all walks of life can enable a successful precautionary as well as preventive approach to crime as a whole and robbery in particular. Introduction Though some very elaborate theories are often proposed to explain robberies in the negative contexts of mental health and social problems the main and very down-to-earth explanations come from the perpetrators themselves - money, thrills, drugs and peer influences. These reasons, some of them quite trifling, are the principal propellants that induce persons to attempt to take by force things of some value from other persons. As representative of overall international demographical trends Canadian statistics reveal that robbery is almost the exclusive preserve of the young male. In Canada just 5 % of those accused of robbery are female, about two-thirds of those accused are below 25 and almost no accused is above 50. Also, approximately 16 % of those accused are young offenders (Research Division, Correctional Service of Canada, 1995). Though the derived statistics is slightly dated study of recent literature reveals that the trends persist to the present day for most countries, including the USA. Another alarming trend revealed by statistics for robbery is that it is the crime most feared by victims. This is even though is constitutes about 10 % of all violent crimes committed in Canada (Research Division, Correctional Service of Canada, 1995). This is because robbery involves a high probability of suffering physical harm from a total stranger and it can happen to anyone anywhere, at any time. Robbery offenders are also more likely to use weapons than other offenders. About one quarter of robberies involve usage of fire-arms, one quarter involves usage of other weapons like clubs and knives and one half involves usage or threat of some sort of physical force. Also, what is alarmingly important, from the victims' point of view, is that almost one quarter of robbery victims in Canada sustained some sort of minor physical injury with about 4 % being treated medically either at the scene of the crime or at a medical facility after transportation there from the scene of crime (Research Division, Correctional Service of Canada, 1995). Another good indicator of the seriousness of the crime is that almost 80 % of offenders accused of robberies are incarcerated while, for offenders of other crimes convicted at Canadian federal courts during the same period, the figure is only 23 %. Statistics for those sentenced for two years or more in prison reveal that 20 % are there for robbery offenses. A December 31, 1994, survey revealed that almost one third of all federal offenders were identified as robbery ones (Research Division, Correctional Service of Canada, 1995). As mentioned earlier the statistic is slightly old but not much has changed since, especially in the manner of general trends in overall crime in most countries. Given the serious nature of the crime and its proneness to violence, it is germane to study prevailing criminal theories that define the motivation of offenders and how such motivation can be fruitfully diverted to good purpose so that succor can be brought to a long-suffering populace, of whatever country it may be, who feel largely victimized by a crime over which they seemingly have no hand. Criminal Theories: An Overview The study proceeds to find explanations for a crime like robbery by investigating causes and effects proposed by two groups of theories - environmental crime theories and routine activities theories. Before presenting the exact theories contained in these two groups further notice is made of the underlying social problems that lead to crime universally in a global context. This shall be particularly useful in understanding some of the crime theories dealt with later. In the present global environment, both for the west and the east, cities, especially the conurbations and megacities, are considered to be the most significant yardsticks of advancement in levels of civilization where most of the greatest steps put forward by humankind are taken. Yet they remain a contradiction in the sense that they develop and sustain severe concentrations of social problems. These concentrations are a result of several factors the primary of which is segregation (How Dangerous is Urban Segregation 2004). Urban sociologists agree that segregation is a result of social inequality and the preferences of population groups opting to partake in social goods and markets determined by their place of residence and the associated opportunity structures. The degree of segregation is an indicator of the degree of overall national integration or disintegration (How Dangerous is Urban Segregation 2004). There is some dispute on the levels of insecurity by the problem of segregation with Germany being somewhat optimistic while prognostications carried out in France, Great Britain and the USA are all negative. Since one of the most virulent problems posed is robbery, especially robbery accompanied by violence, it is germane to investigate more how segregation assists in the generation and sustenance of crime in general. Other crimes that make notable entry with the effects of extreme segregation are murder and ethnic violence. The principal reason why robbery is being treated in this light is because segregation does institute certain effects that induce a criminal mentality that in turn sustains robbery, among other crimes. In particular context of victim-offender constellations the effects of segregation are studied in relation to co-existence among different social, ethnic and religious groups and the questions that arise and require answers in the short term are as below. When violence does diminish with the separation of certain groups When does violence increase with the movement of groups from one part of the city, maybe the periphery, to another part, maybe the center When does violence escalate in a socially and ethnically mixed population concentrated in a small area (How Dangerous is Urban Segregation 2004) Answers to these questions may determine the level of security available to members of different socio-economic groups, socio-economic being taken as a broader grouping under which ethnicity may be included, when such groups are found intermixed in small areas of the city. In this context it