Commonsense Elements Of Crime

Commonsense law involves a person’s opinion on law and order and crime issues, thee opinions are “built, layer upon layer, through constant repetition by popular and authoritative sources”…. (Hogg, Brown 1998, p. 18). Two of these ‘commonsense elements’, ‘soaring crime rates’ and ‘we need tougher penalties’, can be compared to a newspaper article written by Rita Panahi in the Herald Sun on the 12th of April 2017, titled, ‘Tougher Approach is Long Overdue’.

The first commonsense elements of law and order thinking identified by Hogg and Brown that I’ll be looking at is ‘soaring crime rates’. This refers to the depiction of crime that the media repeatedly illustrate. Whether it’s being over-reliant on untrustworthy statistics provided by the

police, surveys and polls, or news headlines such as “Gangs of Bodgies in Crime Wave” (Sydney Truth 17/6/56) and “Only the Brave Walk at Night” (Sun-Herald, 22/1/67), the continuous subject of violence, fear and terror project an image of an uncontrollable crime wave. Hogg and Brown believe that the “uniformity of both assumptions and language make it very difficult to challenge or seek to qualify them (crime statistics) in any way” …. (Hogg, Brown 1998, p. 23), Another main component in the ‘soaring crime rates’ is the “appeal to statistical verification”… (Hogg, Brown 1998, p. 24). This refers to crime statistics gaining no real ‘credibility’ due to them being “rarely qualified by reference to their limitations as a reliable measure of crime trends and patterns”… (Hogg, Brown 1998, p. 24). Generally, the commonsense elect ‘soaring crime rates’ focuses on the news media and their depiction of ‘unreliable’ crime statistics. They also discuss the importance of ‘qualified’ statistics and the benefits they have when used properly.

The second commonsense element of law and order that I’ll be expanding on is ‘we need tougher penalties’.

This element is centred around an advertisement in the Courier-Mail that read “Queensland Law Is Now Tougher On Criminals”. In this advertisement, there were two tables, one indicating increases in maximum penalties for 23 nominated crimes, and the second one set out penalties for a range of “new charges and laws introduced for ‘New Age’ crimes”… (Hogg, Brown 1998, p. 38). Hogg and Brown state that “the call for ‘tougher penalties’ is a perennial theme of law and order debate”…(Hogg, Brown 1998, p. 38). According to Hogg and Brown, there are numerous sub-themes including the re-introduction of capital punishment, complaints about the leniency of prison sentences, parole and remission being overly generous, and prisoners’ living conditions being too comfortable and enjoyable. One of the major flaws in tougher penalties is “it is possible to generate public confidence simply by putting more people in prison”…(Hogg, Brown 1998, p. 39) leaving open the risk of false imprisonment, which in itself, brings along other major long-term problems. Overall, the commonsense element ‘we need tougher penalties’, involves the implementation of tougher penalties on criminals due to the strong public opinion on the

issue.

The newspaper article ‘Tougher Approach is Long Overdue’, written by Rita Panahi, explores Matthew Guy’s (leader of the opposition in Victoria) brand new proposal on tougher sentences. The two commonsense law elements previously discussed can be found in this newspaper article.

This proposal can’t be directly compared to the commonsense element ‘we need tougher penalties’. This is evident through the proposal of “mandatory minimum jail terms that would apply to 11 crime categories”…. (Panahi, 2017, p. 25). These ‘crime categories’ include, “murder, rape, manslaughter by single punch or strike, causing serious injury intentionally in circumstances of gross violence, causing serious injury recklessly in circumstances of gross violence, causing serious injury recklessly, causing serious injury intentionally, aggravated burglary, aggravated carjacking, armed robbery and aggravated home invasion”… (Panahi, 2017, p. 25). These new plans suggested by Guy illustrate the commonsense element of ‘we need tougher penalties’ through the proposition of tougher sentencing for specific crimes.

The commonsense element of ‘soaring crime rates’ can also be found in this newspaper article.

Matthew Guy’s proposal is a reaction to Australia’s ‘crime crisis’. “In the past year there’s been a steep increase in the number of violent offences with a 16.4 per cent increase in murders, 18.6 per cent increase in attempted murders, 11.8 per cent increase in assaults and related offences and 22.3 per cent increase in dangerous and negligent acts endangering people.” ….(Panahi, 2017, p. 25). Panahi also states that “Aggravated burglary offences have soared by 40.6 per cent, car thefts are up 27 per cent and robberies 24.4 per cent.”… (Panahi, 2017, p. 25). These alarming statistics are clear evidence of the ‘soaring crime rates’ that Hog and Brown discuss, along with the discussion of them in Panahi’s

article.

Overall, the commonsense elects of ‘soaring crime rates’ and ‘we need tougher penalties’ indicate the issues and possible solutions in Australia’s law and order system. These ‘commonsense elements’ can also be found in a newspaper article written by Rita Panahi, ‘Tougher Approach Is Long Overdue’, furthermore highlighting the alarming ‘crime wave’ that has hit Australia.