Policing the homeless: An evaluation of efforts to reduce homeless-related crime - Research Paper Example

d: R e d u c i n g H o m e l e s s - R e l a t e d C r i m e. “Policing the homeless:An evaluation of efforts to reduce homeless-related crime.” Name: Order No: 755275 Subject: Sociology Date: Purpose of the research, theories and research method The purpose of this research was and is to generate knowledge on whether “Main Street Project and the SCI” were effective methods in reducing crimes linked to homeless persons. The researchers attempted to prove it through their empirical examination of “place-based policing” strategies (interventions) in Los Angeles, particularly in ‘Skid Row.” They applied social learning theories of “generalized additive model and place-based policing” aimed at reducing homelessness-related “nuisance, violent and property crimes.” These theories were grounded an explanatory research method of gaining insights into the attitudes, behaviors, beliefs, and motivation by police in applying “place-based intervention” to reduce crime. They conclude that the approach yielded positive results and it did not result into crime displacement. The research type was an explanatory research method through systematic observation and analysis of “place-based policing” strategies. This is so because the authors of this article explained how police used their geographical approach to reduce crime using data from police divisions and thereafter drew their conclusions from that analysis. However, the approach was more “restrictive in testing the hypotheses” in a sense that they focused on one particular group of people (the homeless) without making a holistic measurement of both the dependent and independent variables. This means that it was probably intended for future “quantitative research hypotheses.” No any other group of people was tested and they did not ascertain the impact of similar criminal acts in other places in Los Angeles appropriately. The homeless thus became victims of the circumstance. The researchers points out that the social-economic factors that contribute to the commission or omission of those criminal acts were not dealt with, an indication of an explanatory research. They were only explaining in general terms what the police did in averting “homeless-related crimes” and the role played by “Main Street Project and the SCI.” However, this over generalized quality of explanatory research is inaccurate and Illogical because the dependent variables were not tested or measured with the independent variables (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010). The sample The population sampled was the homeless people and how they contribute to nuisance, violent and property crimes. The Sampling frame was drawn from police divisions in Skid Row and other adjacent ones that dealt with ways of reducing the crimes among homeless individuals through demographic policing. This was a systematic sampling technique because it dealt with a spatial group of people, the homeless persons. However, it was over generalized and illogically biased in a sense that the police divisions sampled including the comparative information from other police divisions presented an “8 years of time-series data serving as the observations” for reducing crimes thus, leading underutilization of data. As earlier noted, whereas the dependent variables were properly utilized, the independent variables were not adequately tested in this sample. This was a probability sampling method because it dealt with a geographic area of Skid Row in Los Angeles with specific emphasis on crimes rates among homeless people. Therefore, this sample was not appropriate for the research because it was too general (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010, P.4). The Hypothesis The research question was whether “place based intervention” by police through “Main Street Project and the SCI” was an effective policy in reducing violent, nuisance and property crimes in Los Angeles? On one hand, the dependent variables are the violent, nuisance and property crimes in Skid Row as it was applied in “the Safer Cities in Los Angeles.” These dependent variables suggest that by zoning or targeting the geographically affected areas, the police radically reduced the crimes. The independent variables on the other hand are the social-economic factors that cause homeless encampments such as poverty, mental illness, drug abuse and addiction, as well as the existence of over grown bush as their habitat or shelter and privacy. Therefore, just mere brutal victimizations of the homeless do not help until these social-economic independent variables are dealt with. Dealing with these independent variables is likely to show radical changes in the dependent variables. You know these variables by looking at the effect and cause. The causes of these crimes are the independent variables while the effects or likely results of these social-economic causes which are nuisance, violent and property crimes are the dependent variables. Unfortunately, these independent variables were not effectively identified in the research, analyzed and measured yet researchers indicate that the likely reduction in the independent variables will definitely lead to radical changes in the dependent variables. They dealt with the effect rather than the cause and the reverse is true (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010 P 23). The researchers conclude that the application of “place based intervention” does not cause crime migration into other areas or cities adjacent to Skid Row. However, there is no evidence whatsoever in the article to prove this assertion due to the fact that the dependent variable statistics were not analyzed and weighed with independent variables. Apart from showing readers how the