Crime, Prevention, and Community Safety - Essay Example

Crime, Prevention, and Community Safety You're Crime, Prevention, and Community Safety A look at communities through a historical perspective shows that in regards to the dilemma with crime prevention and maintaining a sense of legal normalcy in society, different communities handle crime prevention in various ways. For instance, Kellings and Wilson developed the "Broken Window Thesis" in 1982, stating that it was a far better theorization in controlling crime in the communities than the more past traditional models within the UK have been (Kelling & Coles 1996). This theory follows a more humane way of dealing with crime rather than agreeing with the concept of capital punishment, or long term prison sentences. According to Kelling & Coles (1996) following a thesis such as the "Broken Window" can allow communities to thrive, and live worry free, without fear of serious criminal actions in their neighborhoods transpiring. It actually brings the citizens, business owners, and police officers together in a joint task force that helps to minimize and prevent many crimes from taking place before they can ever be planned (Kelling & Coles 1996). However there still is the notion that legal bodies have which state that communities do have an obligation to keep their neighborhoods crime free or at least help law enforcement in preventing crime where they live. The strongest reason for this belief is due to the statistical evidence of crime that has grown since 1867 in the UK (Macionis 1994). These statistics have long been studied by Sociologists and other well known scholars due to the relevance that they have with depicting why crime occurs, in what quantity, and in which areas. Furthermore, the crime rate of 1867 and 1987 are just as different as the cultures of the two variant time periods are. However, an interesting correlation has been noted with the crime rates of 1939-1938 and 1980-1988 (Macionis 1994). The following chart gives a good insight into how the issue of economics can increase the statistical evidence of how crime has escalated over time since the middle 1800's. It is one of the many notions of why there has been an expressed concern with getting the communities involved with combating crime. Decade Average Decade High 1980-88 40% 44.2 %(1986) 1970-79 38% 41.3 %(1973) 1960-69 37% 38.7 %(1964) 1950-59 34% 36.0 %(1959) 1940-49 29% 33.1 %(1940) 1930-39 35% 43.1 %(1933) 1920-29 26% 29.6 %(1922) 1910-19 24% 26.6 %(1910) 1900-09 24% 26.9 %(1900) 1890-99 26% 27.9 %(1898) 1880-89 26% 28.5 %(1880) 1870-79 22% 28.7 %(1879) 1867-69 25% 28.1 %(1867) (Roberts 1994). It is believed that these statistics can be drastically lowered if a stronger partnership does develop between law enforcement and communities. Theorizations such as Kellings work to implement this type of philosophy through a mutual partnership between the law and the community, which has been proven to be necessary. This of course leads to the concept of community policing which is a philosophy that has been being highly discussed and tested for a good while now, of course following theorizations such as Kellings, and others as well. Community policing is the most common name for a set of tactics, philosophies and strategies that officers now use to resolve crime issues in urban cities. Community policing allows the police to work closely with the community to think of creative solutions to problems. This view of policing stems from the perception that the police serve a multifunctional role and act as some what of a social service agent in the community. The basic premise of community policing is police on the beat will bring the community and the police together, while empowering communities to resolve some of their own conflicts (Roberts 1994). In order for a community-policing project to be successful it requires participation from everyone in a specific precinct or police station. Community policing gives line officers the autonomy to make decisions. Officers are taken from the squad car and establish relationships with law-abiding citizens, which thereby provide the opportunity for the officer to change the public's perception of the police and their role in fighting crime, and allow the citizens to have a hand in crime fighting. Other thoughts about how communities can work with the police to keep communities safer have come into being also. Of course the realism associated with this is due to theories again like Kellings, Sutherlands, and many other theorists who have studied the reasons in-behind crime. One of the most nationally recognized ways that many communities combat crime in their own neighborhoods now is through a "Neighborhood Watch program" (Berkowitz 2002). In fact, these community action programs are exactly what define the term "community" with regards to crime prevention in many ways (Berkowitz 2002). For years, Neighborhood Watch has only been a program which has held a focus on preventing burglaries and other forms of break ins but due to the escalation in crime in some areas surrounding the UK, it has grown to more extensive proportions in battling crime in communities. Initially, the Neighborhood Watch had one main goal and that was to strengthen the relationship between the communities and local law enforcement officers. Since its initialization this program now works hand and hand with legal bodies to combat crime in a myriad of ways, even pouring over into issues of protection against terrorism and possible occurrences of it (Kelling & Moore 2002). This goes to emphasize how very pertinent this particular program has become in helping law enforcement keep control and order throughout the communities and various cities in the UK as the Neighborhood Watch is basically a second set of eyes and ears for the local police departments in various rural areas. Basically, now law enforcement places a high reliability onto the community in regards to the process of crime prevention. In fact, the assistance given by this program is pro-active even though there are some citizens who tend to think of it as more reactive, but regardless of this point of view in reality it is not. Furthermore, a Neighborhood Watch has the capabilities of