must be noted that rural areas are not exempt from primarily violent crimes like robbery but the extenuating causes for these crimes are entirely different from those of cities. While segregation is acknowledged as the primary cause in cities in rural areas it may be the wide spread of the incumbent population over a large area leading to often extreme isolation and, thus, presenting opportunities to offenders, including robbers. Gloomy forecasts for the US predict that continuing urbanization will further widen the hiatus between the affluent and the economically- deprived. Taking into account current population trends and the ecological distribution of criminality in US cities it is predicted that the poor will become more segregated from the affluent, both spatially and socially. This alarming trend will further increase incidence of crime among the poor that will in turn cause the affluent to recede even further from the poor. This extreme polarization, with isolation of the poor from the affluent, will cause a vicious circle of class alienation that will only aggravate the problems of social security, to which robbery continues to be a major threat (How Dangerous is Urban Segregation 2004). Since in the present age human society, except in the poorest countries, is highly urbanized and some of the socio-economic problems delineated as causes of crimes like robbery by the following crime theories it is useful to note that many of these socio-economic problems arise because of segregation in the cities. Crime Theories The following theories, generated from different perspectives - both offender and victim - primarily take into account the human ecology that generates crimes like robbery. It must be noted here that robbery as a crime is seldom treated in isolation of other crimes, especially violent ones, since most crimes have similar sources and almost similar effects. Pattern Theory Referenced from Brantingham and Brantingham (1981, 1984) pattern theory does not take into account the offender's perspective but instead studies the crime statistics or geographical layout of crime occurrences. It looks at differing scales of patterns of crime on the city level to the building level. It focuses on the how crime happens at a particular location at a particular time by studying habits of both offenders and victims. It postulates that there is a pattern in the occurrence of crime that is correlated to habits of both offenders and victims but the crime locations are not uniform across a geographical neighborhood. The principal assumptions of the theory are as is given. Certain individuals are motivated to crime There is a multi-staged target selection process The selection process is influenced by cues emanating from the environment Environmental cues and cue clusters are used and reused by criminals to form templates for perpetuation There are often groups of offenders among whom the templates are relatively fixed and have similar qualities (Environmental Criminology, 2003) Patterns of crime can then be developed from these fixed templates by studying the selection process from the perspectives of space and time where spatial qualities are understood in conjunction with behavioral patterns in the environment. Certain distinguishable qualities of criminals postulated by the theory are as give. Crimes are committed close to the home of the victim or near major activity nodes in the environment Offenders tend to cluster together Crime happens in the action spaces of offenders (Environmental Criminology, 2003) Thus, patterns can be drawn that show that crime happens along pathways and nodes that are used by clusters of offenders when and where suitable targets are available (Environmental Criminology, 2003). The pattern theory essentially puts the offender and victim in place and time with emphasis on the place of the criminal event. Routine Activity Theory This theory is based on the work of Shaw and McKay (1929, 1942) who examined how the interaction between sociological factors and community structures generated crime. It is also spacio-temporally dependent on the human ecological factor as activities humans indulge in have correlation to social and community structures and time. It made two basic assumptions about the criminal event: there had to be convergence of three elements for a criminal act to take place - a motivated offender, a target and the lack of guardianship, and criminal activities form part of the routine activities of people living and surviving in the city. (Environmental Criminology, 2003) Cohen and Felson (1979) studied in retrospect the rise of crime in the cities in the 1950s utilizing this theory. They found that the increase of women going to work left unguarded homes which posed as easy targets to burglars. The relative easiness of the target minimized motivation levels and crimes of this sort rose (Environmental Criminology, 2003). Cohen and Felson also said this of their theory which was more of crime than of criminality - "Unlike many criminological inquiries, we do not examine why individuals groups are inclined criminally, but rather we take criminal inclination as given and examine the manner in which the spatio-temporal organization of social activities helps people to translate their criminal inclinations into action" (1979: 589. Derived from: James R. Brunet, P. 69, 2002). Using the basic assumptions of the theory posited earlier Miethe and Meier (1994: 39) forwarded three propositions to position the theory in a modern context. Greater levels of non-household tasks would make individuals more visible for and accessible to criminal offenders and increase overall victimization risks. Higher levels of self-protection or guardianship should decrease individuals' risks and aggregate rates of predatory crime. Individuals or properties with higher subjective or material values should incur higher risks from criminals than less attractive individuals or properties (James R. Brunet, P. 69, 2002). Discussions on the Two Theories Though both the Pattern Theory and the Routine Activity Theory base their assumptions on factors of human ecology there is a salient difference between the two. It lies in the remedial actions recommended in conjunction with the individual theories. While the pattern theory rather clinically advocates