Research Articles Base: Crime Term Papers

White Collar Crime and Organized Crime

src=”http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js”>   Introduction             During 1939, crime is commonly perceived as the work of disadvantaged young men who are from broken homes as well as decaying neighborhoods. It can be seen in different books and movies where in criminals were being portrayed as a dangerous and strong guy who’s growing up on the wrong side of town. The story will eventually lead to the brand new life of the young man by the help of the church or the community or lead to the bad ending where in he will be condemned to a sad faith that is determined by different hard circumstances where in he was raised (Weisburd & Waring 2001, p. 1).             In addition to that, there have been series of enduring empirical inquiries, sociologists at the University of Chicago during the 1920s and the 1930s. The study focuses on the link between the social disorganization and poverty in the different areas within a city as well as high rates of the criminal behavior (Weisburd & Waring 2001, p. 1). During the end of the twentieth century, there have been dramatic changes that had happened in the way that the policy makers as well as different elite academics talk about the crime and what should be done regarding it (Shover & Hochstetler 2005, p. 1). White-collar had been one of the most important topics and has a great impact to the British history. The said type of crime, specifically the business fraud, embezzlement as well as financial chicanery of different kinds had affected huge amounts of properties as well as threatened many savings or even broke the lives of many individual investors (Robb 1992, p. 2). What is White Collar Crime?             The real origins of white-collar crime lie from 200 years ago, during the tremendous financial growth that was caused by the British Industrial Revolution (Robb 1992, p. 1). The Industrial Revolution has been the cause of the complexity in the economy as well as the dependency of the economy on different finance as well as investment. The economy during that time can be seen as having a vast banking network, a burgeoning commercial nexus of insurance, stocks and credit that eventually lead to a more complicated legal system. The said phenomena, together with the affiliated growing numbers of lawyers, brokers as well as financiers had helped to increase the potential for the white-collar crime (Robb 1992, p. 2). The term white collar crime was coined by Criminology Expert and sociologist, Edward Sutherland in order to describe nonviolent crimes that are committed by the corporations or the individual like office workers as well as sales personnel during the track of their business activities and tasks (The Columbia Encyclopedia 2007, p. 51465). It defines the crimes that are committed at a business by a businessman or business woman. The primary reason of Sutherland for coining the term is that he believed that people are more likely to be more committed to the crimes if they are surrounded by different criminal behaviors of other people (Ellis-Christensen 2008). The said term had been used in order to expand the boundaries of the study of the crime, by including the criminal acts of different respectable individuals in the process of their occupation or profession (Schlegel & Weishurd 1992, p. 3). It includes crimes such as embezzlement, false advertising, bribery, unfair competition, tax evasion, as well as unfair labor practices (The Columbia Encyclopedia 2007, p. 51465). The reasons or factors that push Sutherland to study about the white collar crime is that he sees that criminology had been focused on the social and economic determinants of crime, like the family background and the wealth level of a person, in incorrect manner. In addition to that, Sutherland believed that all crimes are committed at all levels of the society as well as by the person with a wide divergent of background in terms of socio-economic. Furthermore, he believed that crime is often committed by the persons that operate through a large as well as powerful organization. On the other hand, he concluded that white collar crime has its greatly-underestimated effect on the society (Strader 2002, p. 4).             The said definition of Sutherland can be considered as outdated for the students of the criminal law nowadays. During the mid-1970s, the white collar crime had capture the attention of many prosecutors as well as the public, and the definition of the said term had evolved and gained its different meaning. There have been many studies that show that crimes like security fraud as well as tax fraud are not just committed by persons who belong to the high social status but also by those people who has a divergent background (Strader 2002, p. 4).             Reiss and Biderman describe white-collar crime as the violations of law that pertains to the use of a violators; position as well as power in order to influence as well as to trust, for the purpose of the illegal gain, or to commend an illegal act for the sake of personal or organization gain (cited in United States, Bureau of Justice Statistics 1988, p. 9).             The United States Department of Justice define white collar crime as a nonviolent crime for the purpose of financial gain that had been committed and done by doing deceptions by those people that belongs to the entrepreneurial, professional and semi-professional occupational status. In addition to that it is being done by utilizing the special occupational skills as well as opportunities by those people who belong to the said occupational status. Furthermore, it can also be considered as a crime that focuses on the financial gain that uses deception and committed by anyone that has a special technical as well as professional knowledge of business as well as government, regardless of the occupation of the person (cited in Strader 2002, p. 5).             On the other hand, white collar prosecutor and defense attorney define white collar crime as crime that does not: essentially engage in force against a person or property; directly linked to the ownership, deal, or even circulation of narcotics; directly linked to the prearranged crime activities; directly linked to a definite national policies like immigration, civil rights as well as national security; or directly engage in different vice crimes or the common theft of property (Strader 2002, p. 5).             Shapiro also argues that white-collar crime should be perceived as an abuse of one’s trust. This is due to the fact that the white collar criminals are holding monopolies of information that cannot be verified by their client or by their target. The said situation makes the client separated from the perpetrators in physical and social manner (Vito & Maahs 2006, p. 415).             The man difference between the white-collar crimes and violent crimes is that the first do not necessarily caused physical injury to the identifiable person. Instead, it can cause loss and damage to the society as a whole, that is why it is hard to detect and difficult to investigate the white-collar crime than the violent crime (United States, Bureau of Justice Statistics 1988, p. 9).  