Major Crimes in the United States in 2010 - Research Paper Example

Major Crimes in the United States Introduction Laureate Albert Camus made his mark in history by highlighting the woes of the human conscience during his moment of glory (The Nobel Foundation, 1957, para. 1). One of his most remarkable quotes elucidates how crime had stubbornly endured despite the stern punitive arm of the law contending that: “For centuries the death penalty, often accompanied by barbarous refinements, has been trying to hold crime in check; yet crime persists … because the instincts that are warring in man are not, as the law claims, constant forces in a state of equilibrium” (as cited in Crane, 2004, p. 72). When crime is committed, man’s criminal instincts dominate his sense of morality and his respect for the social and legal norms of a peaceful society. Crime is, therefore, defined by as “conduct in violation of the criminal laws of a state, the federal government or a local jurisdiction, for which there is no legally acceptable justification or excuse” (Walston-Durham, 2009, p. 500). The structure of the criminal justice system was patterned after the concept of federalism. Hence, police power is predominantly a stately matter, permitting all states to pass legislation required to protect the health, morals, safety and the general wellbeing of the people (Gaines & Miller, 2010, p. 12). Despite of laws and incarceration of criminals in correctional facilities, crime is continually a challenge for law enforcement. This is grounded on reported country totals of 1,092,455 cases of violent crimes and 6,390,018 cases of property crimes in the US for the year 2010 (FBI, 2011). However, surveys have revealed that many crimes were unreported, which only goes to show that more crimes are being committed than are generally reported, otherwise known as the dark figure or crime (Cole & Smith, 2007, p. 25). This paper examines the major crimes reported in the US with the end in view of lifting nuggets of wisdom from the statistics. Violent Crimes Major crimes in the United States are classified into two broad categories: violent crimes and property crimes (Hess & Orthmann, 2011, p. 83). Violent crimes are defined as offenses which involve the use of force or threat of force, according to the Unified Crime Report (UCR) Program (FBI, 2009a, para. 1). Violent crimes are crimes against persons (Gaines & Miller, 2010, p. 7; FBI, 2009a, para. 1). Four offenses comprise the category of violent crimes: murder and negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault (Gaines & Miller, 2010, p. 8; FBI, 2009a, para. 1). Figure 1 presents the frequency distribution of violent crimes in the US in the form of a pie chart. Figure 1. Frequency distribution of violent crimes in the US in 2010 (computed from FBI, 2011). As depicted in Figure 1, the top two violent crimes on the national level are aggravated assault and robbery, with 56% and 38% of the total violent crime cases, respectively. Only about 5% of the crimes involve forcible rape and approximately 1% involves murder. Violent crime figures (i.e. 1,092,455) in 2010 decreased by about 17% from 2009 figures (i.e., 1,318,398) (FBI, 2009a, FBI 2011). States with the highest violent crime statistics are California (17%), Texas (13%) and New York (11%). On the other hand, states with the lowest violent crime statistics are Montana (0.05%), South Carolina (0.08%), and South Dakota (0.09%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). A correlation analysis comparing the relationship between state population and violent crime statistics per state revealed that there is a significant near perfect relationship between the state population and the incidence of violent crimes, or in other words, the higher the population, the higher is the incidence of violent crime in the state (r = 0.965; p < 0.001). However, when the violent crime rates were calculated by taking the percentage of the violent crime cases per state against state population, it was revealed that the top three states are Arkansas (1.52%), Maryland (1.46%) and Michigan (1.40%); and the bottom three states are Idaho (0.26%), Montana (0.26%) and Illinois (0.17%). A correlation analysis to examine the association between state population and state violent crime rates showed only a negative small relationship between state population and state violent crime rates and this relationship is not significant (r = - 0.143; p = 0.360). The SPSS output is exhibited as Appendix 1. Interpretation of the Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were carried out using De Vaus (2002, p. 259). The following sub-sections look at each offense in more detail. Murder Murder is defined in the UCR Program as the “willful (non-negligent) killing of one human by another” (Hess & Orthmann, 2011, p. 84). Three levels of murder