Introduction
Violent crimes often cause serious negative impacts on the victims, relatives, and the state. Hence, the public and the state have openly condemned and engaged in discussions that seek to help in deterring the persistence of violence. Scholars have researched widely and offered different perspectives that can help to develop strategies for preventing violent crimes. However, before developing any policy, it is important to understand the nature and trend of crimes among other features. This ensuing discussion provides a precise analysis of violent crimes. The goal is to show how such offenses can be prevented.
Differences among the National Measuring and Counting Systems for Gauging Crime
According to Reiss, Roth, and Miczek, criminal acts can only be regulated if they are properly measured (404). Therefore, effective systems for computing violent events need to be established. Indeed, one single act can result in several offenses. For example, a homicide case reported by the media can involve other crimes such as illegal possession of firearms, murder, and possibly robbery with violence.
Foremost, the United Crime Reports system (UCR) comprises statistics of criminal acts recorded in law enforcement institutions and the actions that the responsible agencies take against such crimes. Secondly, the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) death registration system comprises records of mortalities elicited by violent acts and details on their occurrence. Medical examiners generate and keep these statistical findings. The National Crime Survey (NCS) is also another measuring system, which works through retrieving demographic data to determine the criminal cases within a given period (Reiss, Roth, and Miczek 411). To interpret the findings of cases of violence, the NCS utilizes data from the Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII) and the National Hospital Discharge Survey. Injury Surveillance System (ISS) is also used to quantify violent crimes through keeping statistics of victims who seek compensation and individuals who seek treatment of injuries that result from criminal incidents.
Notably, the UCR and NCS systems are used to count and categorize the specific acts that translate into violence. The UCR keeps a record of very serious crimes such as homicides cases and the perpetrators who were apprehended at the crime scenes. Conversely, the NCS measures victimizations from violent incidents. It caters to the cases that are not reported to law enforcers. When NCS and UCR are equated, the outcome is often contradictory, hence causing a huge concern from observers on the need to reconcile the two computing methods (Reiss, Roth, and Miczek 412).
The Victimization Trend
Members of the minority community are the most vulnerable victims of violent crimes. As such, African-Americans and Latin-Americans are more exposed to criminal incidents than whites. Moreover, American youths are susceptible to violent events such that youthful black American men are more probable to feel the impact of violent incidents when compared to older white women (Shoesmith 2957). There are also frequent reports of serious crimes such as homicides causalities among blacks more than whites. Accordingly, American-Indian males are also reported to have a high homicide prevalence among senior members of the community. However, the trend of victimization is often strenuous to record because not most victims report cases of violent crimes (Reiss, Roth, and Miczek 48).
Effect of Community Characteristics on the Probability of Violent Crime Occurrence
Community characteristics can be identified through the housing density, prevalent family structures, and neighborhood transitions. If these factors are negative, they reflect a disconnection in the community. It becomes less likely that positive values are being passed down to the younger members of the community. The disconnection is apparent in the inability of parents to unite to solve problems that relate to their youths, especially identifying youths who are not part of their community. The lack of such a network or ability to question other neighborhood children about their behavior is also an indicator of a breakdown in the community. Single parents who work have less time to engage in community activities or even concentrate on the behavior of their children (Light and Harris 559).
The culture of a community can inspire the rates of violent crimes. Communities that believe in the importance of violence in illegal business transactions tend to have higher rates of violent crimes. The erosion of social structure from communities being led by elders to gang leaders has also increased violent crimes. The beliefs of a community about what success entails are also vital factors. Communities that believe that extremely expensive material possessions form the standard for success are more likely to turn to violent crimes. Black market deals are illegal. Thus, the disputes that arise from them cannot be resolved using formal means. This case also increases the likelihood of violence. Finally, law-abiding citizens may turn into violence due to constant unreliability on public authorities. The formation of gangs also promotes violence among teenagers and older youths (Light and Harris 560).