Categories of White-collar Crime             The definition of white-collar crime can be divided into two categories: the occupational crime and the corporate crime. <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> Occupational Crime</li> Gary Green had defined occupational crime as the acts that are punishable by law that had been committed and done via the opportunities that had been brought and created within the course of an occupation that is considered as legal (cited in Vito & Maahs 2006, p. 415). It excludes the crimes that are committed in the context as well as in the pursuit of the goals of an avowedly illegal organization. It is committed by the individuals as well as groups of different individuals that has no relationship or connection with any legitimate organization or whose organizational positions do not figure in their crimes (Tonry 1998, p. 138). In addition to that, Green also sets up a typology that center on the beneficiary of the crime as well as separates all the offenders who are motivated by their desire for own gain from those that act on behalf of the organization (Vito & Maahs 2006, p. 415). <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> Crimes committed for the benefit of an employing organization – in this typology of occupational crime, the individuals will not be directly be benefited from the offence, but the employers (Vito & Maahs 2006, p. 415). Individual offenders may be benefited indirectly by the different rewards such as promotion, bonuses and salary raises, but they will be the major beneficiaries of the offense are the owners of the organization where in an individual works (Lewis 2002, p. 32). </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> Crimes committed as the result of the state-based authority – in order for the offender to commit this crime, he must be legally vested with any governmental powers and authority in order to enforce as well as make laws or to give orders to others (Vito & Maahs 2006, p. 415). This type of the state-based authority would be excluded with the criminal acts where in the course of the occupation of the state officials that are related and has a connection with the different exercises and activities of the different legal powers (Lewis 2002, p. 32). </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> Crimes committed by professionals in their professional capacity – examples of this crime can be the sexual assault of the physicians to his or her patients during examinations as well as unnecessary treatments and surgeries by the authorities such as physicians and veterinarians. It can also be the use of different confidential information for the personal gain of the lawyers. Furthermore, the said type of topology would exclude the different offenses that had been committed by the professionals during the course of their occupation that are considered as unconnected to the trusts that had been given to them as professionals (Lewis 2002, p. 33). </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> Crimes committed by individuals as individual – the last typology encompasses all of the remaining offenses or those situation where in the opportunities are not based on any governmental authority as well as the profession of the offender and where in the offenders will be directly benefited (cited in Lewis 2002, p. 33). </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> Corporate Crime</li> The pervasiveness and the power of corporations as well as corporate form are considered as important in order to treat as a subtype of the white-collar crime (Tonry 1998, p. 139). Corporate crime is a white-collar crime that occurs during the context of the complicated relationships as well as expectations between the boards of directors, executives as well as the managers. It can also occur between the relationship of the parent corporations, corporate divisions as well as subsidiaries (Clinard & Yeager 2005, p. 17).  Primarily, corporate crime is recognized as the misconduct that is done by different corporations that is punishable by the state, in spite of, whether it is punishable under the administrative, civil or even criminal law (cited in Spencer & Sims 1995, p. 24). Corporate crime can be considered as a crime that is performed or acted out by the collectivities or the groups of disconnected individuals and hardly equivalent to the action of an isolated individual (cited in Clinard & Yeager 2005, p. 18). It is the crime that had been committed and done by an individual for the duration his or her lawful occupation for the benefit or advantage of the organization (Levinson 2002, p. 319).  In general, the main difference between the organizational crime and corporate crime is that the first one that had been mentioned focus on the bad acts of an individual in order to gain or to obtain something for his or her own sake. On the other hand, the corporate crime pertains to the bad doings of an individual or groups in order to gain or obtain advantage or profit for the whole organization or company that he or she is into. A white-collar crime can only be said as corporate crime if it had benefited the organization or company by the acts that had been done by an individual or group. Part II: The Modernization of Organized Crime: The Entrepreneurial Model Introduction             There have been many studies and seminars that question the changes and evolvement of organized crime over the years. It follows the question about how did it happened. The focus of the studies pertains to the growing social phenomena of globalization, migration as well as the fast development in technology. The two most important phenomenons that enlighten the world regarding the issue of organized crime is the event of the September 11, 2001 attacks in USA as well as the war in Iraq (Siegel & van de Bunt 2003, p. 3).             As of now, the term organized crime is often preceded by the word transnational. This is due to the fact that the increase of organized crime is in entirely geographical terms. Furthermore, it also involves that the organized crime is already in real meaning of cross-boarder crime (Siegel & van de Bunt 2003, p. 3).             Organized crime can also be called global due to the fact that most of the events that are connected with the global consequences are all influenced and affected by the nature as well as form of the organized crime (Siegel & van de Bunt 2003, p. 4).             There is no doubt that organized crime had already evolved and change with connection to the improvement of different economies of different industrialized as well as the continuing negative impact of globalization to the developing country or third world. Furthermore, the presence of new and improved technologies and innovation, particularly the help of the Internet had a great impact to the organized crime. What is Organized Crime?             