Posted: June 16th, 2022

Crime Prevention Criminal Justice

Discussion 1

In Chapter 7 of Crime Prevention, Robinson states that “Rational choice and deterrence theories are two related theories that help understand why criminal justice – including crime control and crime prevention activities of police, courts, and corrections – should help us reduce crime in society” (2012). Answer one of the following questions:

THIS ASSIGNMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE ABOVE. THE NEXT ASSIGNMENT YOU NEED TO DO IS PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON TWO CLASSMATES POSTS.  THE LENGTH MUST BE 200 WORDS EACH POST.  THERE ARE TWO FEEDBACKS YOU MUST DO. MUST BE POSITIVE FEEDBACK, PROPER GRAMMAR/SENTENCE STRUCTURE, AND ANY OUTSIDE SOURCES YOU USE THAT RELATES TO THE FEEDBACK FROM THE STUDENT MUST BE PROPERLY CITED/SCHOLARY SOURCE.

  

Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts.

 

Robinson discusses many theories in Chapters 3 through 7.  Some of these theories are: Biological Theories, Psychological Theories, Integrated Theories, Social Learning Theories, Social Control Theories, Routine Activity Theories, Crime Pattern Theories, Anomie Theories, Strain Theories, Institutional Anomie Theories, Contextual anomie and strain theories, Cultural deviance or subcultural theories.

 

Select a theory other than rational choice or deterrence theories, and compare and/or contrast it to the post of your classmates’ and/or your instructor.

  

Does one of these theories clarify your understanding of the crime or criminal issue you intend to examine in your Final Project?  

ATTACHED FILE(S)

Discussion 1

In Chapter 7 of Crime Prevention, Robinson states that “Rational choice and deterrence theories are two related theories that help understand why criminal justice – including crime control and crime prevention activities of police, courts, and corrections – should help us reduce crime in society” (2012). Answer one of the following questions:

THIS ASSIGNMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE ABOVE. THE NEXT ASSIGNMENT YOU NEED TO DO IS PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON TWO CLASSMATES POSTS. THE LENGTH MUST BE 200 WORDS EACH POST. THERE ARE TWO FEEDBACKS YOU MUST DO. MUST BE POSITIVE FEEDBACK, PROPER GRAMMAR/SENTENCE STRUCTURE, AND ANY OUTSIDE SOURCES YOU USE THAT RELATES TO THE FEEBACK FROM THE STUDENT MUST BE PROPERLY CITED/SCHOLARY SOURCE.

Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts.

Robinson discusses many theories in Chapters 3 through 7. Some of these theories are: Biological Theories, Psychological Theories, Integrated Theories, Social Learning Theories, Social Control Theories, Routine Activity Theories, Crime Pattern Theories, Anomie Theories, Strain Theories, Institutional Anomie Theories, Contextual anomie and strain theories, Cultural deviance or subcultural theories.

Select a theory other than rational choice or deterrence theories, and compare and/or contrast it to the post of your classmates’ and/or your instructor.

Does one of these theories clarify your understanding of the crime or criminal issue you intend to examine in your Final Project?

DISCUSSION RESPONSE FROM STUDENT ONE JAYMES W.

Rational choice theories are among the fastest growing theories in social science today. Many sociologists and political scientists defend the claim that rational choice theory can provide the basis for a unified and comprehensive theory of social behavior. What distinguishes rational choice theory from other forms of theory is that it denies the existence of any kinds of action other than the purely rational and calculative. All social action can be seen as rationally motivated, as instrumental action, however much of it may appear to be irrational or non-rational.

General deterrence strategies focus on future behaviors, preventing individuals from engaging in crime or deviant by impacting their rational decision making process. Specific deterrence focuses on punishing known deviants in order to prevent them from ever again violating the specific norms they have broken. Through the rational use of punishment as a negative sanction, problematic behavior can be cut down dramatically. Some examples are: shock sentencing, corporal punishment, mandatory arrests for certain behaviors.