Impact of Individual and Social Processes on an Individual’s Potential for Violent Behavior
Aggression in children is much less as compared to the situation for adults in low-income areas. Research by Light and Harris confirms that individuals who face frustration are likely to display aggression, which is a learned response (559). Other individuals learn to use violence to achieve certain goals. Hence, they are likely to have observed similar models such as violent pornography from their family members, mass media, and even peers. Research also shows that fearless temperament in childhood is likely to be a predictor of aggression as an adult, especially in poor societies (Light and Harris 561). On the other hand, fearful children use it to shield themselves from aggression. Violent adults are likely to demonstrate it in their personality even as children. They are rarely empathetic, tend to have a lower IQ, are risk-takers, are impulsive, and always go for instant gratification.
In children, predictors may include negligence, abuse, harsh disciplining, bullying, low-income backgrounds, watching television for long hours, criminal behavior by members of the family, school failure, seclusion by peers, large families, poor housing, and living in a neighborhood with high crime rates. The effects of the interaction can be used to explain the link between social processes and violence. Socioeconomic status (SES) and ethnicity seem to interact. At low SES levels, the chances of blacks being homicide victims are high. Conversely, in higher SES levels, this interaction does not appear. Residential mobility, ethnicity, and SES levels in society tend to indicate the prevalence of violence (Light and Harris 562).
Biologically, violent behavior may be influenced by genetics and neurobiological characteristics. Antisocial personality in adults may result from genetics. However, genetic influences alone do not control fluctuations in violence rates. However, they require interaction with other factors. However, they explain why some individuals or families deviate so far from normal societal behavior. Neurobiological processes are activities in the human brain that influence the behavior of individuals. The study of these processes may produce knowledge that is vital for explaining violent behavior.
Impact of Alcohol Abuse and Use of Other Psychoactive Drugs on Violence
According to Darke et al., the use of alcohol and other psychoactive drugs tends to increase the rate of violence (916). For adults, long-term use of alcohol is likely to lead to violence and aggressive behavior. This outcome is more prevalent in adults who showed pointers of aggressive behavior when they were teenagers. Problem drinkers are more likely to demonstrate violence compared to other alcoholics. Other drugs may have links to violent behavior, depending on the amount and dependency of use. Opiates or marijuana taken in low doses temporarily prevent aggressive behavior. Conversely, withdrawal from opiate addiction is likely to lead to augmented violent behavior (Rahtz 67).
Similarly, chronic use of marijuana and opiates among other psychoactive drugs increases the potential of violent victimization because it changes the functioning of the nervous system. In rare cases, it increases the potential for violent outbursts. The effects that alcohol and other drugs have on violence depend on the interaction with other factors such as the social and situational contexts. The reaction after drinking often depends on the expectations of the drinker and the environment he or she faces. About psychoactive drugs, the illegal market environment is responsible for more violence than the pharmacological effects of the drugs (Reiss, Roth, and Miczek 207).
Patterns and Trends of Family Violence
The violence that occurs within the family is not highly reported. This observation is credited to the privacy that is traditionally accorded to the family. The fact that this privacy had not been treated as a crime for long coupled with the trauma that surrounds such violence has inhibited reporting. Women are the greatest victims of assault, especially the divorced, cohabiting, or separated females. Intrafamily homicides have also been increasingly reported. Males are more prone to being victims of intrafamily homicides than females.
In this context, violence towards children is mostly physical and sexual. Children who are below four years old are more likely to be victims of murder than their older counterparts. Mothers are more likely to kill their infants as compared to fathers. Additionally, female children are thrice more prone to sexual assault as compared to males. Black children are more prone to abuse and neglect than white children. The social seclusion of a family, alcohol consumption and depression are factors that increase the probability of violence. Individuals exposed to the above circumstances are more prone to develop violent tendencies. Children who have been abused in the family are more likely to become violent adults. Additionally, males who have been sexually abused as children have higher chances of becoming sexually abusive in the absence of intervention (Reiss, Roth, and Miczek 240).
How Firearms Alter a Series of Conditional Probabilities in Violence Occurrences
Statistical findings reveal that a firearm is used in about 60 percent of homicides incidents that occur in the US. Such findings are chilling. They trigger the need to reevaluate the existing laws and policies necessary for preventing gun violence. However, before initiating strategies for preventing gun violence, policymakers must understand how firearms interfere with various conditional probabilities in criminal incidents (Doeden 53).