Organized crime can be considered as a non-ideological enterprise that involves number of persons that are into close social interaction, organized on the basis of hierarchical manner that has three levels or rank, the purpose of securing profit as well as power by means of engaging different illegal and even legal activities (Abadinsky 1990, p. 6). It is any criminal activities and tasks that involves two or more persons, that can be specialized or non-specialized, that is compose of some form of social structure, has a form of leadership, making use of different modes of operation, where in the primary purpose is to found in the enterprises of a specific group (Albini, 197, p. 37).             Organized crime is considered as both a social system as well as social world. This is due to the fact that the system is composed of different relationships that connect the professionals, criminals, law enforcers as well as the different entrepreneurs (Block 1983, p. vii). It can also be considered as a technique of violence, intimidation as well as corruption where in the default of the effective law enforcement, can be successful applied, via the use of those sufficiently unscrupulous, to any of the business or industry that can produce large profit. It focuses on the main motive, which is the secure as well as hold and maintain the monopoly of different activities that will reduce huge profits. The activities can be illegal and legal (Special Crime Study Commission on Organized Crime 1953, p. 11).             Furthermore, organized crime is considered as a syndicated crime, the violation of the law about the large-scale basis by the ongoing, tightly structured groups that are devoted in pushing and gathering profit via different means of criminal activities.   Organized crime is syndicated crime, the violation of the law on a large-scale basis by ongoing, tightly structured groups devoted to the pursuit of profit through criminal. The main difference between the organized crime from other type or categories of crime is that it shows durability as well as complexity of the syndicates that uses and shows some of the traits of a formal organization such as division of labor, organizational structure, power distribution as well as the process of coordinating different statuses (Conklin 2007, p. 315).             In general, organized crime can be describe as a identifiable, monopolistic, self-perpetuating, hierarchical organization that is keen use different violence as well as fraud of the officials of the government in order to connect in the traditional or legal activities as well as different complicated criminal enterprises. Another thing is that, it operates like the usual organizational where in it ensures that the organizational longevity by different ritualistic practices, rules and regulations, organizational tithing as well as investments in different legal businesses (Grenna & Britz 2006, p. 15).             Human and Drug trafficking are the most important organized crime in the world. The said two crimes are always visible in any country, in any region no matter how strict a given government is.             In US, there is what they call the US-based Tongs; where in some of the members are working together with the heroine traffickers, triad member as well as the gang leaders in order to import heroin and other types of drugs inside the US. There are also some members of the Tong members, more specifically those who are involved in the Fujianese organizations are engaged in the smuggling of Chinese citizens to the US (Wright 2006, p. 114).             On the other hand, some of the gang leaders in the US-based gangs are working together with the different heroin traffickers, triad members as well as the Tong members that are involved in the importation of heroine in the US. The gang members are also into the tasks of helping the different snakeheads in order to collect the human smuggling fee (Wright 2006, p. 114). Evolution of Organized Crime             Crime is becoming and increasingly international. With the exception of the high homicide rates that are considered as unique to the US, the rates for the crimes in many developed countries of the West are considered as quite similar as well as appear during the recent years, to rise and fall in the tandem (National Research Council 1999, p. ix).             There have been many factors that had affected the development of the organized crime, the integration of the economic systems and institutions of the world, the easing of different barriers to the trade, travel as well as migration as well as the technology that enables easy global communication (National Research Council 1999, p. ix).             Like the legal companies, organized crime is also affected and influenced by globalization as well as the use of modern technologies in terms of communications as well as file sharing.  Furthermore, most of the organized crime is also being done in terms of thinking global but acting local. It can cause a global effect on the organized crime but the modus operandi of the organized crime can affect and caused local problems. Those criminals who are running their international operations are often relying on the local powers that are based on their respective country. The said power had been propped up by the friendships of many years that stands or close-knit family. One of the most fascinating factors of the global organized crime is that proximity is a condition that is used in order to succeed in the long distance operations (Siegel & van de Bunt 2003, p. 4).             There have been many developments that had happened in the organized crime. The explosion of the drug markets since the 1980s, the waves of illegal migration as well as the increasing numbers of different conflicts that are fueled by the large-scale criminal activities had been the most important and significant issues that are included in the transnational criminal networks (Berdal & Serrano 2002, p. 13).             As the globalization had helped and enabled to expand the international trade and international communication, it had also increase the range of the organized crime activities by making it broader as well as more diverse. The common or the conventional hierarchical forms of the organized crime groups have already disappear and was replaced with the different approach, which is the loose network that works together for them to exploit new and larger opportunities in other market (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2008).             One of the most important and the most common organized crime is the market of drugs. Due to the impact of globalization, the said market had gone through several changes. For the last fifteen years, Spain as well as the Netherlands has been considered as the two most important countries in importing cocaine from South America and its distribution to the rest of the Europe, however, there are huge differences in terms of trafficking networks as well as competitive advantages. However, the said scenario had change since the development of the XTC or ecstasy culture and XTC market in Israel.  The said change and development in the culture and market of Israel had resulted to the change of the organized crime in the global industry (Siegel & van de Bunt 2003, p. 5).             