policy reduced crimes, we are not given any data on how the social-economic factors were addressed since they are the presumed causes of these crimes. This evidence is lacking. No wonder, the criminal justice law department did not applaud the police for what they did to reduce crimes which commensurate with research findings that this approach was a bad use of police resources. Therefore, whereas the dependent variables were somehow defined, the independent variables are undefined and identified in the entire article (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010 P.22). Measurement The measurements defines the independent variables in a sense that when you deal with these independent variables and the statistical measurements show a radical change in these social-economic changes, it will reciprocally defines a radical changes in the dependent variables hence reducing on the crimes committed. This is where the definition of both the dependent and independent variables lie on the measure of the cause and the effect. However, both variables were not properly defined by the authors. Whereas the estimates are constant with reductions in crimes, it was grounded on dependent variables without applying the likely changes that would be caused by the measure of the independent variables. It means that the results cannot effectively be valid and reliable without showing how the independent variables affected the likely changes in the dependent variables. The evidence available to support this argument is that the coefficients in all the police divisions visited and all data gathered from other police divisions is similar in a sense that it “provides 8 years of time-series data serving as the observations for the treatment condition” which are consistent with the simulations for all the crimes on pages 7-22 (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010). Research Design This was a secondary research design where the authors collected information from police division in as far as geographical “place based interventions” were effective in reducing crimes associated with “homeless encampments” in Skid Row, Los Angeles. The researchers took raw primary data and converted it into useable secondary data for the readers. This was done by critically analyzing already existing primary information at various police divisions, formulating the research question and making conclusions (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010). The elements of this research design include analyzing already existing primary data in the safer cities and police divisions, converting such primary row data into usable secondary data, identifying relevant or promising primary data and being guided by research questions and hypotheses. This were accurately applied by the researchers, an indication of a secondary research design. By relying on the primary sources in the police division and information relating to the safer cities, the authors concludes that “police based interventions” were effective mechanisms in averting crimes linked with homeless people. Therefore, this was purely a secondary research design (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010). The researchers properly implemented this research design by specifically using primary sources to achieve the desired goal. I believe that it was the best research design based on the nature of research undertaken. This is so because it allows use of all kinds of primary information to discuss the research question and arrive at the desired hypotheses. The major challenge however, is that this analytical design was not holistic because it did not measure the independent variables against the dependent variables. We do not see how the police dealt with social -economic causes but the only evidence available is how police dealt with the symptom of being homeless and its contributions to “homeless-related crimes” (John MacDonald & Richard Berk, 2010). Conclusions It’s clear that there was a significant decline in all forms of crime through the applied “place-based intervention” by police as a consequence of “Main Street Project and the SCI.” This saw the disappearance of homeless encampments. However, these results are not holistic. They are biased, inaccurate and illogical in a sense that the results are only grounded on dependent variables results without the likely changes of the independent variables which would have affected the measurements in relation to dependent variables. They also acknowledge that there was limited evidence on the role of the police in this crime reduction. It is only based on speculations. Therefore, these results are unreliable and too general. The clearing of “the homeless encampments” was a bad use of government resources by police. This is so because the police focused on the symptoms rather than the causes and there is no evidence that the offenders were accorded a fair hearing as a cardinal principle of natural justice. It was also discriminative because it only targeted one suspected group of criminals (the homeless) who virtually became prisoners of their own circumstance. Therefore, the policy makers failed to solve the predicaments associated with being homeless and it was ineffective. There is no causal link between the homeless people and the crimes committed. Whereas there is a high likelihood that the sample population may be responsible for the crimes committed, the researchers ought to have shown this causal link within the article by measuring accurately the variables. It’s not shown anywhere in the article making the research unreliable and inaccurate. References MacDonald, R. B. (2010). R e d u c i n g H o m e l e s s - R e l a t e d C r i m e. Policing the homeless:An evaluation of efforts to reduce homeless-related crime, volume.9: issue.4 PP 1 -28. Read More