CCJS360-Victimology November 18, 2013 1.Explain how inaccuracies in data creep into the statistics compiled by the various crime victimization surveys. What information about crime victims is not systematically collected by the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), or even the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS)? Why would this additional information be important? Some features of crime which affect our ability to measure it accurately are the relative infrequency of serious victimization, the skewed distribution of victimization in the population, and the furtive character of crime. Often times these surveys make the assumption that crimes are always discrete incidents rather than a repetitive social processes.
However collecting this type of results is not a fair representation of true crime. Having to fill in a survey may be inconvenient for some people. Many people may also be unaware they have seen a crime being committed or even do not want to report a crime as they may be scared of the possible outcomes of reporting it. People also may not actually report crimes to the police as they find the police unapproachable or that they have no trust that the police will sort out the problem. This shows how police records may only show a minimal amount of crime that has actually been committed.
The argument is against those who committed theses crimes, they knew what they were doing was wrong and instead they continued to break the law. It does not support my position nor does it negate from it. I believe that these primary sources were not that reliable because they were just court case files. I think that no
A new breed of federal agents was put in place to enforce the Volstead Act. The agents were not trained for the type of work they would be doing. Investigating underground speakeasies, illegal distilleries and alcohol related organized crime were just a few of their tasks. These agents were underpaid and overworked. The government did not hire the necessary amount of agents needed to scour such a vast area.
Thus, many people do not see the reason behind their course of wrong action. Why would someone do something they know is wrong? If it was an accident, should they not at least think about the effects that one accident can have? Indeed, a youth's mind is not yet fully developed. However, they should be able to do a simple thought process.
Measuring Crime Paper CJA/204 Uniform Crime Report (UCR) is one way that crime is measured. Uniform Crime Report (UCR) uses only crimes that have been reported to police. Every major crime is added together that have been reported to the police who takes these and reports them to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) who publishes these findings. National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is another way used to measure crime. The National Crime Victimization (NCVS) does not report murder crimes because the victim cannot report this crime, and it does not report drug related crimes because no victim is reporting.
Officer Dwyer’s opinion is not shared by all those employed in Law enforcement, especially not by Bernard C. Parks who is the police chief of the entire Los Angeles area, in a statement to the LA board of safety Parks said, “Curfews have not greatly impacted the number of violent crimes or the people who become victims of crimes.” The reality is that curfew laws are not based on any justifiable law enforcement technique but instead they unfairly single out a particular age group because of a perennial stereotype against children and adolescence in
This omission, we believe, is largely due to the limited availability of data that contains the criminal records of multiple generations. The lack of research on the intergenerational nature of crime can be considered a gap in two lines of research. First, it represents an important gap in the crime literature, as there are substantive policy implications of intergenerational criminal correlations. Such a relationship could imply that policies that appear to be successful at reducing
A major issue facing the juvenile justice system is how young offenders are treated and held, before the trial process. Laws dictating rights of adult suspects are not necessarily applied to juveniles, and this is due to an unresolved and halfway approach to juvenile crime.Juveniles are not considered responsible adult, it is often the case that parents are to be turned to when arrests take place. Legally, a parent or guardian must be contacted upon the holding of a suspected juvenile. This is a mode of thinking perhaps admirable, but hopelessly antiquated and unrealistic, since many adolescent offenders do not come from traditional backgrounds, or even have a parent in place as guardian. What actually happens in most cases of juvenile arrest
In the past, when cases of intellectual disability and other cognitive impairments have risen, the law has not been conclusively established as to whether or not the defence is available. Currently, legislation on this issue has also been unable to clearly categorise and thus effectively process those accused or convicted of crimes before or after being established as “mentally ill”. These statutes include the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act, and naturally the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). As the MHFPA does not define mental illness as such but moreover refers to a “mentally ill person”, the understanding of what is categorised in this term becomes a topic of discussion. This characterization essentially stems from the M’Naghten rules and it should be noted that of all the states in Australia, NSW is the only one that invokes the common law in its legislation.