In terms of the organized crime groups that are involved in the activities of drug trafficking, they are more commonly engaged in smuggling other illegal goods. Therefore, the link or the relationship between the drug trafficking as well as other form of the transnational organized crime is in a great call for a more integrated or connected approach in order to be addressed (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2008). Organized Crime in USA and UK             Both Europe and America have a common background that focuses on the factors that had affected the rise of the groups that had been engaged in different illegal activities. The rise of the outlaw gangs had been showed in the America with the rise of the cities. On the other hand, the Mafia arouse in the different part of Europe. Both of the regions show the different social, political as well as economic factors that are the reason for the emergence of the growth of the said type of crime (Larson & Garrett 1996, p. 143).             One of the primary reasons for the emergence of the secret societies and gangs is due to the unorganized or disorganized social milieu lacking of the effective means of the social control like the establishments of respected and fair law, rules and regulation as well as the governing and controlling structure. In the case of the US, different governmental structure commonly follows as well as a respond to the social and economic changes as well as development, rather than being lead. Furthermore, disorganization is not the primary problem in the country but the total absence of the organization that will handle the different process of generating the milieu that is behind the rise of the outlaw gangs (Larson & Garrett 1996, p. 143). The said absence of organization or governing structure that will handle the different needs as well as the different demands of the citizens with accordance to the different violence as well as gangs and illegal associations that are emerging during that time.             On the other hand, in Europe, disorganization is the one that affected the presence of different social disorganization due to the impact of the feudal heritage, due to that fact that Europe is a region that is dominated by different independent city-states that are engaged in different internecine warfare as well as the periodic occupation by the neighboring powers. Furthermore, the unification also add up to the factors that affected the overall impact of organized crime in the region, there have been a widespread of the absentee ownership of the landed stats that resulted to the conducive environment to the overseers’ use of any means or method at their disposal in order to control as well as to exploit the peasants (Larson & Garrett 1996, p. 143).             Unlike US, that is failing to pay attention to the terror-crime nexus in the serious way, UK had been one of the most active countries in focusing in the said phenomenon. The UK has refurbished it police human resources practices groups in order to improve their ability in order to collect different intelligence as well as to examine it. The said country also established its National Criminal Intelligence Services or NCIS in 1992 in order to unify the collection, processing as well as analyzing of the criminal intelligence that is inside the policing system (Orttung, & Makarychev 2006, p. 11).                                                             References   Abadinsky, H 1981, The Mafia in America: An Oral History, New York.   Berdal, M & Serrano, M (eds.) 2002, Transnational Organized Crime and International Security: Business Asual?, Lynne Rienner, Boulder CO.   Block, A. & Chambliss, W 1981, Organizing Crime, Oxford, New York   Clinard, M B & Yeager, P 2005, Corporate Crime, Transaction Publisher   Conklin, J 2007, Criminology, 9th ed., Pearson, Boston   Croall, H 2001, Understanding White Collar Crime, Buckingham, Open University Press.   Ellis-Christensen, T 2008, What is White Collar Crime?, WiseGeek, viewed 30 April 2008, <http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-white-collar-crime.htm>   Fijnaut, C 1990, ‘Organized Crime: A Comparison between United States of America and Western Europe’, Journal of Criminology, vol. 30, pp. 321-340   Grennan, S & Britz, M 2006, Organized Crime: A Worldwide Perspective, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ   Harmattan Ruggiero, V. 1996, Organised and Corporate Crime in Europe: Offers That Can’t Be Refused, Dartmouth, Aldershot   Hobbs, D 2002, Oxford Handbook of Criminology, Oxford University Press, Oxford   Larson, C & Garrett, G 1996, Crime, Justice and Society, Rowman Altamira   Levi, M & Hobbs, D 1998, ‘Going Down the Global: The Local Context of Organized Crime’, Howard Journal, pp. 407 – 422   Levinson, D 2002, Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment, SAGE   Lewis, R 2002, White Collar Crime and Offenders: A 20-Year Longitudinal Cohort Study, iUniverse   Maguire, M 1994, Oxford Handbook of Criminology, Oxford University Press, Oxford   National Research Council 1999, Transnational Organized Crime: Summary of Workshop, National Academies Press   Nelken, D 1998, ‘White Collar Crime’, in Maguire, M, Morgan, R & Reiner, R (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, Oxford University Press, Oxford   Orttung, R, Makarychev, A (eds.) 2006, National Counter-terrorism Strategies: Legal, Institutional and Public Policy, IOS Press   Pearson, J 1985, The Profession of Violence, Harper Collins, London   Ponsaers, P & Ruggiero, V (eds) 2002, Economic and Financial Crime in Europe, Paris   Robb, G 1992, White-collar Crime in Modern England: Financial Fraud and Business, Cambridge University Press, London   Schlegel, K & Weisburd, D 1992, White-Collar Crime Reconsidered, UPNE   Shover, N, Hochstetler, A & Hochstetler, A 2005, Choosing White-Collar Crime, Cambridge University Press, London   Siegel, D, van de Bunt, H G & Zaitch, D 2003, Global Organized Crime: Trends and Developments, Springer   Spencer, M & Sims, R 1995, Corporate Misconduct: The Legal, Societal and Management, Greenwood Publishing Group   Strader, K 2002, Understanding White Collar Crime, Southwestern University School of Law, LexisNexis, viewed 30 April 2008, <http://www.lexisnexis. com/lawschool/study /understanding/pdf/whitecollarch1.pdf>   The Special Crime Study Commission on Organized Crime 1953, Final Report, Sacramento, California.   Tonry, M 1998, The Handbook of Crime & Punishment, Oxford University Press, US   United States, Bureau of Justice Statistics 1988, Report to the Nation on Crime & Justice, DIANE Publishing   UNODC and organized crime 2008, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, viewed 1 May 2008, < http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/organized-crime/index.html>   Vito, G, Maahs, J & Holmes, R 2006, Criminology: Theory, Research and Policy, Jones & Barlett   Weisburd, D, Waring, E & Chayet, E 2001, White-Collar Crime and Criminal Careers, Cambridge University Press, London   White-Collar Crime 2007, The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed, Columbia University Press, New York   Wright, A 2006, Organized Crime, Willan Publishing   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