being formed around any type of community, a block, apartment housing, public housing, and specifically within a affluent neighborhood that does not want crime affiliated with it's identity in society (Kelling & Moore 2002). To accentuate on this thought concept further, ideas such as these have been in the making for almost thirty years, which have developed not only this main program but a new wave of thinking for police officers in the communities as well which was brought up earlier in this literature. A realistic perspective defines "a new kind of police officer" and therefore a whole new model for policing in communities has definitely been put into place through the combination of community and police interaction against crime in neighborhoods. This is a evolutionary and not revolutionary philosophy that attempts to refocus the essence of policing to "a Law Enforcement (philosophy) that tries to do two things: first bring police officers and citizens together in neighborhoods, and secondly it places a good deal of responsibility onto the body of police officers in regards to solving the problems in the communities (Wilson 1994, p. 21). Through these two new elements, two new aims have become distinguishable: Community partnership and Problem solving. It is these two elements that are the cores of the policing strategy for the future of large United Kingdom Communities. The focus is targeted specifically on inner cities and large cities (such as in Wales and London) which have been pinpointed as high crime areas. Despite the fact that community action against crime is a somewhat positive influence in society, Young (1999, p. 17) argues that it does not bring inclusion for all in a community due to the inequality issues that exist. This has lead to the existing disillusionment in communities of what the true causes of crime are and where they are stemming from (Young 1999, p. 17). Thoughts such as these are of course what have lead to the development of a "subcultural theory" due to the inequality that obviously can not be questioned to exist in these various societies throughout the United Kingdom. Of course it is all well and good to have programs such as Neighborhood Watches and theories such as Kellings (Broken Window thesis) that work consistently with the policing bodies but when it comes down to the reasons for crime occurring, some are being caused by the actual exclusion from society, as Young (1999) has stated in his literature. This is just one of the innumerable reasons why many criminologists, scholars, and sociologists have tried to discredit these types of theorizations because the truth is there is doubt of whether or not disorderly conduct that is left neglected in communities actually does play such a big role in the promotion of crime. It could perhaps be for other reasons that the subcultural theory brings up which is more associated with the issue of inequality, lack of opportunities, and exclusion from the major part of society (Young 1999). Furthermore, it has been stated that another more likely reason is the issue of poverty in communities which possibly have a more concentrated affect in developing into issues of crime if left neglected rather than simple disorderly activity such as Kelling and Coles (1996) have pinpointed. In fact Young (1999) seems to be emphasizing the facts concerning crime in communities are relative to how people are treated, which has been stated. For instance, the theory assumes that when community members are acquainted and on good terms with one another the behaviors of the adults influence those of adolescents. On a larger scale these acquaintances serve as community surveillance, supervision for youth and shape the values and interest of children. Communities with high levels of social organization are more likely to have common values and work together toward preventing social problems. When a community has social and economic hardship this impeded the social organization of the community because these communities have a weaker organization base. People who live in poverty stricken areas are less likely to create in voluntary organizations such as neighborhood associations that focus on crime issues (Beggs, Hurlbert, & Haines 1996). This shows that communities, law enforcement, and political bodies need to try and bring a sense of equality to many of these communities if crime is ever going to be minimized and refrained from effectively. In conclusion, it is believed that all of these various points concerning what promotes crime are what need to be focused on to gain ground over combating more violent crime in communities. By mending the broken bones of exclusion and economic factors now and perhaps by utilizing a more humane way of dealing with crime, these issues can be proven more effective than the traditional model of minimizing crime period. In finality, it has been proven that there is indeed a direct link between living in poverty and the crime rate of a neighborhood. It is for this reason that a new way of dealing with crime needs to be implemented and the most logical way is to allow for inclusion of all people into society and then try and attempt to work together to bring equality, fair understanding, and justice to one another. As the literature has found, within there exists social organization within communities crime is a very minimal occurrence. Notes 1. Beggs, J.& J. Hulbert, & V.Haines. "Community Attachment in a Rural Setting: A Refinement and Empirical Test of the Systematic Model." Rural Sociology (1996) 61: 407-26. 2. Berkowitz, Bill. "Amerisnitch," The Progressive, 24 May. 2002, 10. 3. Kelling, George & Moore, Mark. "The Evolving Strategy of Policing: Perspectives on Policing," National Institute of Justice & John. F. Kennedy School of Government; Harvard University, 2002, 4-5. 4. Kelling, George & Coles, Catherine. Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities, New York: Simon & Schuster Publications (1996). 5. Roberts, Albert. Critical Issues in Crime and Justice, California: Sage Publications (1994). 6. Wilson, James. "Can the Bureaucracy be Regulated," Brookings Institution Press (1994): 21. 7. Young, J. The Exclusive Society, London: Sage Publications (1999). Read More