Foremost, the likelihood that gun injuries result in the demise of the target is far much higher than other weapons such as knives. Firearm injuries are five times more probable to cause death than knives. The lowest probability comparing the lethality of guns to knives is at 2 to 1. The deadliness of firearms is not only because of the content of the bullets but also the motive of the perpetrator. Criminals whose intention is to kill or cause injury will always prefer to use firearms. They are very diligent in firing the bullets to ensure that they cause grave injuries. Subsequently, such injuries are likely to cause death. Even in the absence of guns, such perpetrators use other lethal weapons such as knives to cause fatal injuries. Thus, the probability that firearm injuries result in death is usually hastened by the intention of the reprobates. However, this claim is debatable, considering that some individuals only use firearms to threaten their victims or for self-defense (Reiss, Roth, and Miczek 260). Moreover, where individuals use the arms to intimidate a target and accomplish a specific objective, the probability of an injury varies. Where one wants to commit robbery using a gun to threaten the victims, it may cause no injury if the victims yield to such a threat. However, where a confrontation arises, the weapon is likely to be used to cause injury.
Reasons why the Tripling of the Prison Populations resulted in an increase in the Levels of Violent Crimes
According to Reiss, Roth, and Miczek, incarceration has historically been used as an effective method of controlling violent crime (292). It is presumed that it isolates criminals from innocent members of society while discouraging perpetrators from continuing with their illegalities. Despite the projected success of incarceration, the recent statistical findings on the tripling of prison populations as the level of violent events remaining constant contravene the popular theory. Certain factors must have caused the insignificant change concerning the prevention of violent crime.
Foremost, several crimes can be committed by a single offender. Hence, the arrest of some perpetrators will still imply that the existing offenders are likely to commit crimes higher than the number of the arrested criminals. Hence, incarceration is not likely to trigger a significant drop in the number of crimes. Instead, it only has a significant bearing on the population of offenders but not the actual crimes. Moreover, crime can be termed as a temporary career since those who are locked in prisons for long sentences might have quit criminal activities even before incarceration. Thus, increasing the imprisonment terms has a little impact on discouraging criminals who are not yet convicted. Instead, policymakers should strive to increase the rate of incarceration to instill fear among potential offenders not to engage in criminal events (Shoesmith 2957).
Conclusion
The factors that affect the rise in violent crimes positively or negatively are diverse. In some cases, they are not connected in any manner. In other cases, the surge in the rates of violence may be caused by an interaction of factors. Violent behavior can be influenced by the individual’s immediate conditions, background, SES, or psychological reasons. Some behaviors develop from childhood due to frustration and defensiveness whereas they may develop due to an instant need to achieve a goal. There is a need for research to be carried out on various factors that influence violent behavior to develop mechanisms for preventing violence.
Works Cited
Darke, Shane, Michelle Torok, Sharlene Kaye, Joanne Ross, and McKetin Rebecca. “Comparative rates of violent crime among regular methamphetamine and opioid users: offending and victimization.” Addiction 105.5(2010): 916-919. Print.
Doeden, Matt. Gun Control: Preventing Violence or Crushing Constitutional Rights?, Minnesota: Twenty-First Century Books, 2011. Print.
Light, Michael, and Casey Harris. “Race, Space, and Violence: Exploring Spatial Dependence in Structural Covariates of White and Black Violent Crime in US Counties.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 28.4 (2012): 559-586. Print.
Rahtz, Howard. Drug, Crime, and Violence: From Trafficking to Treatment, Maryland: Roman & Littlefield, 2012. Print.
Reiss, Albert, Jeffrey Roth, and Klaus Miczek. Understanding and Preventing Violence, Ohio: EBSCO Publishing, 2015. Print.
Shoesmith, Gary. “Four Factors that Explain both the rise, and fall of US crime 1970-2003.” Applied Economics 42.22(2010): 2957-2973. Print.