Specific deterrence strategies, focuses on punishing known deviants in order to prevent them from ever again violating the specific norms they have broken. The concern here is that motives and rationales that lie behind the original behavior can, perhaps, never be delineated, but through the rational use of punishment as a negative sanction, problematic behavior can be extinguished. Examples: shock sentencing, corporal punishment, mandatory arrests for certain behaviors, domestic violence, etc.

Crime prevention or at least crime reduction may be achieved through policies that convince criminals to refrain from criminal activities, delay their actions, or avoid a particular situation. People will engage in criminal and deviant activities if they do not fear apprehension and punishment. Norms, laws, and enforcement are to be designed and implemented to produce and maintain the image that “negative” and disruptive behaviors will receive attention and punishment.

References:

(1) Bennett, T. (1986).Situational Crime Prevention from the Offenders Perspective. In Heal, K. and G. Laylock (eds.), Situational Crime Prevention: From Theory into Practice. London, England: Her Majesty s Stationary Office.

(2) Cornish, D. & Clarke, R. (1987). Understanding Crime Displacement: An Application of Rational Choice Theory, Criminology, 25, 933 947.

DISCUSSION RESPONSE FROM SECOND STUDENT ALICIA R.

The relationships between these innovations require examination to plan for the future. Among the goals of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services is “to help develop an infra- structure to support and sustain community policing after Federal funding has ended.” It is hoped that this report, and its accompanying guidelines, will make a contribution to achieving that goal. Infrastructures require a context, so that decisions can be made that are consistent with strengthening opportunities and minimizing threats in this instance, with respect to the overarching goal of delivering safety in a democracy. Community policing, community justice, and restorative justice all touch upon this mission in varying degrees, depending on their implementation. Experiments with community policing since the 1970s are widely regarded as having con- tribute to a welcome maturation of law enforcement organizations. After years of organizational distance from their communities, the police are taking stock of their position in society and in relation to citizens. Strong police-public relationships make for mutual respect, confidence, and improved information flow. Community policing also has significant potential for handling the challenges presented by the changing nature of crime. Crime can no longer be thought of only in terms of isolated incidents of victimization. Crime has come to represent a series of phenomena, including school violence and youth delinquency, the growth of the teen “super-predator,”2 white-collar crime, gang and group violence, drug turf wars, stalking, gun trafficking, domestic and child abuse, road rage, hate crimes—all wreaking havoc across U.S. society. Crime has also become a catchall word covering a broader range of problems that are seen to threaten the social order, including the homeless, the mentally ill, quality-of-life infringements, teenage mothers, and urban poverty.

Local communities are increasingly recognized as the primary source and recipient of these breakdowns in law and order. Crime is intercommunity and requires local solutions; these facts make a case for attentive policing that is sensitive to the dynamics within different neighborhoods and groups and is geared to community safety. In many areas, communities are now viewed as partners in tackling crime as well as customers of police services. Police leaders are acknowledging that the police can no longer be the Omni competent force for dealing with crime, fear, disorder, and public safety. The police are seen as needing to work with communities, sharing responsibility and being creative in applying joint resources to recurring problems and to advancing community well-being.

Finding the appropriate framework for this collaboration is proving difficult in the face of traditional public dependence on the police, on the one hand, and rapidly changing social conditions (including crime), on the other. Controlling crime and maintaining order are widely seen by the police and public alike—as police functions. The police are recognized as being organized and equipped to fulfill these functions. Communities seem to be chaotic, to have deeply entrenched problems, and to require professional help to mobilize and organize resources. Communities may be seen as having the capacity for self-strengthening and self-building, if given strong service institutions, including the police. A tension exists between the calls for more police and the recognition that communities need to be regenerated.

References:

Nicholl, C. G. (1999). COPS Publication. Retrieved April 02, 2014, from Community Policing, Community Justice and Restorative Justice: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00