Uniform Crime Report and the National Crime Victimization Survey - Research Paper Example

Critical Analysis of UCR and NCVS Introduction Crime can be measured using different methods and using different types of data. The United States uses two fundamental sources of data on crime, which are the National Crime Victimization Survey and the Uniform Crime Reporting program (Schmalleger, 2009). These two methodologies have both pros and cons, which will be discussed in this paper. In addition, the paper will also seek to discuss the measures for rape and arson according to the methods incorporated by both the UCR and NCVS. Both programs provide crucial information regarding the problems of crime in the country. Because they are conducted with different purposes in mind, focus on varied crime aspects sometimes, and use different methods, they both produce a comprehensive picture of the crime problems facing the United Sates than either could alone (Schmalleger, 2009). However, when it comes to individual offences, such as arson and rape, they differ in the quality of data produced. Uniform Crime Reports Arson Arson, under the UCR program, is defined as malicious or willful attempt to burn or burning another person’s property, aircraft or motor vehicle, public building, or dwelling house with intent to defraud or not (Hagan, 2013). Data collection on arson is only made officially for fires that have been determined by investigations to have been set willfully. Fires that law enforcement agencies label as of unknown origin or suspicious are not included in the data. The data collection procedure excludes arson estimates since agencies differ with regards to their degree of arson offence reporting. Due to the reporting unevenness, national, state, and metropolitan statistical areas offence rates for every one hundred thousand inhabitants are not inclusive of arson data. The arson rates are also calculated on the basis of received data from agencies that give data to the UCR program, after which data for a complete year are presented. The reporting includes arson year-to-year trend data, individual law enforcement agencies, and arson clearance data (Hagan, 2013). Rape This is defined as having carnal knowledge of a female against their will and forcibly. This includes assaults or attempts to rape and forcible rapes sans regard to the victim’s age. However, statutory offences where there is no force used are not included. The program counts one offence for every victim of assault with rape intent, attempted forcible rape, and forcible rape regardless of age (Hagan, 2013). Rape that involves force involving a familial offender and female victims is also regarded as forcible rape, rather than incest. Other sexual crimes are defined under Part II offences, which mean that only arrest data is collected for them. Statutory rape as an offence whereby no force is used but the victim is underage is also included in the total for arrests under the category of sex offences. Attacks on males are defined under sex offences or aggravated assaults, depending on extent and circumstances of the resulting injuries. The UCR program altered its rape definition to penetration of the anus or vagina with any object or body part, as well as penetration of a person’s mouth by another’s sex organs, no matter how slight, without their consent (Hagan, 2013). However, this definition became operational in January of 2013. Advantages and Disadvantages of the UCR Program One advantage of the UCR program is its allowance for a more comprehensive and thorough data depiction. It enables the researchers a better chance at studying criminal behaviour and crime (Lynch & Addington, 2012). Concerning rape, the NIBRS is able to collect data from both the offender and the victim, while also including information whether there were any arrests or not. Additionally, it is able to provide knowledge regarding the characteristics of the individual, for instance gender, age, and ethnicity, which provides additional information about the offender. The UCR guidebook also provides a detailed account of terminology for different sexual offences and the order that offences are to be allocated. Moreover, the NIBRS will allow for the knowledge about the perpetrators and victims as it centralizes data collection on 22-offence sub-classification that can then be classified into forty-six different infractions (Lynch & Addington, 2012). With regards to arson, the report is based on offences witnessed by law enforcement, reported to law enforcement, and reports where there were no arrests (Lynch & Addington, 2012). Information is provided voluntarily via local and state law enforcement agencies with the FBI procuring the data on crimes from police on the basis of their clearance rate. These clearance rates include arrested individuals who are charged, as well as recognized individuals who cannot be physically arrested due to other situations. The criminal offences are also categorized by law enforcement using an FBI designed classification system to determine whether it coincides with the official guidebook on arson (Lynch & Addington, 2012). It also covers situations with more than one criminal act and the precedence that is to be given to each. One significant disadvantage for the UCR with regards to rape is that it only includes raped females, leaving