The first reason why getting tough on criminals does not work is because for the most part, they are not deterred You must Login to view the entire essay. If you are not a member yet, Sign Up for free! by increased punishment for the crimes they commit. For smaller crimes such as parking violations and speeding tickets, deterrence seems to work because people committing these crimes are not considered criminals, rather law abiding citizens who have made a mistake and are aware of the punishment. The fact that the penalty for armed robbery has gone up to twelve years from nine years does not pass through a criminals mind because they genuinely do not expect to be caught for the crimes they commit.
So gun control is not the answer to the problem. Law Enforcement needs to crack down on criminals and the illegal sales of firearms to help elevate the problems with the death or homicide rate. The normal everyday work class people do not need to be punished for the acts of criminals and drug dealers. If gun control were to take effect and guns were outlawed it would still not solve the problem at hand. It wouldn’t solve the problems because only the outlaws
There are many different theories on how to decrease crime rate such as not having the right to bear arms or keeping criminals behind bars for longer periods of time, but there isn’t really one solution to fix the problem. There will obviously always be corruption and crime, it is part of life, but I think that police forces could focus more on violent crimes than they do. We could also have more neighborhood crime watches in town. That way cops could drive around neighborhoods at night to make sure everything looks like it’s in order. This is especially needed in Lancaster City where there are so many random robberies and shootings on the streets.
While I would not say Dr. Hill’s argument is absolutely false-there are exceptions to every rule, I would say he is misguided with how much power a fence possesses. For the most part, Fences are creatures of opportunity; Fences didn’t create the thief, the thief created the fence by stealing in the first place. While some fences do finance, plan, and train thieves-these fences are a rare breed. The vast majority of fences merely act as businessmen and buy merchandise as it comes in “No questions asked”. Before I share my views on how to reduce crime, let me explain why I disagree with some of Dr. Hill’s arguments.
This is a map that is individual to the person where they will have routine routes of where they will walk/drive etc. Brantingham theory suggests that offenders are more likely to operate in areas ‘cognitively known’ to them rather than places they don’t, so can explain patterns such as burglary in certain areas. This theory explains where crimes are more likely to happen, but Clarke’s opportunity theory explains why certain victims are chosen and others aren’t. As it depends if the target is accessible so how easy it is to commit the crime such as no security cameras in a store will probably have a high percentage of stolen goods. Another factor is that it depends on how attractive the target is in that how much will the individual gain from committing the crime or how easily the crime can be implemented such as robbing from a bank will have a high risk factor.
In turn, this led police to patrol working class areas more intensively, resulting in more arrests and confirming their stereotypes. Edwin Lemert distinguishes between primary and secondary deviance. Primary deviance refers to deviant acts that have not been publicly labelled. Lemert argues that it s pointless to seek the causes of primary deviance, since it is so widespread that it is unlikely to have a single cause, and is often trivial and mostly goes uncaught. Primary deviants don't tend to see themselves as deviant.
Criminal Acts and Choice Theories Response The basis of the “choice theory” is to show why and/or what causes a criminal to make the choice to commit a crime. Every person has to make their own choices and decisions and criminals make irrational decisions when, where, and how to commit a crime. All the while giving no thought to the punishments for their actions because the personal gain is of greater value to them. Criminals do not believe the laws apply to them. The criminal commit crimes for personal gain, money, power, and status.
And of course none of these are good escape routes from poverty and we all believe in the term "poverty causes crime". But it’s not always the poor who commits crime. Mostly the poor or the middle class people will go after crimes to fulfill their temporary desires. For example raping, stealing and sometimes murder too. Since the low class poor people are not usually educated, they often easily “pushed” into the crimes by the high class people.
Although this might be true, reporting the crime gives the police the opportunity to figure out what areas need more patrolling. Reporting the crimes also help the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), to create a data base for all crimes reported within the United States. The information collected
I would describe organized crime as groups of people taking the time to commit criminal activity without being caught by law enforcement officers. I have in the past thought about the mafia or drug cartels concerning organized crime. I had never given much thought to gangs being a part of organized crime. Many organized crime groups have law enforcement and politicians on their payroll, which disturbs me. The very people whose job is to protect society will deceive people to make illegal money.