are recognized under US law: first degree, which involves willfully, intentionally and planned taking of a person’s life; second degree, which does not have involve premeditation, but there is intent to kill; and manslaughter or non-negligent manslaughter, where the death of a victim is accidental and the offender does not have original intent, hatred, will or disregards for someone else’s life and there is absence of malice (Hess & Orthmann, 2011, p. 84). In 2009 there was a 7.3% decrease in murder cases in the entire United States compared to 2008 figures (FBI, 2010, p. 1). In 2010, a 2.9% decrease was observed. The top three states with the highest incidents of murder include: (1) California – 1,017; (2) Texas - 769; and (3) New York - 658. Meanwhile, states with the lowest reported murders include (1) Iowa - 9; (2) Idaho and South Dakota - 3; and (3) Montana – 2 (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Forcible Rape Rape is a violent crime which involves having sexual intercourse through force or threat of force or in more precise words, “coerced action of a sexual nature against an unwilling participant” (Gaines & Miller, 2010, p. 7; Hess & Orthmann, 2011, p. 84). Forcible rape cases went down by 2.6% in 2009 (FBI, 2010, p. 1). In 2010, a decrease of 0.8% was also observed. The states with the highest reported incidence of forcible rape include: (1) California (15.73%); (2) Texas (14.79%); and (3) New York (5.25%). On the other hand, states with the lowest rate of forcible rape are: (1) South Carolina (0.07%); (2) Montana (0.09%); and (3) Rhode Island (0.28%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Rape is, however the one of the top violent crimes which goes unreported mainly because of the stigma of being identified a victim of a sexual offense (Boskey, Harper & Hilgenkamp, 2010, p. 166). In the year 2007 alone, the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network argued that 41.6% of forcible rape in the US is not reported to police authorities (as cited in Boskey, et al., 2010, p. 166). This should be of primordial concern for the government. Aggravated Assault As defined by the UCR Program, aggravated assault is an unlawful attack by one person upon another person with the aim of causing this person severe or aggravated physical injury. Aggravated assault is usually committed by using a weapon or any other object capable of causing death or serious bodily harm (FBI, 2009b, para. 1). Assault is differentiated from battery since battery involves physical attack upon another person, whereas assault involves an attack through threats in order to purposely lead that person to believe that physical harm is intended (Gaines & Miller, 2010, p. 8; Hess & Orthmann, 2011, p. 84). Cases of aggravated assault in 2009 were reduced by 4.2% (FBI, 2010, p. 1). Likewise, aggravated assault incidents went down by 3.2% in 2010. Meanwhile, states with the highest incidence of aggravated assault include: (1) California (14.98%); (2) Texas (13.03%); and (3) New York (9.96%). States with the lowest incidents of aggravated assault include: (1) Montana (0.07%); (2) South Carolina (0.08%); and (3) South Dakota (0.1%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Robbery Robbery is defined as the act or an attempted act of taking property or anything of value from the care, possession or control of another person with the use of force, threat of force or intimidation (Gaines & Miller, 2010, p. 8; FBI, 2009c, para. 1). Robbery incidents in 2009 decreased by 8% (FBI, 2010, p. 1). The figures went further down by 9.2% in 2010. States with the highest number of robbery incidents include (1) California (17.86%); (2) Texas (11.39%); and (3) New York (10.8%). In contrast, states with the fewest number of robbery incidents were: (1) Montana (0.02%); (2) South Dakota and Idaho (0.03%); and (3) South Carolina (0.07%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Property Crimes Property crimes are crimes against property where the goal of the offender is to achieve economic gain or inflict damage to property (Gaines & Miller, 2010, p. 8). The UCR Program definition of major property crimes includes: burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft and arson. Figure 2 shows the frequency distribution of property crimes in the US in the form of a pie chart. Figure 2. Frequency distribution of property crimes in the US in 2010 (Computed from FBI, 2011). Data from Figure 2 reflected that 65% or a majority of the property crimes in the US for 2010 are categorized as larceny-theft, while the second highest property crime incidence in the US is burglary at 23%. Motor vehicle theft comprises 11% of property crimes, while only 1% of the property crimes are arson. States with the highest property crime statistics are Texas (18%), California (16%) and Florida (5%). On the other