Situational crime prevention is an idea criminologists use in order to reduce the chances of crime initially taking place. This theory does not aim to punish criminals after the crime has taken place like the criminal justice system does, but however the opposite, it aims to reduce the chances of the crime taking place to start with. Ron Clarke (2005) describes this theory as an approach that aims to reduce the opportunities out there for crime, involving rational choice theory. Clark focuses on three methods within this theory, directing at specific crimes, altering the environment we live in and aiming to reduce the benefits of committing crimes. Rational choice can have major effects when it comes to individuals committing crimes, rational
Crime occurs when people are carefree and are ignorant of situational crime prevention. The situational crime prevention prescribes target hardening, increasing the risks or costs of committing a crime and reducing the overall rewards from the crime. Some steps individuals may take to prevent crime is to ensure all doors are locked and keeping valuables out of sight. This will reduce the incentive for potential offenders (Cartwright, 2015). If these steps of precaution are not taken, potential offenders may view it as an easy crime.
Situational crime prevention in some crimes is more successful than that of developmental. Situational Crime prevention takes an approach that the victim is responsible for implementing measures to protect themselves whilst developmental needs programs to be undergone by the offender. The two prevention strategies will be discussed in relation to burglary. Ronald V Clarke originally developed the idea of situational crime prevention in the 1980’s (Brantingham & Brantingham 2005). This particular crime prevention theory addresses techniques that increase the effort required to commit the crime, increase the risks involved with committing the crime, reducing the reward gained by the offender after committing the crime, reducing the provocation between the offender and others and remove excuses (Brantingham & Brantingham 2005).
The study of criminology is important because it helps society understand what the crimes are, and how criminals who commit this crimes are punished. Understanding crimes from inside out allows us to avoid breaking the law and being considered criminals. Most criminals have a reason to
The theorem for deterrence and rational choice consists of the following: the guarantee of punishment could lower criminal behavior, the severity of consequences will also reduce criminal acts, and swift discipline will avert further criminal behavior from offenders (Kubrin, Stucky, and Krohn 2009). Action... ... middle of paper ... ...e, severity and swiftness of punishment would and could avert further criminal behavior from offenders. Harsher punishments, and those pertaining to a specific crime (intoxicated driving laws/drug laws) could also further have a positive effect on crime. It is the discretion, which is what has had a negative effect on crime and deterrence. Research should be conducted on the police officers, judges and prosecutors on how often discretion undercuts the harsher punishments that have been advocated throughout not on an individual’s rational thinking strategy or a person’s perception of risk taking.
Displacement is a key measurement when determining whether crime prevention programs are effective or not. According to Rosenbaum, Lurigio, and Davis in the book, Prevention of Crime: Social and Situational Strategies, displacement is the dislocation of “criminal activity in time, space, method, or type of offense.” Since crime is being displaced on the micro level, understanding the effects of displacement is important when dealing with situational crime prevention. There are several forms of crime displacement: temporal, spatial, target, tactical and offense. Of all the forms, spatial is the most commonly perceived and, when discussing crime, displacement is the one most often referred. Spatial crime displacement is the transfer of criminal activity from one area to the next typically after a crime reduction initiative has taken place in the original area.
Restorative justice includes things such as victim- offender mediation, victim- offender panels or community sentencing. However, this movement needs support from the local community and it is important that the restitution helps the victim recover from the trauma the crime might have caused. Further restorative justice can not be applied to some crimes, such as rape (Allen, et al., 2015). Currently restorative justice is mostly used within the juvenile justice system, mostly due to the believe that juveniles have to be treated differently than adults when it comes to punishment for an offence. Restorative justice is often prefered to the traditional system, since the offenders are more likely to comply with the required restitutions and it helps incorporate them back into their communities (Hines, 2008).
Likewise, SCP is also based upon the premise that crime is often opportunistic and aims to modify the background factors in order to limit the opportunities for offenders that engage in criminal behaviour. Situational prevention contains a range of measures that highlight the importance of targeting specific forms of crime in certain situations. This entails recognizing, manipulating and controlling the situational or environmental factors associated with certain categories of crime. It is also formed on assumptions concerning the nature of the offence and the offenders. By acquiring an understanding of these incidents, systems are then established to modify the relevant environments with the aim of reducing the opportunities for such meticulous crimes.
Bilton, Bonnet & Jones (2002:386) point out that according to the delinquent subculture theories, external social influences may have significant impacts on human behaviours. Graham (1998:7) identifies some of those external social influences as the ‘risk’ or ‘causal’ factors of crime. They include: poverty, poor parenting, poor education level, generational crime, and constant interaction with delinquent associations. Apparently, the way social structures are organized might be considered crucial in determining whether a society will have the tendency of committing criminal actions or not. As social problems are more likely the cause of most crimes, social intervention would seem to be an appropriate way of preventing it.
There are many approaches to dealing with crime. There are preventive methods that seek to prevent a crime from happening. There is also a punitive method of preventing crime that work by making the penalty for committing a crime very high. It prevents people from committing a crime and offenders from repeating the crime. This research seeks to establish whether making the penalty stiff will work in repeating repeat and future offenders.