study of the patterns or templates of criminals to undertake remedial action the routine activity theory has a major benefactor to its cause who proposed certain rather humane ways to achieve remedial measures with perpetrators. It is accepted for this study that the pattern theory advocates usual remedial actions undertaken for reforming criminals without any actual specificity. On the other hand one of the revivers of the Routine Activity Theory Felson definitely advocated linking routine activity to Hirschi's control theory (1969) (James R. Brunet, P. 70, 2002). This was reputedly to counter the theory's rather objectified assumption of accepting criminality in a simplistic manner. The control theory is an informal social model that was subsequently incorporated into the general structure of the routine activity model to incorporate some measure of remedial action. It was incorporated in two steps. In the first stage, it is asserted, society establishes some social bonds, which can act as a handle attached to individuals. In the second stage, someone with sufficient knowledge of the offender (mother, father, siblings, other intimate members of the family) can grasp that handle and acquire control. Thus, the revised routine activity theory now allowed guardians to supervise the safety of the target while the criminal tendencies of the potential offender is being monitored by an intimate person who can exert informal social control over him or her by virtue of being linked by social bonds. Felson said of this - "Informal social control requires both attaching handles to youths and organizing community life so that such handles can be grasped" Felson 1995: 54. Derived from: James R. Brunet, P. 70, 2002). Felson (1998) also advocated the cause of self-control as a role in restraining individuals from committing crimes and he also stipulated that those with low levels of self-control should be assisted (James R. Brunet, P. 71, 2002). Another singular dissimilarity that seems to be inherent within the context of the two theories is that though both theories place emphasis on the spatio-temporal parameters of the criminal event rather than on either the offender or the victim this similarity is superficial and the pattern theory is more inclined to examine crime from the perspective of the offender than the routine activity theory which, on the other hand, seems to examine crime from the perspective of the victim. This is so in the following manner. Pattern theory places emphasis on apprehending crime by revealing and studying criminal templates for perpetrating crime while the routine activity theory places emphasis on the susceptibility of the victim to the intentions of the offender in examining possibilities of criminal occurrences. The routine theory explicitly incorporates the presence or absence of a guardian in its assumptions while the pattern theory does not do so. Instead the pattern theory posits the susceptibility of pathways and nodes in a neighborhood in temporal terms that can by implication be interpreted as being susceptible primarily because it does not have much possibility of enabling successful guardianship. Thus the two theories do approach criminality through the common medium of human ecology but the pattern theory is more oriented towards the offender's propensity while the routine activity theory is much more inclined towards the victim's condition, if not perspective, within a spatio-temporal range. Conclusion The study ends with the conclusion that both theories it has focused on has legitimacy within the present criminology for use by both professionals and laymen. Laymen are mentioned because the present scenario of freedom when anyone can be at any place at any time demands that all individuals, whether professionally assigned to the task or not, should be aware of the possibility of crime, including robbery, and take preventive measures that can shield him or her from criminal acts. As David Indermaur puts it reductions of opportunities for violence, to which robbery is highly prone, can be achieved in two ways: by taking routine precautions that will reduce the likelihood of an encounter with a potential felon, a measure which requires some amount of individual knowledge and attention, even from laypeople, and by focusing on the confrontation between the victim and the offender, which has many stipulations one of which is not to demonstrate bravado in the face of threat from violent criminals (David Indermaur, 164) In the context of urban conglomerization and general fissuring trends between poor and affluent communities even in rural environments, if not spatially then certainly in levels of equity, it is essential that all responsible persons know a little about criminal theories so that they can not only defend themselves against perpetrators but also so that they can themselves act concertedly or individually to undertake measures that can reduce crime. References David Indermaur, Reducing the Opportunities for Violence in Robbery and Property Crime: The Perspectives of Offenders and Victims, Published in Criminal Justice Press. Extracted on 14th November, 2005, from: http://www.popcenter.org/Library/CrimePrevention/Volume%2005/07%20indermaur.pdf#search='David%20Indermaur%20Opportunities%20for%20violence' Environmental Criminology, Design Centre for CPTED, 2003. Extracted on 12th November, 2005, from: http://www.designcentreforcpted.org/Pages/EnvCrim.html#PatternTheory How Dangerous is Urban Segregation International Conference at the Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Conflict and Violence, 2004, Last modified 2005. Extracted on 12th November, 2005, from: http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/ikg/eng/conference_2004.htm James R. Brunet, Discouragement of Crime Through Civil Remedies: An application of a Reformulated Routine Activity Theory, Western Criminology Review, 4(1), 68-79, 2002. Extracted on 14th November, 2005, from: http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v4n1/Manuscripts/brunetarticle.pdf#search='James%20Brunet%2C%20routine%20activities%20theories' 1995 Statistics, Research Division, Correctional Service of Canada, Updated 2003. Extracted 14th November, 2005, from: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/briefs/b10/b10e_e.shtml Read More