hand, states with the lowest property crime statistics are South Carolina (0.13%), South Dakota (0.15%), and Montana (0.16%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Like the violent crimes, property crime incidence in the US also has a significant near perfect relationship with the state population (r = 0.941; p < 0.001). However, when the association between state property crime rates and state population are evaluated, a significant but negative association was uncovered (r = - 0.303; p < 0.001). This implies that the higher the population, the lower the state property crime rate and vice versa. The following sub-sections look at each offense in more detail. Burglary As defined by common law, burglary is the act of “breaking and entering a dwelling house of another person at nighttime with the intent of committing a felony once inside”. Meanwhile, the use of the term has evolved in modern times to describe the act depending on the circumstances when the crime was committed such as intrusion on another person’s home, intent to harm, time of day committed, and presence of the owner. Several graduations have been developed for this crime based on such factors (Siegel, 2009, p. 360). In 2009, incidents of burglaries decreased by 1.3% (FBI, 2010) and further went down in 2010 with cases reduced by 2%. States with the most burglary incidents include: (1) Texas (17.03); (2) California (14.64%); and (3) Florida (6.05%). Meanwhile, states with the least number of burglary cases are: (1) South Carolina (0.08%); (2) Idaho (0.12%); and (3) Montana (0.13%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Arson Arson is defined as the deliberate burning of a home, building, or vehicle with the intent of performing criminal acts to obtain profit, commit fraud, exact revenge, or hide evidence of another crime committed. Negligent burning of structures and vehicles are also considered as arson. Persons committing this act may range from juveniles acting out of mischief to professional arsonists (Siegel, 2009, p. 566). For arson cases, the FBI does not generate estimate data due to the variations in reporting by participating agencies (FBI, 2010). However, based on data available for 2010, arson incidents were reduced by 8.6%. States with the highest number of arson incidents include: (1) California (20.36%); (2) Texas (15.68%); and (3) Michigan (8.49%). On the other hand, states with the least number of arson cases include: (1) South Carolina (0.02%); (2) Montana (0.07%); and (3) South Dakota (0.13%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Larceny – Theft As defined by the UCR Program, larceny-theft refers to the “unlawful taking, carrying, leading or riding away of property from the possession or constructive possession of another” (FBI, 2009d). Gaines and Miller (2010) added that no element of force is involved in the unlawful taking of the property and there is intent in keeping the property in question (p. 8). Cases of larceny and theft in 2009 were reduced by 4% (FBI, 2010, p. 2) while 2010 figures show a decrease of 3.4%. States reporting the most number of larceny and theft cases include: (1) Texas (18.62%); (2) California (14.92%); and (3) New York (6.54%). In contrast, states reporting the least number of larceny and theft cases include: (1) South Carolina (0.15%); (2) South Dakota and Montana (0.18%); (3) Idaho (0.22%) (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Motor Vehicle Theft The UCR Program defines motor vehicle theft simply as the theft or attempted theft of a motor vehicle. For purposes of clarification, a motor vehicle may be defined as self-propelled vehicles which may be maneuvered only on land surfaces and not on rails (FBI, 2009e, para. 1). Motor vehicle theft incidents show a 17.1% decrease in 2009 (FBI, 2010). In 2010, the incidents went further down by 6.8%. States with the highest number of motor vehicle thefts reported include: (1) California (24.51%); (2) Texas (12.66%); and (3) Illinois (5.83%). On the other hand, states with the fewest number of motor vehicle theft cases are: (1) Idaho (0.04%); (2) South Carolina and South Dakota (0.06%); and (3) Montana (0.1%). (Computed based on FBI, 2011). Conclusion There were indications that statistics of all major crimes reported were lower in 2010 than in the previous year. This may not, however, be considered a solid victory for law enforcement, because there are yet big numbers of unreported crimes. This is one area for improvement which will benefit research on crime prevention and law enforcement. Secondly, while the FBI (2010) issued a caveat about the comparability of the statistics between states in the Uniform Crime Reporting Program, it is this author’s personal opinion that somehow, the FBI data on crime statistics may find utility as a crude measure of criminality on a country-wide basis. Correlating