Deterrence Theory Of Crime Prevention Essay

This paper is based on the analysis of the United States crime prevention programs that are being implemented at the state level, law enforcement authorities, government authorities or both. In this essay, I have critically analyzed the effectiveness of some crime prevention strategies. The effort and societies attempt to reduce victimization and stop criminal acts and crimes are known as crime prevention.

There exist basic programs and strategies used and established to reduce and stopping the ever exceeding rate of criminal activities in most states and countries around the world. The adoption of crime prevention programs in most places help the society as well as law enforcement in maintaining criminal justice, enforcement of law and

control over the illegal activities This has contributed to the decline of victimization and criminal activities within the society. One of the main program and reason is the involvement and participation of the community members and the local law enforcement authorities helping to control the rate of crime. In United States there are many crime prevention programs are running for the benefit of the society and state.

Looking at the theoretical frame works of Crime prevention, these are strategies based on the deterrence theory that proposes that “sufficiently repugnant punishments will inhibit individuals from committing crime” (Mackenzie, 2002).

Harsh sanctions by the criminal justice system should deter an individual from committing a crime. It also incorporates the rational choice theory which emphasizes that an offender will weigh the pros and cons of a crime. It describes that “the offender perceives that the cost and benefits of punishment are not outweighed by the crime” (Mackenzie, 2002). The chance that an individual will commit a crime is reduced when they think about how the threatened punishment will impact their lives. The deterrence theory, especially specific deterrence, is the basis for programs such as Scared Straight, chain gangs and shock probation where “ the major emphasis is on the punitive nature of the punishment and not on reducing crime through restraint, discipline or challenge” (Mackenzie, 2002). The shock probation or parole programs are a sort of split sentence where offenders are briefly incarcerated with other offenders and then go on community supervision. The incarceration should shock the individual into “abandoning criminal activity and into more conventional and law-abiding behavior” (Mackenzie,

2002).

Our current research has begun to show how these programs don’t have a deterrent effect and that the recidivism of shock probationers with similar probation groups have found no differences and in some cases the shock probationers have done demonstrably worse” (Mackenzie, 2002). The Scared Straight programs were once popular, even having its own television show. These target at-risk youth where they are taken into maximum security institutions and “inmates tell them the horrors and difficulties of life in prison” (Mackenzie, 2002). However, studies have shown that the Scared Straight programs “have not indicated any differences between those who participated in the programs and comparison groups and in some cases the re-arrest rates were higher for those who participated in the program” (Mackenzie, 2002).

Incapacitation is another crime prevention strategy that assumes that since offenders are behind bars, they cannot commit crimes in the community. Also, it proposes a general deterrence effect where the threat of incarceration prevents others from committing crime. It also has a specific deterrent effect on the incarcerated offender to deter them from continuing their criminal behaviors. However, incapacitation and the three strikes laws are a controversial subject as to determining if it cost effective and effective. This strategy showed a “modest reduction in crime combined with substantial increases in prison populations” (MacKenzie, 2002). It is obvious that the offenders do not have the capability or opportunity to commit crimes within the community. However, it doesn’t address the “expected increases in imprisonment rates and the associated financial costs that accompany such strategies” (MacKenzie, 2002).

Some crime prevention such as situational crime prevention has focused on an environmental approach that “seeks to change the specific characteristics of the environment that may cause criminal events to occur” (Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015). It targets specific form of crime in different circumstances and is “based upon the premise that crime is often opportunistic and aims to modify contextual factors to limit the opportunities for offenders to engage in criminal behavior” (Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015). Those contextual factors can be assessed, manipulated, modified and controlled in order to help deter crime. The theoretical basis for situational crime prevention is the routine activities theory where “three critical elements must occur simultaneously for a criminal event to take place—a motivated offender, a suitable target and the absence of a capable guardian” (Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015). Offenders can find a crime opportunistic and that chance is influenced by the community itself. Research has indication that “opportunity reduction measures can reduce crime in many circumstances with little evidence of displacement” (Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015). This crime prevention is cost-effective by modifying the environment’s contextual factors and condition to prevent crime.

The Public video surveillance is something that has been implemented throughout a large portion of Europe, such as England and Ireland. I incorporate CCTV video surveillance within large segments of public space, not just at designated traffic intersections. I have shown to reduce crime if implemented or perhaps designated to cover small very specifically defined areas of public travel. These areas are often determined through statistical data concerning criminal activity either in general or crime specific. This would in my view be based upon the criminological theory of problem oriented policing as well as the Deterrence model. Whether it is fully implemented within major areas or a majority of the United States is in the air due to manpower costs, equipment and installation cost, training and resistance from the public in general. (Ratcliffe, February 2002).

The Amber alert system or Broadcast Emergency Response is designed as collaboration between broadcasting and law enforcement to relay or disseminated pertinent information quickly and effectively about potential or actual child abductions and in some cases missing children or loved ones. This could best be described as a community based policing model with aspects of Incapacitation Strategies. I see this is a “potentially effective” program for the simple reason that once the investigation has begun and the alert is determined to be warranted, the media begins broadcasting alerts every 15 minutes, interrupting regular programming when necessary. According to the resource however which cites 80 AMBER Alert activations, the result is only around 16 children found or returned as a direct result of the AMBER system, this means that the program boasts approximately a 20 percent success rate. Even with that being the case however