out same sex and male rape (Lynch & Addington, 2012). In addition, UCR does not take criminal offences that are not reported into account, which are referred to as crime dark figures. A victim of rape may fail to report the offence because they are unwilling to be involved in judicial procedure or they are embarrassed and ashamed. Finally, because of the hierarchy rule that classifies different offences into one offence, where burglary and rape occur, only rape is counted as it is the most serious crime. With regards to arson, the hierarchy rule is also a disadvantage as, for example, a murder outweighs arson and it is the only one recorded. It is also disadvantageous where there are victimless crimes that fail to harm property, and thus, are not reported (Lynch & Addington, 2012). Most of the arson-related crimes are unknown to law enforcement and are not reported. National Crime Victimization Survey Rape This is the most severe crime of a personal nature measured by the NCVS. The NCVS defines rape as carnal knowledge through threats to use force or use of force, which also includes attempts (James, 2009). However, statutory rape where no force is used is not included, although it does include homosexual and heterosexual rape. In investigating the occurrence of rape, the NCVS seeks to ascertain whether the victim was threatened or attacked with a form of sexual attack or threat. Whether anything was stolen from them during their attack, whether they were threatened or attacked by people they know or have net, a family member or relative, a friend or neighbor, or someone at school or work. In addition, it also seeks to ascertain whether the victim was coerced or forced to engage in an unwanted carnal act, the manner of the attack, injuries suffered, and the number of times attacked (James, 2009). Arson The NCVS measures for arson require that the investigator must have determined that the fire was really arson. The measurement of arson using the NCVS also excludes people under the age of 12 in its investigations. However, because the reasons for arson vary widely, the NCVS is not used to measure arson and excludes it altogether in the final report (James, 2009). This is also true for other offences like homicide, commercial crimes, and crimes against children below the age of 12. Advantages and Disadvantages of NCVS With regards to rape, the NCVS has a major advantage because it relies on both crime reports from law enforcement and interviews with members of households. This means that it can collect information on gender, income, ethnicity, and age as they relate to rape. It also does not rely on the hierarchy rule, which means that other crimes committed with the rape are also measured (Lynch & Addington, 2012). In addition, the ability to collect information that was not reported to law enforcement allows the researchers to access information that rape victims were not willing to provide to the police. The NCVS is also victim oriented and, via its crime studies, it advocates for the victims, as well as the direct correlation of crime on the victims. This allows it to be continually revised and questions added onto the survey. However, there are some disadvantages, such as inaccurate comparisons of data because it was reconstructed in 1992 utilizing diverse methods. It may also be liable to over-reporting or under-reporting crimes with some victims feeling the need to exaggerate the crimes, while others may be too traumatized to properly remember the crime (Lynch & Addington, 2012). Concerning arson, there are no advantages to using the NCVS since it does not measure arson. Opinion on Accuracy for Both Methods With regards to rape, the NCVS measure is the best tool. This is because it allows for crimes that were committed together with the rape to be measured. By allowing for data on ethnicity, age, income, and gender to be included through its household surveys, it allows for correlations of these factors with rape, while also enabling victims to report crimes that they felt too embarrassed to report before. Its victim-oriented stance ensures that new definitions and terminologies for rape are included within the measures. It is better than the UCR because the latter only includes female rape and excludes same sex or male rape. Finally, the absence of the hierarchy rule enables for measures of crimes that are most connected to rape. The UCR program, on the other hand, is the only measure for arson as the NCVS excludes arson from its measures. It allows for inclusion of arson incidents that are witnessed by law enforcement, reported to law enforcement, and incidents that did not involve an arrest. It also includes both perpetrators that are in custody and have been charged, as well as those who are yet to be apprehended for various reasons. References Hagan, F. E. (2013). Research methods in criminal justice and criminology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. James, N. (2009). How Crime in the United States is Measured. Ft. Belvoir: Defense Technical Information Center. Lynch, J. P., & Addington, L. A. (2012). Understanding crime statistics: Revisiting the divergence of the NCVS and UCR. New York: Cambridge University Press. Schmalleger, F. (2009). Criminology today: An integrative introduction. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc. Read More