Various scholars define home crime using different synonyms or by their varied point of views. As a result, their meanings are sometimes misinterpreted to lessen the seriousness of this grievous misdemeanor. They use terminologies such as wife-battering, family conflict and intimate violence to depict family violence. Historically, under the authorities set rules and regulations, the home was considered a private place and the police were not supposed to meddle in family conflicts. They were only supposed to maintain public peace and order, intervened only when extremely necessary. This posed a significant problem in regulating the rampant cases of domestic violence at that time. Moreover, cases of domestic violence were handled, when the victims sought for legal action rather than direct state intervention. Women also feared losing the families’ breadwinners and the male perpetrators who could increase violence once sued. The police viewed home crimes as insignificant, thus requiring little or no attention at all. Besides, the police forces were male dominated and did not understand female sufferings. However, in the modern times, most victims are aware of their rights, but are always unwilling to report the wrongdoers. The concerned parties do not have enough data to help them regulate the ill effects of home-based crimes, and there are no specific rules that protect women from male violence (Palmer 2005, p.1).
The law considers a home setting as a private place, and it should not interfere within internal conflicts within the home (Stubbs 2006, p.177). Moreover, in case of domestic violence, the police do not directly involve themselves, until the victims litigate, seeking legal help. Besides, unless the crime committed is grave enough to catch their attention, they always never intervene. Besides, the police are directly involved in other crimes external to family matters and will intervene and act appropriately in such incidences. The police consider the freedom of a person outside the family set-up as public, and their duty is to serve and protect the public welfare and not their private affairs. On the other hand, the law sometimes has prejudice against the poor and does not accord them their rightful privacy (Stubbs 2006, p.178).
The emotional depiction of home to different members of the society has different impacts, with regard to the way they face conflicts emanating from other home members. The description of home in regards to women is biased, since it considers home as an environment of uncertainty, as home is a source of happiness and a haven for security on one side. On the other hand, it harbors violence, intimidations, and acts of exploitation towards women. This description serves as a way of victimizing women as insignificant human beings, whose purpose is to serve men without question, making them subject to battering and other forms of misdeed. It shows how the society refers to the man as the head of the family, and the woman as weak, submissive beings. Conversely, the cultural interpretation of home is that of colonial nature, where the native Australians lost their homes through disinheritance and removal of young natives from their motherland. Moreover, the homeless were viewed as a menace to the entire community. This resulted in bringing up adults that are prone to unending domestic violence and political conflicts between them and the law enforcers.
Based on the above definitions of home, victims of domestic violence view the vice as an accepted norm, and do not seek legal help from the authorities once victimized. Moreover, the victims are unwilling to sue the perpetrators, who are their own relatives. As a result, the criminologists lack the actual data for analysis and only rely on unfounded information. In turn, this makes it difficult for policy makers to enact laws that control the vice. The differentiation of criminologists’ home offences from street offences also aggravates this challenge (Stubbs 2006, p.178). In addition, the police’s view on the issue is too shallow, since they regard the sin as a semi-crime, not worth their notice. Their view of home crime as private issues is tenuous.
References
Palmer, D 2005, Crime, Criminology and Policing, Deakin University Publishers, Victoria.
Stubbs, J 2006, Crime and Justice: A guide to Criminology, Thomson Lawbook Co., Sydney.