White Collar Crime and Organized Crime

src=”http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js”> Introduction During 1939, crime is commonly perceived...

Sample Term Paper on Hate Crime

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the different issues with regards to hate crimes. It will specifically state the different definition of the word hate crime and the different kinds of hate crime prevalent in the society. It will also attempt to state important laws and regulations that punishes and penalizes perpetrators of hate crime.             Although experts commonly agree that hate crime is prevalent in American society, these same writers, lawyers, sociologists and experts do not agree on the true and total definition of hate crime. The Congress of the United States defined hate crime as a crime in which “the defendant’s conduct was motivated by hatred, bias, or prejudice, based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or gender identity of another individual or group of individuals” (Kelly, 1998, p. 110). Meanwhile, other police organizations the United States define hate crime as criminal offenses committed against persons, property or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by an offender’s bias against an individual’s or a group’s race, religion, ethnic/national origin, gender, age, disability or sexual orientation (Jacobs, 2001, p. 59).  In legal parlance, the term hate crime is diversely defined throughout the United States. The District of Columbia defines hate crime as crimes in which victims are selected because of a perpetrator’s bias against a victim’s perceived race, religion or ethnicity (Levin, 2001, p. 98). However this definition is different when compared to other states in the Union since these states define hate crime in which the victims are chosen because of his/her sexual orientation (Levin, 2001, p. 100). The California Penal Code section 422.6 offers a wider interpretation of hate crime, defining it as those acts “committed because of the victim’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, gender, or sexual orientation (Perlmutter, 1999, p. 210). The law against hate crimes punishes actions considered criminal by using force or threat of force in order to injure, intimidate or interfere with a person’s civil rights. State hate crime laws in the United States vary immensely in wording and in their definition of the phrase hate crime. Some laws employ a language of civil rights as can be seen in California when it adopted an “Interference with Exercise of Civil Rights” statute that states that no person, whether or not acting under the color of law, shall by force or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate, interfere with, oppress, or threaten any other person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him or her by the constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution or the laws of the United States because of the other person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, or sexual orientation (Hawkins, 2003, p. 165). In contrast, some states employ the language of “ethnic intimidation or malicious harassment.” In 1983, for example, Idaho adopted a “Malicious Harassment” law that declares it shall be unlawful for any person, maliciously and with the specific intent to intimidate or harass another person because of that person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, or national origin to cause physical injury to another person, damage and destroy, or deface any real or personal property of another person (Hawkins, 2003, p. 201). Another law that is against hate crime is Bill SB 1234 passed by the California legislature. In this piece of legislation passed by the California legislature, persons of all sexual orientations are protected from hate crimes (Perry, 2005, p. 51). One strong objection with regards to this law is the act of criminalizing incitement to violence if a hate speech would result in physical harm for the protected group of individual (Perry, 2005, p. 52). This law therefore criminalizes the act of inciting violence if the probability of harm is high. Although this law is passed in the legislature, other interest groups are against this law since in their view it restricts and obstruct the practice of free speech as mandated by the First Amendment. It is said that this law against hate crimes is an attack upon the religious freedom in the United States because the law punishes the thought and ideas of an individual and not the wrong or criminal act (Perry, 2005, p. 53). This law as stated by groups that are against this hate crime law is an attack on the ability of an individual to criticize and comment on certain groups of people, In 1990, President Bush signed the Hate Crime Statistics Act that requires government officials specially the Attorney General to collect statistical data on crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation or ethnicity (McDevitt, 2002, p. 87). Since this law is primarily concerned with data gathering, it merely requires the Attorney General to collect and to make available to the public certain statistics on hate crimes (McDevitt, 2002, p. 77). Although data collection with regards to hate crime is important it does not answer the need to develop an effective policy that can be used by the federal government in prosecuting and punishing hate crime offenders. Supporters of this law meanwhile argued that mere data collection could help law enforcement officials in measuring trends, fashioning effective responses and designing prevention strategies (McDevitt, 2002, p. 100). In 1994, Congress passed two more laws that deal with hate crime. The Violence against Women Act specifies that “all persons within the United States shall have the right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender” (McDevitt, 2002, p. 109). This law also allocated over .6 billion for education, rape crisis hotlines, training of justice personnel, victim services especially shelters for victims of battery and special units of police and prosecutors to deal with crimes against women (McDevitt, 2002, p. 110). Congress has also passed the Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act. This law identifies eight predicate crimes–murder; non negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault; simple assault; intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage, or vandalism of property–for which judges are allowed to enhance penalties of “not less than three offense levels for offenses that the finder of fact at trial determines beyond a reasonable doubt are hate crimes” (Gerstenfeld, 2003, p. 207).  For the purposes of this law, “hate crime” is defined as criminal conduct wherein “the defendant intentionally selected any victim or property as the object of the offense because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person” (Gerstenfeld, 2003, p. 208). Although broad in form, this law addresses only those hate crimes that take place on federal lands and properties. Many oppose hate crime laws, stating that imposing a greater penalty on an act committed in hate would thus make hating illegal (Levin, 2001, p. 98). Some Americans feel this to be a direct infringement on First Amendment rights. Others argue that such legislation provides special status to certain protected groups. They also say that distinguishing a hate crime requires reading the mind of the accused, a dubious prospect at best and perhaps not something that should be considered when deciding on punishments. In short, critics argue that hate crime legislation criminalizes thought and also clearly violates the Fourteenth Amendment by denying “equal protection of the laws”. In addition, hate crime prosecutions seek to punish an individual for motive rather than intent. For example, the difference between first or second-degree murder is intent, not motive (Kelly, 1998, p. 100). It is also said that hate crime laws are largely unnecessary, as a crime committed solely on the basis of hatred of a group would already be punished harshly by the justice system. If no argument could be made in mitigation, thereby reducing the culpability of the offender or the seriousness of the offence, the offender would be sufficiently punished to the full extent of the law. Others support hate crime laws, stating that by enacting them individuals would face greater discouragement from committing hate crimes. They also point out that all laws are subjective, and that if society can determine that one crime deserves more punishment than another then it can also determine what motivations deserve harsher punishments (Jacobs, 2001, p. 129). Some supporters reason that one who can be moved to violence by hatred of a class of people presents greater danger to society than one who merely hates an individual. Their position states that if normal punishments are inadequate deterrents, then additional punishments may deter crimes motivated by hate. Other proponents of hate crime legislation consider that politically correct or socially sanctioned hate is a problem, and that legislation will need to explicitly cover those often deemed less worthy of protection (Perlmutter, 1999, p. 59). Another argument sometimes advanced by supporters of hate-crime laws are that violent acts motivated by political or similar reasons are characteristic of earlier, less enlightened societies, and toleration would result in regress. Proponents point out that it is not unusual to make thoughts or states of mind elements of a crime (Perlmutter, 1999, p. 45). Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Sample Term Paper on Hate Crime

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the different issues with regards to hate crimes. It will specifically state the different definit...

Sample Crime Paper The Contexts of Predatory Crime

CONTEXTS OF PREDATORY CRIMES Homicide Homicide is the manner in which human being takes the life of another human being. The diverse kinds of homicide, like murder, manslaughter and infanticide, all have the subsequent elements in common. (Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) [1997] 3 All ER 936) One element is that the killing has to be against the law. Specific defenses, like self-preservation, will make a killing legally allowed. Another is the participation of a different human being. The killing has to be of an existing human being. Furthermore, there is similarly the requirement that a rule of “death within a year and a day” be conformed to. The rule labeled the ‘year and a day rule’ that is for the reasons of crimes concerning death and of suicide, an action or oversight is decisively supposed not to have brought about a individual’s demise if more than a year and a day passed before he expired. And finally, homicide has similarly the element of causation. The defendant has to be established to have brought about the victim’s demise. Assault There is constantly a significant amount of confusion with regards to the definition of assault. Often times, it is constantly being confused with battery. Legally speaking, assault supposedly signifies different elements. In Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439, the court stated that an assault is any action which deliberately or perhaps irresponsibly brings about another individual to apprehend instantaneous and unauthorized personal violence. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Sample Crime Paper The Contexts of Predatory Crime

CONTEXTS OF PREDATORY CRIMES Homicide Homicide is the manner in which human being takes the life of another human being. The diverse kin...

