Crime Prevention
Criminal Victimization
- In 1993 the violent crime rate was estimated at 50 victimizations per 1,000 persons. In
2000 the estimated rate was 28 victimizations per 1,000 persons. This represents a 44%
decline in violent victimizations over the seven year period (Rennison, 2001).
- An estimated 25.9 million victimizations occurred in the United States in 2000. The
lowest level recorded since 1973 (Ibid).
- The violent crime rate fell 15 percent (15%) and the property crime rate fell 10 percent
(10%) within the past year. The 15 percent decline in violent crime represents the largest
single year decline ever measured by the National Crime Victimization Survey (Ibid).
Fear and Perception of Crime
- One out of every two Americans surveyed nation-wide felt that there is more crime in the
United States this year than in the previous year (Pastore, 2000).
- Forty-one percent (41 %) of inhabitants report feeling afraid of walking home alone at
night within a mile radius of their own neighborhood (Ibid).
Overview
Although crime and victimization rates have steadily declined since the early 1990's,
society’s perception and fear of crime is still very high. Greater participation
between community members and local law enforcement is needed to help ensure that crime
and victimization rates continue to decline. Crime prevention is a concept that can help
reduce crime and public fear and perception of crime.
Many individuals have taken steps to protect themselves and their property by attending
self-defense courses, acquiring dogs, or engraving their property with some form of
identification. Businesses have initiated crime prevention measures in the workplace,
ranging from hiring security officers to installing security alarms, as well as training
staff to recognize potential problem situations.
Many large businesses have instituted employee assistance programs to not only educate
employees about crime prevention measures, but also to provide assistance to victimized
employees.
Perhaps the most significant area of growth has been the involvement of communities in
crime prevention programs. Twenty years ago, numerous communities established block home
programs for children. Children were taught that if they were afraid for any reason, they
should go to the house with the block home sign in the window for assistance. This type of
community response has expanded into programs that include neighborhoods, schools,
businesses and local police departments.
Primary Crime Prevention
Crime prevention is usually described by using the medical model. Primary, secondary,
and tertiary crime prevention models all involve some level of community involvement.
However, each type of prevention focuses on a specific developmental stage of crime.
Primary prevention addresses the conditions in the natural environment that may lead to
the development and prevalence of crime. Lack of street maintenance, broken windows,
abandoned buildings, and broken down cars are a few examples of a disorganized community.
Primary prevention seeks to directly alleviate these factors that may lead to crime. One
type of primary prevention is that of neighborhood crime prevention.
Neighborhood Crime Prevention
By addressing the factors that may lead to crime, neighborhood crime prevention affects
the fear and perception of crime as well as the actual prevalence of crime. If members of
the community are participating in crime prevention, their perception and fear of crime
may reduce.
There are many different approaches to neighborhood crime prevention. The attempt is to
establish a cohesive and socially aware community where crime cannot flourish. Some
examples of neighborhood crime prevention are neighborhood watch programs, citizen
patrols, organized community clean up days, social events with local law enforcement
(picnics, festivals, etc..), and physical design.
Neighborhood crime prevention programs are most successful if there is active
participation from both citizens and local resources. The more actively involved members
are in the overall well-being of the community, the more successful the program will be at
reducing crime.
How to Organize Neighborhood Crime Prevention:
- Talk to your neighbors. Communication of the issues
and each other’s concerns allows for further concrete steps to be taken.
Assess what the community wants accomplished through neighborhood crime
prevention.
- Locate and Identify local resources. The more
resources that are available to a community the more programs that can be
implemented.
- Talk to local police about organizing community
activities.
- See if local businesses are willingly to donate time,
money, and or resources.
- Seek out State and Federal resources. Are there any
funds/grants available to your community. Apply for them.
- Get together. Hold regular meetings where all
citizens can suggest ideas and improvements. Communicate citizen ideas or
concerns to local agencies(law enforcement, businesses, etc..)
- Start small. Identify one or two programs that is suitable and adequate for your
neighborhood. It may be unrealistic and ultimately unsuccessful to implement a program
that does not address the issues in your community.
Secondary Crime Prevention
Secondary crime prevention attempts to prevent crime by focusing on at-risk offenders
or potential opportunities that may foster criminal activity. The main tool used in
secondary crime prevention is identification and prediction. There are many theoretical
basis for the implementation of secondary crime prevention programs. Once we are able to
identify potential places, people, situations, or opportunities that are at-risk for
criminal activity it may be possible to predict and prevent any future criminal
occurrence. By reducing the potential opportunities to commit crime, increasing the
risk(s) of the crime, and by minimizing the potential gain of the criminal act, it is more
likely that the criminal will not engage in such behavior.
Citizens can take individual steps to protect themselves from victimization. Organizing
large groups for crime prevention may be very difficult at times. Certain programs like
situational crime prevention allows citizens to individually participate in crime
prevention.
There are many techniques that are used in situational crime prevention. Situational
crime prevention focuses on preventing a specific type of crime and criminal behavior.
However, no one technique is guaranteed to prevent all crime. A few techniques of
situational crime prevention are categorized under the following goals.
Reducing the opportunity to commit crime.
Target hardening.
This technique makes it physically more difficult for the
potential offender to engage in criminal activity. Installing dead-bolt locks in doors,
using steering wheel locks for cars, and putting iron bars on windows are a few examples
of target hardening. The recent surge of computer crimes has made it increasing necessary
to address issues of privacy. Computer users can protect themselves from victimization by
installing software that defends against potential intrusion by hackers and other
criminals. Software that protects against computer viruses are a form of target hardening
that is widely implemented.