state population with state criminal statistics may be a pitfall for researchers, not just because of data comparability issues but because it is quite apparent that larger populations means higher percentage of possible victims, and hence, higher incidences of crime. It is however, an interesting revelation that for offenses against property, the association between crime rate and population is negative, but significant, since this suggests the states with lower population tend to have higher rates of property crimes. This is a legitimate challenge for law enforcement. Finally, both local and national law enforcement units should step up their efforts to neutralize the dark figure of crime by enhanced data collection and statistical procedures to be able to minimize if not totally do away with unreported crimes, especially sexual assault. Rape is not just a crime against chastity but a crime against persons. There should be more support for rape victims especially interventions to liberate rape victims from the stigma of their ordeal. References Boskey, E., Harper, J. & Hilgenkamp, K. (2010). The truth about rape (2nd ed.) New York: DWJ Books / Facts On File – InfoBase Publishing. Cole, G. F. & Smith, C. E. (2007). The American system of criminal justice (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education. Crane, M. (2004). The political junkie handbook: The definitive reference book on politics. New York: SPI Books. De Vaus, D. (2001). Surveys in social research. 5th ed. Oxon, GBR: Routledge. Federal Bureau of Investigation (2009a). Offenses known to law enforcement. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/index.html Federal Bureau of Investigation (2009b). Aggravated assault. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/violent_crime/aggravated_assault.html Federal Bureau of Investigation (2009c). Robbery. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/violent_crime/robbery.html Federal Bureau of Investigation (2009d). Larceny-theft. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/property_crime/larceny-theft.html Federal Bureau of Investigation (2009e). Motor vehicle theft. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/property_crime/motor_vehicle_theft.html Federal Bureau of Investigation (2010). Uniform Crime Report: Crime in the United States, 2009. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/documents/ pressreleasecius09.pdf Federal Bureau of Investigation (2011). Uniform crime report: Preliminary annual, January through December. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/preliminary-annual-ucr-jan-dec-2010/data-tables/table-4/table-4/view. Gaines, L. K. & Miller, R. L. (2010). Criminal justice in action: The core. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth / Cengage Learning. Hess, K. M. & Orthmann, C. H. (2011). Introduction to law enforcement and criminal justice (10th ed.). New York: Delmar / Cengage Learning. Siegel, L. J. (2009). Criminology (10th ed). Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Learning. The Nobel Foundation (1957). The Nobel Prize in Literature 1957: Albert Camus. Retrieved from http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1957/. Walston-Durham, B. (2009). Introduction to Law (5th ed.). New York: Delmar / Cengage Learning. Appendix 1 Findings of the Correlation Analyses State Population Vs. State Violent Crimes Statistics State Population Violent Crime Incidents State Population Pearson Correlation 1 .965** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 43 43 Violent Crime Incidents Pearson Correlation .965** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 43 43 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). State Population Vs. State Violent Crimes Rates State Population Violent Crime Rate State Population Pearson Correlation 1 -.143 Sig. (2-tailed) .360 N 43 43 Violent Crime Rate Pearson Correlation -.143 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .360 N 43 43 State Population Vs. State Property Crimes Statistics State Population Property Crime Incidents State Population Pearson Correlation 1 .941** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 43 43 Property Crime Incidents Pearson Correlation .941** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 43 43 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). State Population Vs. State Violent Crimes Rates State Population Property Crime Rate State Population Pearson Correlation 1 -.303* Sig. (2-tailed) .048 N 43 43 Property Crime Rate Pearson Correlation -.303* 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .048 N 43 43 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Appendix 2 Interpretation Table for the Correlation Analysis The strength of the correlation computed was grounded on the following interpretation table from De Vaus (2002, p. 259): Read More