Hate Crime

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the different issues with regards to hate crimes. It will specifically state the different definition of the word hate crime and the different kinds of hate crime prevalent in the society. It will also attempt to state important laws and regulations that punishes and penalizes perpetrators of hate crime.             Although experts commonly agree that hate crime is prevalent in American society, these same writers, lawyers, sociologists and experts do not agree on the true and total definition of hate crime. The Congress of the United States defined hate crime as a crime in which “the defendant’s conduct was motivated by hatred, bias, or prejudice, based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or gender identity of another individual or group of individuals” (1998). Meanwhile, other police organizations the United States define hate crime as criminal offenses committed against persons, property or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by an offender’s bias against an individual’s or a group’s race, religion, ethnic/national origin, gender, age, disability or sexual orientation ( 2001).  In legal parlance, the term hate crime is diversely defined throughout the United States. The District of Columbia defines hate crime as crimes in which victims are selected because of a perpetrator’s bias against a victim’s perceived race, religion or ethnicity (2001). However this definition is different when compared to other states in the Union since these states define hate crime in which the victims are chosen because of his/her sexual orientation (2001). The California Penal Code section 422.6 offers a wider interpretation of hate crime, defining it as those acts “committed because of the victim’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, gender, or sexual orientation (1999). The law against hate crimes punishes actions considered criminal by using force or threat of force in order to injure, intimidate or interfere with a person’s civil rights. State hate crime laws in the United States vary immensely in wording and in their definition of the phrase hate crime. Some laws employ a language of civil rights as can be seen in California when it adopted an “Interference with Exercise of Civil Rights” statute that states that no person, whether or not acting under the color of law, shall by force or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate, interfere with, oppress, or threaten any other person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him or her by the constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution or the laws of the United States because of the other person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, or sexual orientation (2003). In contrast, some states employ the language of “ethnic intimidation or malicious harassment.” In 1983, for example, Idaho adopted a “Malicious Harassment” law that declares it shall be unlawful for any person, maliciously and with the specific intent to intimidate or harass another person because of that person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, or national origin to cause physical injury to another person, damage and destroy, or deface any real or personal property of another person (2003). Another law that is against hate crime is Bill SB 1234 passed by the California legislature. In this piece of legislation passed by the California legislature, persons of all sexual orientations are protected from hate crimes (2005). One strong objection with regards to this law is the act of criminalizing incitement to violence if a hate speech would result in physical harm for the protected group of individual (2005). This law therefore criminalizes the act of inciting violence if the probability of harm is high. Although this law is passed in the legislature, other interest groups are against this law since in their view it restricts and obstruct the practice of free speech as mandated by the First Amendment. It is said that this law against hate crimes is an attack upon the religious freedom in the United States because the law punishes the thought and ideas of an individual and not the wrong or criminal act (2005). This law as stated by groups that are against this hate crime law is an attack on the ability of an individual to criticize and comment on certain groups of people, In 1990, President  signed the Hate Crime Statistics Act that requires government officials specially the Attorney General to collect statistical data on crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation or ethnicity (2002). Since this law is primarily concerned with data gathering, it merely requires the Attorney General to collect and to make available to the public certain statistics on hate crimes (2002). Although data collection with regards to hate crime is important it does not answer the need to develop an effective policy that can be used by the federal government in prosecuting and punishing hate crime offenders. Supporters of this law meanwhile argued that mere data collection could help law enforcement officials in measuring trends, fashioning effective responses and designing prevention strategies (2002). In 1994, Congress passed two more laws that deal with hate crime. The Violence against Women Act specifies that “all persons within the United States shall have the right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender” (2002). This law also allocated over .6 billion for education, rape crisis hotlines, training of justice personnel, victim services especially shelters for victims of battery and special units of police and prosecutors to deal with crimes against women (2002). Congress has also passed the Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act. This law identifies eight predicate crimes–murder; non negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault; simple assault; intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage, or vandalism of property–for which judges are allowed to enhance penalties of “not less than three offense levels for offenses that the finder of fact at trial determines beyond a reasonable doubt are hate crimes” (2003).  For the purposes of this law, “hate crime” is defined as criminal conduct wherein “the defendant intentionally selected any victim or property as the object of the offense because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person” (2003). Although broad in form, this law addresses only those hate crimes that take place on federal lands and properties. Many oppose hate crime laws, stating that imposing a greater penalty on an act committed in hate would thus make hating illegal ( 2001, ). Some Americans feel this to be a direct infringement on First Amendment rights. Others argue that such legislation provides special status to certain protected groups. They also say that distinguishing a hate crime requires reading the mind of the accused, a dubious prospect at best and perhaps not something that should be considered when deciding on punishments. In short, critics argue that hate crime legislation criminalizes thought and also clearly violates the Fourteenth Amendment by denying “equal protection of the laws”. In addition, hate crime prosecutions seek to punish an individual for motive rather than intent. For example, the difference between first or second-degree murder is intent, not motive (1998). It is also said that hate crime laws are largely unnecessary, as a crime committed solely on the basis of hatred of a group would already be punished harshly by the justice system. If no argument could be made in mitigation, thereby reducing the culpability of the offender or the seriousness of the offence, the offender would be sufficiently punished to the full extent of the law. Others support hate crime laws, stating that by enacting them individuals would face greater discouragement from committing hate crimes. They also point out that all laws are subjective, and that if society can determine that one crime deserves more punishment than another then it can also determine what motivations deserve harsher punishments (2001). Some supporters reason that one who can be moved to violence by hatred of a class of people presents greater danger to society than one who merely hates an individual. Their position states that if normal punishments are inadequate deterrents, then additional punishments may deter crimes motivated by hate. Other proponents of hate crime legislation consider that politically correct or socially sanctioned hate is a problem, and that legislation will need to explicitly cover those often deemed less worthy of protection (1999). Another argument sometimes advanced by supporters of hate-crime laws are that violent acts motivated by political or similar reasons are characteristic of earlier, less enlightened societies, and toleration would result in regress. Proponents point out that it is not unusual to make thoughts or states of mind elements of a crime (1999).                       Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Hate Crime

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the different issues with regards to hate crimes. It will specifically state the diffe...

