On Crime Prevention

On Crime Prevention

I previously mentioned a couple of crime theories that relate to victimization.  There is another theory that in reality relates to crime prevention.  It has as its foundation the theories promoted by Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) and Cesare Beccaria (1738 – 1794), both who were Choice or Rational Choice theorists.

Classical Criminology

As a primer, Choice Theory or Rational Choice (properly referred to as Classical Criminology) simply states that people commit crimes because they choose to commit crimes.  Prior to their introductions of Choice Theory, the prevailing attitude was that people committed crimes because the devil made them do it.  As the Age of Enlightenment (1650s through 1780s) and development of scientific thought emerged it became apparent that it would be difficult to prove that the devil made anybody do anything.  (Likewise, it was also impossible to prove that God made anything happen by using the scientific method or process for proving anything.)  As a result, the notion that the devil was responsible for crime was dismissed and the fields of medicine, sociology, psychology, philosophy, and law began to wield influence on what we now call criminology.  While Choice Theory came about more as a result of a desire to change penal codes and modes of punishment than as a social science, it opened the door to identifying the different potential causes of crime. Incidentally, criminology is a rather recent entry into the social sciences when compared to sociology and psychology. With a few caveats, I am a Classical – Neoclassical Theorist.  Neoclassical Theorists assert that there may be multiple causes to crime.  If you happen to be a person who believes that the crime should fit the punishment and that people have free will to commit or not commit crimes, you most likely hold to the classical school of thought.

Crime Prevention

Returning again to Choice Theory, the central notion of this theory is that people commit crimes because they choose to commit crimes.  This theory becomes especially important when we think in terms of crime prevention.  One of the most important ideas that has evolved from this theory is that there are three things that go into a person committing a crime.  Actually, one of the three on the list amounts to the "lack" of something.  They are:

     1. A Motivated Offender
     2. A Suitable Target
     3. The Lack of a Capable Guardian

Put these three on the table and you will have a crime.  Let's discuss the first "item" on the list.  Obviously, if a person is not motivated to commit a crime there will be no crime, but what if there is a person who is motivated to commit a crime?  You must then determine just exactly how motivated that person is.  If the motivation is extremely low and there are no opportunities to commit a crime, or the opportunity is too far out of reach for the offender, the person will not commit a crime.  On the other hand if the offender is highly motivated, that person may jump at any opportunity, regardless of how far out of reach the offense may be.

            Motivated Offenders

I like to think of motivated offenders as having three characteristics that contribute to their degree of motivation. This is my own design and not attributed to any other theorist.  For a motivated offender to advance his/her crime, that person must have the following.

     1. The ability to commit a crime.
     2. The opportunity to commit a crime.
     3. The desire to commit a crime.

You remove the motivation of an offender by removing the person’s ability and opportunity to commit a crime or lessen or remove the person’s desire.  I would suggest that an effective tool would be to replace the person’s desire with something more appropriate.

            Suitable Targets

A suitable target may be a person or an object – property.  If the target is what the offender wants, and the offender is motivated to strike, then we have a crime.  Remove the target or present the target in such a way as it will not have the appearance of suitability, then crime has been prevented.

Again, I have my own theory on suitability of targets. Like offenders, there are three characteristics of the target that play into their suitability. And, like the three characteristics of the offender being of my design, these characteristics of the suitable target are of my design.

     1. Attractiveness of the target.
     2. Accessibility of the target.
     3. Ease of escape from or withdrawal from the target.

            Capable Guardians

The third component of the equation is the capable guardian.  This simply says that if there is a guardian protecting the offender, a guardian that is capable of denying access to the target by the offender, then no matter how motivated the offender may be, there will be no offense.  Keep in mind that the guardian must be stronger than the motivation of the offender to commit the crime.  Capable guardians may be guard dogs, surveillance systems, security alarm systems, several friends walking together (day or night), and in some cases the appearance of capable self-defense of the part of the target.  In all cases the target must become less suitable to the offender. Three factors contribute to the capability of the guardian, again as I see them.

     1. Ability to Identify the Offender
     2. Ability of Target to Prevent the Crime and/or Protect Oneself
     3. Ability of Target to Detain the Offender

Offenders may unconsciously weigh the costs and benefits of committing the crime.  They consider the suitability of the target (person or property) and the risk that will be taken too achieve the benefit of the effort to commit the crime.  If the risks are too high, then the crime will not be committed.  In the case of a highly motivated offender, one who is intent on committing a crime, perhaps a specific crime, if the risks are too high, if the target is not suitable or the guardian presents too high of an obstacle to overcome, the offender will look for another target.  It is called risk-benefit analysis.  It's called rational choice.  Your job as a target (and we are all targets at one time or another, generally several times in a lifetime) is to become less suitable and to have a guardian appropriate for what you want to protect.

It is important to understand that victims of crimes are not (generally) responsible for their victimization.  Some victims appear more attractive than others, not because of beauty, but because of ease of attack and appearance of what the offender is desiring.  We do not hang signs on our mailboxes that say "Please Knock Me Over" nor do women, regardless of how provocatively they may dress announce that they desire to be raped.  But, we increase the probability of being victimized if we give the appearance of suitability without a capable guardian.  We increase the risk of having our Christmas gifts stolen from our cars when we leave them in plain view in the back seat of an unlocked car.  And yes, the drunk co-ed at a frat party who says yes by her appearance and behavior even though she verbally says no will likely be victim to her worst nightmare.  This is not a popular position, but it happens to be a reality and in no way excuses or justifies the behavior of those who would take advantage of her.