No quick fix to solving crime

THE EDITOR: Again the situation continues to develop where there is a major problem with crime and we continue to go about trying to solve it via all the wrong methods. It has now reached a point where the Government, and dare I say the Police, have run out of ideas, so now they turn to the business sector to give them “ideas.” The business sector at times are the hardest hit and valuable information is required from them to assist in diminishing crime. However, due to the capabilities and tactical planning by criminals, what is required to stop these felons in their tracks is not advice from victims, but acquiring expertise in the field of security and crime prevention to match and defeat these criminals. Such personnel can be acquired both at home, and if the matter is totally out of control, even abroad, as was done by the Mexican Government, when they suffered from almost identical problems that we are encountering now. Crime Prevention is now a science, and gone are the days when laymen just get these bright ideas in their heads and come up with the quick fix solution to prevent crime. That was what most politicians did, and their theories were and sometimes still are the same, as could be seen in some manifestos such as, “more police vehicles, more soldiers, more patrols, zero tolerance, etc.”

These are all just fancy techniques to give the public false hope and a few extra votes, but the end result is that, just like a business, you cannot just implement a policy unless you do a proper evaluation and research, and analyse the threat upon which you will then formulate the appropriate  plan of action. That is how crime prevention works. This is why the statements by the Crime Reduction and Prevention Committee and others that blame society are unfounded since they have done no research or gathered any data to make such   statements. Crime Prevention is based now on research methodology and empirical testing, upon which a community can formulate the ideal  prevention plan to stop crime. Criminological theory and research is described as a search for the general explanation of crime, and can only be done by this means, and by specialists in that field. There are three crime prevention concepts, which all attempt to disrupt the mechanism that cause crime. Primary Crime Prevention, which deals with protecting the target and making it less attractive for the criminal. The measures used are situational preventative measures, and this type of prevention concentrates on the criminal event rather than the motivated offender. This method was used quite effectively in New York, where crime decreased by over 50 percent, and is now regarded as one of the safest cities in the United States.

Secondary Crime Prevention involves seeking to eradicate the social conditions which are thought to foster crime. This type concentrates on the offender rather than the offence. This is known as social crime prevention, and deals with what the Crime Prevention Committee and others are harping on, that is stating that it is the morals of society and family values being lost, and the theory that there is no such thing as the “born criminal,” so if society has made them criminals, society should revert them. Acceptance of this theory can also be done based on data from the felons themselves. A recent survey to this effect was done in the United Kingdom, and 85 percent of felons said that they committed burglary and other related offences, primarily for money, but for varying reasons due to the lack of it such as unemployment, lack of values, entertainment or even drug related. Tertiary Prevention is mainly practised by the courts and the penal system, its aim being to ensure that, once caught, offenders lose the desire, the means or the ability to transgress again. For determinists, the criminal justice system can incarcerate incurable offenders for the protection of society, and act as a deterrent to others. Case point being that one of the lowest murder rates for the decade was the two months following the hangings of the Dole Chadee gang.

Due to restraints on funding and resources, a Government cannot place its emphasis on all three measures. They need to verify which is the critical element that they should focus on to reduce crime, and as stated, each country/ city/ community will need to focus on different crime prevention aspects to reduce them. This can only be done by research methodology and empirical tests both on the apprehended felons and even on the victims. When this data is tabulated, then and only then would one be able to know which crime prevention method will be ideal for their area. Otherwise it would just be concerned citizens just making recommendations based on personal perception. The British Crime Survey (BCS) obtains data from 40,000 criminals per annum, just to ensure that their crime prevention methods are accurate. These techniques require persons specialised in this field, since Crime Prevention is based on specialists having the knowledge, training and obvious technique to deal with such matters. The victims quite obviously are the most vociferous, but their knowledge  and action plans in diminishing crime will be limited. It’s a straight case of horses for courses. This is one instance that in the political scenario, the persons who sit on opposite ends in Parliament are not the enemy. All of them need to have one common goal, which is to reduce crime, and anybody who is not part of the solution, becomes part of the problem. In this scenario, the criminals and the criminals only, are the enemy, and all relevant bodies need to utilise all the resources that they can muster to eliminate this menace from our society.

CAPTAIN GARY GRIFFITH
Security Adviser
United National Congress