The Pros and Cons of Crime Mapping within a Crime Prevention Context - Coursework Example

Crime Prevention Introduction As societies and global market, environments evolve, so does the human mind and behavior. The human mind is capable of devising constructive and destructive ideas. Through devising destructive ideas, crimes are committed. Crime refers to violation and contravening of set norms, regulations, guidelines in a society, for which laid down legal structures and frameworks are, established to offer a conviction (World Health Organization, 2004). Different societies and cultures in diverse global regions identify crimes differently. The severity of punishment and reprimand for crimes committed depends on various factors such as circumstances, deliberation and pre-meditation, strategizing, disclosure, purportedly preparations, incomplete crimes, complete crimes and proclaiming the crimes after the fact (Welsh & David, 2006). However, it should be, noted that not all breach of set rules and laws are termed as crimes such as breach of contract, and defamation among others. They are, instead referred to as offences (Chainey & Tompson, 2008). This is because crimes are considered as grievances done against the public while offences are, considered as grievances against a private party. In modern society, majority of crimes are recorded as cold cases due to lack of evidence to prosecute or inability to find a suitable suspect, while other cases remain unreported, unrecorded and others are merely pending in the corridors of justice (World Health Organization. 2004). This report seeks to candidly, highlight the pros and cons of crime mapping within a crime prevention context. This report seeks to analyze the pros and cons of crime mapping within a crime prevention context and thereby recommend the best strategies and programs for preventing crime and fostering peace and order in global societies. The paper starts with defining and expounding on crime mapping, and then the cons and pros are analysed. Crime mapping To fully, understand the concept of crime mapping there is, a greater need to grasp the types of crimes, causes of crime and various methods used to prevent crimes. There are three categories of crimes namely property crimes, violent crimes and public order crimes (Henry & Lanier, 2001). More often than not, crimes committed in different states, are termed and assembled based on their severity, which includes among others federal crimes, felonies, indictable offences, misdemeanors and juvenile delinquency among others (World Health Organization. 2004). Due to technological advances, improved IT infrastructures, easy access to organizations and personal information, more and more virtual crimes are being committed. In the 21st Century, there has been, increased rates of crimes committed over the internet, social networking sites, gambling, and faulty accounting programs among others (Paynich & Hill, 2009). There are various causes of crimes including increased mass populations and high levels of urbanization, poverty, media violence, deteriorating parenting skills and availability of parents, poor judgments on the part of the offender, diversity in population composition, economic situations comprising of level of income and access to employment (Welsh, & David, 2006). In addition, the means of transport and road networks, social-cultural elements and religious convictions, the conditions of the family structures, the environment, the effectiveness and efficiency of law enforcement groups and legal systems and the management and the importance placed on quality investigations of crimes by law enforcement personnel (Paynich & Hill, 2009). Crime mapping comes in to identify locations where most or least incidents of crimes occur, the types of crimes that occur in a particular area and most importantly, the likely causative agents of crimes in the specified area, thus, law enforcement agencies can formulate strategies necessary to combat and prevent future occurrence of crime in the said area (Boba, 2005). Crime mapping entails utilizing geographic data systems to carry out spatial evaluations of crimes and other policing matters (Chainey & Ratcliffe, 2005). Crime mapping emerges from the fact that for crimes to happen, it entails an offender meeting with a suitable target at a suitable location (Manning, 2008). The Pros of crime mapping The concept of crime mapping therefore, entails using crime analysts with collaboration with law enforcement stakeholders and related sectors to map, plan, envisage and evaluate the patterns of crime occurrence in a region (Chainey & Tompson, 2008). Crime mapping is, utilized in disciplines such as crime analysis and CompStat policing systems. Crime mapping is, done using GIS or Geographic Information Systems that help establish regions or areas mapped, in relevance to occurrence and tendency for crimes to occur. Crime mapping is a fundamental element in the fight against crimes and effectively and efficiently preventing crimes from being, orchestrated (Manning, 2008). Crime mapping is helpful in reducing the rates of crimes, enforcing and upholding the rule of law and is essential in preserving criminal justice (Scaramella, et al., 2010). Additionally, the practice is beneficial for communities in decreasing the collective rates for people to participate in criminal acts; minimizing the risk factors associated with compelling individuals to commit crimes and helping communities to become more crime aware (Welsh & David, 2006). With increasing rates of crimes in contemporary world both in developed and developing countries, crime prevention is not an option but a must do practice. This allows safeguarding of local and international peace, order and harmony, which is vital in stabilizing market environments and providing profit and non-profit organizations a stable platform on which to operate and function (Chainey & Tompson, 2008). This ensures the needs, expectations, preferences and tastes of the society and the world at large are, adequately, competently and sufficiently satisfied. The benefits of crime mapping as a law enforcement plan cannot be overemphasized. This is associated with the law enforcement stakeholders having an upper hand in anticipating crimes, identifying high crime areas, analyzing crime risks and