Identifying crime hot spots in space and time: Leeds City in UK is a case study

Introduction             The drastic and inevitable changes that happen in the society today lead to the increasing rate of crime in any part of the world today. Today, factors including the advancement of education, technology, and communication affect such changes. Enhancement in such differences augments the rise of several social issues in different nations, including poverty, unemployment, hunger, and crimes. These social issues, thus, along with technologic, education, and communication advancements, determine the improvement and development of a particular nation.             In line with this, it would be relevant and beneficial to analyse and evaluate the issues regarding crime in Leeds City in UK, to further provide understanding and enlightenment on the current situation of the country. As such, the current crime situation of Leeds City in UK indicates its kind and time of occurrence. With this, this paper aims to evaluate the leading types of crime occurring in the city with respect to their coefficient of variation (C.V.). Along with this discussion is the comparison of averages of time occurrence of different crimes in Leeds. The differences will be given proof by the actual figures and statistics that can be found from reliable sources.   Statement of Problem The researcher finds the necessity for a study that specifically tackles the current status of crimes in Leeds. Specifically, this study intends to explore the significant coefficient of variation (C.V.) of time occurrences of crimes happening in Leeds City, UK. This paper will present the occurrences of different crimes happening in Leeds with respect to the mean and standard deviation of its time. Basically, this paper seeks to compare the mean and standard deviation of crime occurrences in Leeds. Moreover, this study will try to answer the following queries: 1.    What is the dominant type of crime happening in Leeds City, UK? 2.    Which type of crime is more variable in terms of occurrences?   Literature Review The policy to control the fires by simply removing the blaze and sitting back to wait for more fires are swiftly being deserted as restricted and lavish. Study of the sources of fires, and the improvement of precautionary programs, are becoming essential activities of the modern fire department. In relation to the control of delinquency and crime, however, society has not progressed much beyond the stage of putting out the flames. It has stayed for law violations and then turned the efforts to arrest, prosecute, and punish the offenders without giving much attention to the exclusion of the forces that produced them and continue to produce thousands like them. The analogy between fire control and crime prevention is, to be sure, an imperfect one. To classify causes of fire into improper electric wiring, accumulation of oily waste materials, careless storing of gasoline, and the like, is a simple matter compared to ascertaining the causes of delinquency and crime. In dealing with crime we are concerned with a very complex phenomenon involving the interplay of biologic handicaps, subtle human motivations, and often unmeasurable social and economic factors (1987). It is usually very difficult to assign proper weight to any single factor or group of factors in the causal complex, not to stress the obstacles to ascertaining all the active elements. It is often very difficult, also, to determine which factor in a pattern of criminogenic forces should be given primacy. There is, moreover, the probability that certain groups of factors are causally operative in the career of one type of individual, others in another ( 1987). This does not mean that increasing scientific precision is not highly desirable in criminologic research but it recognises the imperfection of knowledge in respect to the etiology of antisocial behaviour. Crime prevention, in one form or another, has become a central organising principle of the criminal justice systems of most western nations (1989). As one criminologist recently noted (1987): “We are entering the heyday of community crime prevention. Never before has the notion of citizen involvement in crime prevention received such widespread support.” () The constituency of individuals and groups involved in the struggle to prevent crime grows constantly, as witnessed by the diverse collection of organisations attending the International Conference on Urban Safety and Crime Prevention in Montreal in October 1989. But as the quotes preceding this article illustrate, the onus for crime prevention in the community is now being transferred to citizens themselves. That this is appropriate is readily apparent from considering the role of the police in preventing crime. The reality of policing is that the ratio of police officers (or patrols) to the universe of potential — or even actual offenders — is so low as to severely limit the ability of the police to either deter or detect crime (1974). Crimes are very rampant in our everyday society. It’s very rare that you see the evening news without any reports about crime and violence. It’s been said that one of the major factors of the continuous soaring of crime rates is the rampant usage of illegal drugs. Crimes such as assaults and alcohol offences are no longer a new matter to the society. It’s been existing up to the current era. In connection to this, this paper attempts to identify the coefficient of variation (C.V.) of the time occurrences of types of crimes (i.e. burglary, criminal damage and theft from/or motorcycle vehicle) in Leeds City, UK and some relative variables.   Data Data shall be collected from certain source, allowing for a number of different perspectives to be taken into consideration in the development of the recommendations. The data sources that will be examined include: ·         a review of the appropriate research literature. This includes examining studies related to crime. Both technical articles and “how-to” articles were included in the review; <ul style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0in" type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 200%"> an examination of the crime data gathered from Leeds police station</li> </ul>   Methods There are three kinds of research methods, correlational, experimental and descriptive. ( 2001) The correlational kind of research method is used due to ethical problems with experiments. The correlational research refers to studies in which the purpose is to discover relationships between variables through the use of correlational statistics (). If a strong relationship is found between two variables, using an experimental approach can test causality. On the other hand, the experimental method is the only method that can be used to establish cause-and-effect relationships. (1994) That is, it is the only one that can be used to explain the bases of behaviour and mental processes. In this method, the subjects split into two (or more) groups. One group, called the experimental group gets the treatment that the researcher believes will cause something to happen (this treatment is formally called the independent variable). The experimental and control are compared on some variable that is presumed to reflect the effects of the treatment, or outcome. This is formally referred to as the dependent variable. And lastly, the descriptive research method uses observation and surveys. This study utilised the descriptive type of research, which uses observation. In this method, it is possible that the study would be cheap and quick. It could also suggest unanticipated hypotheses. Nonetheless, it would be very hard to rule out alternative explanations and especially infer causations. Thus, this study will use the descriptive approach.  This descriptive type of research utilises observations in the study.  To illustrate the descriptive type of research,  (1994) will guide the researcher when he stated: Descriptive method of research is to gather information about the present existing condition. The purpose of employing this method is to describe the nature of a situation, as it exists at the time of the study and to explore the cause/s of particular phenomena. The researcher opted to use this kind of research considering the desire of the researcher to obtain first hand data from the respondents so as to formulate rational and sound conclusions and recommendations for the study. The source of data came from the police station in Leeds, UK. For this research design, the researcher gathered the information, collate published studies from different local and foreign universities and articles from business journals; and make a content analysis of the collected documentary and verbal material.  