Increasing the risk associated with the crime.
Formal Surveillance
This technique is used by many companies and corporations. It can
also be used in a residential environment. There are many ways to conduct formal
surveillance. Some examples of formal surveillance include night desk attendants, security
guards, security cameras, speeding cameras, and alarm systems. Potential criminals may be
less likely to engage in illegal activity if they perceive a greater risk at being
apprehended.
Natural Surveillance
In Defensible Space (1972) Oscar Newman proposed natural
surveillance as a technique of crime prevention through physical design. The physical
space is designed in a manner in which legitimate users can monitor the activities that
occur in that area. For example, by increasing street lighting legitimate users can better
see any unusual activity. This increases the exposure of any potential criminal behavior
and increases the chance someone will be able to identify the criminal. Residential motion
lights are an example of increased lighting. Physical surroundings may be conducive to the
formation of crime. Criminals are more liking to offend in an area that they feel more
confident in not getting caught in. There may be easy access and exits to the location of
the crime. Once the crime has been committed the criminal knows he/she can escape with
relative ease. One way to address this is to create speed bumps that would slow down a
potential fleeing felon or to limit road access to the neighborhood.
Reducing the potential reward(s) of the crime.
Denial of benefits. Reducing benefits of a criminal activity may deter the offender
from committing the crime. Retail store owners who fear theft of merchandise have used the
ink-marking technique of situational crime prevention. If the offender knows that the
merchandise will be stained once he tries to illegally remove the tag the monetary
benefits of the crime have been removed. Car manufacturers have long ago designed
face-less car stereo players. The idea is to reduce the potential reward of the criminal
activity by removing the target of the crime. Another example of reducing potential reward
is property identification. By marking and tagging one’s property the monetary gains
the criminal anticipates to receive is reduced. If they are unable to dispose of the
stolen property it is useless to them.
Tertiary Crime Prevention
Tertiary prevention, unlike primary and secondary prevention focuses on prevention
after a crime has occurred. The focus is to reduce the recidivism rate of criminals and
insure that steps are taken so that a victim will not be re-victimized. The primary form
of tertiary prevention in the United States today is that of incapacitation. Although it
does not prevent criminals from committing crimes once they leave prison, it does protect
the larger population from present victimization at the hands of the criminal.
Summary
Evaluations of these crime prevention programs are mixed. There is no one great
approach to preventing crime. The Maryland Commission’s report to Congress,
"Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising," is the
most comprehensive analysis of crime prevention programs and strategies. Over 500 studies
world-wide were evaluated and critiqued.
The success of neighborhood crime prevention programs in reducing crime is dependant on
several factors. Citizen involvement over the course of the program, funding, and local
commitment are essential ingredients to any neighborhood crime prevention program.
Evaluations show a reduction in crimes of drug use and vandalism. No major reductions were
shown for serious violent crimes. However, most studies on neighborhood crime prevention
suffer from many research limitations. Therefore, it is not possible to say that
neighborhood prevention does not reduce serious violent crime. Serious violent crimes
often occur in what is normally called "hot spots." By targeting these areas and
using a combination of programs reduction of crime is possible.
Situational Crime Prevention has shown to dramatically reduce burglary crimes. In the
Maryland Report, over 90% of the studies evaluated on situational crime prevention show
reductions in crime (Sherman, 1996). Approaches like target hardening had a significant
effect on crime rates. In some studies crime rates rose in surrounding areas where target
hardening was used. However, the displacement was not significant enough to overshadow the
effect of target hardening.
Crime prevention is not limited to any one program or any one group of programs. There
are several other approaches in crime prevention that have reduced crime and
victimization. Mentoring of youth, home visits by nurses, and nuisance abatement are all
forms of crime prevention that can be done at the local level. Citizens can take an active
role in preventing crime, preventing victimization, and reducing the fear of crime in
their neighborhoods.
References
Pastore, Ann L.; Maguire, Kathleen. (2000). Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.
Reninison,Callie. (2001). National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of
Justice Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.
Sherman, L. (1996). Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s
Promising. A Report to United States Congress. Washington, D.C.
Bibliography
Lab, S. P. (1997). Crime Prevention: Approaches, Practices and Evaluations. Third
Edition. Cincinnati, OH. Anderson Publishing Company.
For additional information, please contact:
National Association of Town Watch
1 Wynnewood Road
Suite 102
Wynnewood, PA 19096
Tel: (610) 649-7055
(800) NITE-OUT
Fax: (610) 649-5456
www.natw.org
NATWNNO@aol.com
National Crime Prevention Council
1000 Connecticut Avenue, NW
13th Floor
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202) 466-6272
Fax: (202) 296-1356
www.weprevent.org
National Crime Prevention Institute
University of Louisville
Louisville, KY 40292
Tel: (502) 852-6987
(800) 334-8635 ext. 6987
Fax: (502) 852-6990
www.louisville.edu/a-s/ja/ncpi
jcfryo1@gwise.louisville.edu
Executive Office of Weed and Seed
U.S. Department of Justice
810 7th Street, NW
6Th Floor
Washington, DC 20531
Tel: (202) 616-1152
Fax: (202) 616-1159
All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2001 by the National Center for Victims of
Crime. This information may be freely distributed, provided that it is distributed
free of charge, in its entirety and includes this copyright notice.