hence, developing plan of action to eliminate crime and minimize it (Boba, 2005). Crime mapping is a beneficial tool for community policing, as communities are able to know what type of area they live in terms of crime concentration and thereby take crime defensive, preventive and response measures fundamental in minimizing crimes within neighborhoods (Manning, 2008). Effective crime mapping coupled with collaboration with the law enforcement agencies and personnel and the community is cost-effective, safer and healthier for the society compared to salvaging property set ablaze and damaged during robberies (Boba, 2005). Moreover, negative effects of losing lives of friends and relatives in crimes, treating victims of attempted murders, rapes and violent crimes, handling offenders and recovering from stigmatizing violent crimes such as homicides, bombings, and fraud among others (Welsh, B. & David, F. 2006). Crime mapping coupled with collaboration from concerned parties allow the police to know who the offenders are, where crimes are taking place and what crimes are being committed, implement programs and systems in place to prevent a crime prior to occurring and fostering unity among police enforcers, the community and other law enforcement related stakeholders. There are various analyses used in crime mapping to assess whether a region is a crime hot spot or not and it includes manual and eyeball analysis, graduated color map or choropleth map analysis, grid cell mapping methods, point pattern analysis or cluster analysis and standard deviation analysis (Welsh, B. & David, F. 2006). Crime mapping is a crime detection and prevention tool that if correctly and consistently used, helps formulate suitable policies and guidelines on criminal issues by the government agencies (Vann, & Garson, 2003). It aids the law enforcement management and stakeholders to make better and appropriate decisions on the mechanisms of stopping crimes before they occur and devising ways of mitigating the associated risk factors (Chainey & Tompson, 2008). Furthermore, the crime mapping practice helps in ensuring appropriate allocation of available resources; it helps the law enforcers in developing policing strategies and establishing tactical evaluations useful in predicting crimes and geographic crime profiling. Crime mapping is beneficial in comprehending trends of imprisonment, rates and patterns of recidivism; ensure appropriate community reform programs for freed offenders who have completed their prison terms, offenders released on parole and bail and those on community service (Boba, 2005). Additionally, the practice is helpful in analyzing the effectiveness and competence of crime prevention structures and systems and assessing the appropriateness of crime diminution measures and plans (Manning, 2008). For crime detectives and criminal profilers, crime mapping helps track where similar crimes have occurred and thereby identifying the trend of crimes in relation to establishing the works of serial crime offenders, random crime acts and identifying copycats of known serial killers. In addition, understanding the format of crimes and establishing the causative agent. This is very essential in apprehending criminals and curbing criminal gangs. GIS crime mapping software allows law enforcers handle large amounts of information within a short duration of time (Chang, 2008). in addition, security details on crimes, apprehension reports, accidents and connection to dispatch systems has help boost the reliability and accuracy of record management programs essential in investigating crimes. Data collected in crime mapping is, recorded and is fundamental in conducting long-term strategic crime analysis (Chang, 2008). It goes without saying the important role crime mapping plays in visualizing locations of criminal acts by law enforcers and researchers, in analyzing crime interventions programs, creating community mobilization and awareness about crimes; establish repeat calls for service and identifying crime hot sports (Vann, & Garson, 2003). With crime mapping, law enforcers are in a better position to cluster dissimilar data sources based on geographic elements and easily interpret the findings. GIS tools apply varied geographical aspects namely points, images, polygons and lines to estimate actual global factors (Chainey & Tompson, 2008). Cons of crime mapping There are different types of crime mapping namely single-symbol mapping, buffers, graduated mapping, chart mapping, density mapping, interactive crime mapping. Among factors that form, barriers to consistent and correct use of crime mapping tools and programs include inadequate financial resources since majority of funds, are, directed to other vital security areas such as terrorist watches. In addition, time constraints and inadequate training, skills, knowledge and experience about crime mapping and related programs and software and short supply of crime mapping and crime analysis personnel. Despite the benefits associated with crime mapping, it has a number of disadvantages although not many. Due to over reliance of crime mapping on modern technological and IT frameworks, spatial maps and GIS software are susceptible to malfunctioning and manipulation, therefore, may present false data and facts (Chang, 2008). Crime mapping depicts data on neighborhoods and communities with high and low crime rates (Vann, & Garson, 2003). This information is, made available to the community, which may result in massive migration of locals from the hot spot crime areas to the low risk crime areas. This may have an effect of spreading the rates of crimes to areas that initially did not. In addition to this, with law enforcers understanding which areas are hot spot crime areas and which are not, they are more likely to direct available resources such as finances and personnel to these areas and allocating minimal resources to low crime areas. This leaves the low crime areas susceptible to new trends of crimes. Since crime mapping uses different types of maps, the data findings will be, influenced by the design of the map, making the data analysis inconclusive. Crime maps are, exposed to abstraction, which present limited information, which is not helpful in helping formulate strategies to prevent and combat crime. Capturing the variable of time in maps is especially