Afterwards, the researcher summarised all the information, make a conclusion based on the null hypotheses posited and provide insightful recommendations on the dealing with the Crimes in Leeds, UK.   Results analysis It has been reported that a crime is defined as an act, which violates the moral, religious, and political command, wherein this command is considered essential in the protection of the interests of a particular State or the welfare of the State’s citizens or subjects (2007). This definition states the meaning of crime in general, as it refers to action(s) committed by an individual or individuals toward other citizens, with the intention of taking away their rights and privileges as individuals in the society. In this sense, it can be understood that crimes are violations committed against individuals and the community, which is punishable by the laws governing that particular community.  In this particular idea, the coefficient of variation (C.V.) of crime occurrences in Leeds, UK was analysed.   Burglary The evidence for the effectiveness of physical measures and their impact upon crime rates is similarly mixed.  (1984) studied the effect of target hardening upon a difficult-to-let estate. Although there was no decline in burglary upon the target estate a trend analysis of the monthly data revealed a pronounced levelling off for just over a year following the start of security improvements. This contrasted with the encompassing police subdivision and the control area where burglary rose substantially. There was also some displacement of burglary to an area of private housing and an adjacent council estate. In addition there was also displacement to other crimes within the target estate; other crimes, such as theft of vehicle and burglary of other premises. The evidence for the effect of property marking upon crime rates provided by Laycock (1985) are encouraging although the results have to be seen within a specific context.     From the given presentation, 51.3% of burglary elsewhere offences out-numbered the burglary dwelling offences in Leeds by approximately 2.6%. Basically, burglary is a crime related to theft or another crime. It usually engages contravention into someone’s property with an intention to commit a crime. However, this crime excluded the lawful break-ins of property, such as to rescue someone, quench a fire, lawful searches and seizures by police, removing of visible smuggled goods, to effect a lawful arrest, or to eject a tenant who has failed to meet payments. With these findings, the following presentation illustrates the descriptive of time occurrence of an unlawful burglary.   Based on the presentation, the average time of committing this crime is 8.3 hours.  Meaning to say most of the criminals who committed this crime are normally lasting in 8 hours with 6.8 standard deviation.       Criminal Damage   Intentional property damage may be considered a form of violence or sometimes called criminal damage, although one usually (but not always) less culpable than violence which does physical harm to other living beings. According to  (1984), criminal damage simply means to destroy or damage property belonging to another, including arson. In the Criminal Justice Act of 1988, common assault, unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle, criminal damage above £400 and below £2,000, and driving while disqualified were all reclassified as summary offences. It has been estimated that this reclassification resulted in a 5 percent reduction of persons tried in Crown Court (1992). From the gathered information related to criminal damage in Leeds, the following table shows the descriptives of the time occurrences of the crime.     Based on the presentation, the average time of committing Criminal Damage is normally within 8.9 hours.  Meaning to say most of the offenders who are doing this crime are normally lasting in 9 hours with 7.5 standard deviation.   Theft from/or Motor Vehicle   The different successes and failures experienced by generic and generalised crime prevention programs should not be surprising. Crime is not uniform. Shoplifting by a tourist in a record store is different from theft by a salesperson working in that same store. Robbery from a centre city bank is different from theft of a motorcycle by a teenager. A sexual assault in a subway is different from abuse of a foster child by a foster parent. The people committing these diverse crimes cannot reasonably be considered as identical. Generalised approaches, while popular, are unlikely to have a substantial impact on crime rates because they cannot address the diversity of criminal behaviour. In this regard, the theft from motor vehicles is relatively different to the theft of motor vehicles. The occurrence of recorded theft incidence in Leeds was presented below.  Based on the presentation, 37.7% are considered theft of motor vehicles while 474 or 62.3% of the recorded theft is from motor vehicle.       Based on the illustration, the average time of committing Theft from/or Motor Vehicle is in 8.9 hours.  Meaning to say most of the offenders who are doing theft from/or motor vehicle are normally lasting in 9 hours with 6.46 standard deviation.     Coefficient of Variation Analysis To determine the variation among time occurrences of crimes, the use of coefficient of variation analysis was considered. When the standard deviation is expressed as a percentage of the mean resulting type of relative dispersion is called coefficient of variation (C.V.). The coefficient of variation is always expressed in percent.     Formula:   where: CV= coefficient of variation     S=sample standard deviation     =sample mean                 In other words, coefficient of variation indicates the relative magnitude of the standard deviation as compared with the mean of the distribution of measurement.  It allows us to compare variability of data with different measurement units.  Since the data provides us the standard deviations and sample means, then we may compare the variability of the data that tests the claim of the investigator.              Using the formula above, the following results was gathered:     For Burglary: =(6.83/8.38)(100%) =81.5%   For Criminal Damage = (7.5/8.9)(100%) =84.27%   For Theft from/of Motorcycle Vehicle: = (6.46/8.9)(100%) =72.58     Based on the computation above, the criminal damage type of crime is more variable than other two types of crime.  Basically, the computed coefficient of variation for burglary, criminal damage and theft from/of motorcycle vehicles are 81.5%, 84.27% and 72.58%, respectively.  In relation to results of the gathered data, we may conclude that criminal damage type of crime dominates in terms of time of crime occurrences. The variation analysis also identified that the length of time of criminal damage is much longer than other crimes. With these findings, the police authority in Leeds should now consider the time of occurrences in order to minimise long occurrences of crimes. From this, criminal damage’s long period of occurrences might also affect the strength of damages.   Conclusion Given the results of previous coefficient of variation (C.V.) analysis, relevant crime related issues aside from crime hot spots and patrolling of police, i.e. time occurrences of crime should also be addressed.  Based on the facts and information discussed, it can be understood that police patrol practices and hot spot analysis in UK minimises offenders to commit crimes. However, time analysis of crime occurrences in Leeds, UK should also be given enough attention. In addition, the number of crime with respect to its time of occurrences in UK should be observed by the government, such as murder and theft. Because many individuals are deprived of their right in the society, their answer to this would most likely be in the form of crime or violations, which would justify the injustice they have received from the society or from other people. In addition, it can be seen that Leeds must be able to continuously do and uphold punishments to crimes, to ensure that all citizens are given justice in the society. This must also continue to serve as a form of education to citizens, in the emphasis of respect and recognition of other people’s rights and privileges in the society.   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Identifying crime hot spots in space and time: Leeds City in UK is a case study

Introduction The drastic and inevitable changes that happen in the society today lead to the increasing rate of crim...