hard to do and may obscure daily or weekly variations of data (Chang, 2008). Crime mapping programs and GIS software are expensive to install and therefore, law enforcement agencies with small financial and personnel budgets lag behind in crime prevention interventions (Vann, & Garson, 2003). Given that crime mapping is, based on various theories and models, the practice present a loophole in identifying which is the most suitable model to use in one area over another. Among theories used in crime mapping and analysis includes environmental criminology theory that deals with identifying criminal trends in built ecologies and evaluates the effects of the environment on an individual’s cognitive behavior patterns. Routine activity theory implies that criminal offends by having the opportunity to do so. The theory implies crime occurs when an opportunity is, availed, there is less security, and the risks of being, seen and apprehension are low. Additionally, crime is not, initiated by social-economic factors such as bad parenting, poverty and social inequality. The rational choice theory on the other hands implies that an individual before committing a crime or an offence measures the means and the ends, the pros and cons and thereby makes a choice(Boba, 2005). The theory suggests that for a crime to happen there are factors that must be available namely accessibility to an appropriate target, inadequate rules and authority figure to stop the crime from occurring and availability of a motivated criminal. Crime mapping analysts utilizing data from varied sources run the risk of computerizing divergent data sets, having irreconcilable coordinate systems and conflicting map projections. Map scales, map projections and map symbols are susceptible to misrepresentation and therefore, may not represent the real facts on the ground thus, providing analysts with unreliable and inaccurate information on the patterns, trends, rates, location, offenders of crime (Vann, & Garson, 2003). Spatial scales such as Kennel Density used in crime mapping has the limitation of relying on point data. This has the effect of indicating a hotspot at a point of low crime, when the adjacent regions are high. In addition, use of grids present the challenge of including non-point information in the grid cells. Grids are prone to a challenge of having increased number of grid cells at the margin of boroughs, which are incomplete (Chang, 2008). Information and findings analyzed from crime mapping programs are, made available to the public and therefore, can be, used for commercial purposes such as by alarm installation firms who may promote their products and services to hot spot areas and residence that have experienced episodes of crimes and break-ins. Existing and potentials offenders may use the information gathered to strategize on where and how to commit successful crimes (Boba, 2005). Offenders knowing which locations to strike while avoiding locations with increased rates of apprehension can do this. Crime mapping present a negative effect on home, land and property values given that such information can easily be used by real estate investors to know which area to put in their investments and which not to (Boba, 2005). This means hot spot areas are likely to have decreased property values. This information can be, used by risk mitigating firms such as insurance agencies and firms. They can increase the premiums for individuals and property in hot spot areas and offer less insurance premiums for those in low crime occurring areas. Due to complexity of map representations, the community may not fully understand the findings and consequently, the maps may not serve the purpose they were, intended (Boba, 2005). Conclusion From the report, it is evident that crime mapping plays a major role in crime prevention and response. From criminal theories, crimes occur based on having a willing offender, opportunity, and having easy access to tools required to carry out the crime. Crime mapping is beneficial in identifying hot spot crime areas, analyzing trends and patterns of crimes, helping law enforcers in developing effective and efficient crime prevention and deployment programs and systems. Through crime mapping, the community is, made aware of the crime issues in their areas and is thereby able to take decisive and defensive measures. In addition, crime detectives are able to track locations and works of serial crime offenders, and keeping a close look at the effect of crime prevention and reduction strategies implemented. To avert the limitations of crime mapping such as existing and potentials offenders using the information gathered to strategize on where and how to commit successful crimes, using the information for commercial purposes and inability of the communities to understand the spatial maps, the State agencies and law enforcement agencies should only make available necessary information to avert crimes. In addition, employing qualified crime mapping personnel, and training law enforcers on how to read and interpret spatial maps. References Boba, R. 2005. Crime Analysis and Crime Mapping. London: Sage Publications. Chainey, S. & Tompson, L. 2008. Crime mapping case studies: practice and research. London: John Wiley and Sons. Chang, K. T.2008. Introduction to Geographical Information Systems. New York: McGraw Hill. Manning, P.K. 2008. The technology of policing: crime mapping, information technology, and the rationality of crime control. London: NYU Press. Vann, I.B. & Garson, D. 2003. Crime mapping: new tools for law enforcement. Sidney: P. Lang. Welsh, B. & David F. 2006. Preventing Crime: What Works for Children, Offenders, Victims, and Places, New York: Springer World Health Organization. 2004. Preventing violence: A guide to implementing the recommendations of the World Report on Violence and Health, Geneva: Violence and Injuries Prevention. Paynich, R. & Hill, B. 2009. Fundamentals of crime mapping. New Jersey: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Chainey, S. & Ratcliffe, J. 2005. GIS and Crime Mapping. London: John Wiley & Sons. Scaramella, G., McCamey, W.P., & Cox, S.M. 2010. Introduction to Policing. London: SAGE. Henry, S., & Lanier, M. 2001. What is crime? Controversies over the nature of crime and what to do about it. New York City: Rowman & Littlefield. Read More