Research Paper on 3 Techniques for Collecting Crime Data: Self-Report, Victimization & Law Enforcement

Introduction

There are three main approaches for collecting crime data. These techniques are self-report delinquency surveys, crime victimization surveys, and data from law enforcement arrest (uniform crime surveys.) The latter refers to a nationwide collection and integration of delinquency data under the records of the police. Crime victimization surveys, on the other hand, is an annual national collection of crime data where the victims of delinquent acts give self-reports on the circumstances that the led to crime (Regoli, Hewitt, & DeLisi, 2016). Conversely, self-report surveys, or National Youth Surveys (NYS) entails a voluntary collection of crime data from delinquents (Regoli et al., 2016). Unlike crime victimization surveys that gather information from the victims, NYS collects data from the delinquents.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

However, the three methods are essential, but the national crime victimization method is more reliable. The reason is that it involves the parents, guardians, and the caregivers of juveniles. These people will likely disclose delinquent acts, unlike NYS, that depends on the individuals engaged in crime. Uniform crime data, on the other, do not give accurate information since it only uses data from police arrest. Thus, it suggests that juvenile crime offenders are not reported to the police go undetected in the criminal justice system.

Positivist and Classical Schools of Criminology

The classical theory examines juvenile delinquency using the concept of free will. It states that minors choose to engage in crime, and for this reason, the best approach to deter misconduct is by making the act unprofitable and uncomfortable to juveniles (Fuller, 2005). The positivist school of thought, on the other hand, says that humans, including the minors, do not have free will. Instead, external factors surrounding an individual influence behavior and consequently, juvenile crimes.

The classical and positivist theories have similarities and differences in their approach to juvenile delinquency. The classical theory focuses on an offense, whereas the positivist studies the offender and factors that trigger juveniles to commit crimes. Also, the positivist theory examines juvenile delinquency from a scientific perspective, unlike the classical thought that explains it from a philosophical viewpoint. The similarity is that both schools of thoughts aim at enhancing the social well-being among the juveniles through crime deterrence. While both approaches are essential, the positivist school of thought explains juvenile delinquency better. The reason is that it recognizes that minors do have free will, and thus, the study of factors that motivate them to commit crime provides long-term solutions. These components are poverty, unemployment, health, and the cultures of the neighborhood.

Social Learning Theory and Merton's Five Modes of Adaptation

The two approaches attempt to explain juvenile delinquency, though from different perspectives. The social learning theory states that the minors develop delinquent behaviors by associating with individuals that are used to law-breaking (Fuller, 2005). Such people expose the juveniles to criminal models where they learn beliefs that are favorable in promoting crime. As a result of their association with other people, the minors come to develop a notion that lawlessness is not only justifiable but also desirable in some instances. It further explains that intimate group such as peers and families influence attitudes towards crime.

Merton's five models, according to Fuller (2005), explain juvenile delinquency from the perspective of moral values. It states that the personal strain that results from exclusion from economic rewards is a primary driver to juvenile delinquency. These strains, according to the theoretical model, are rebellion, ritual, retreat, innovation, and conformity. The five components cause stress, which ultimately makes minors engage in crime for social and economic satisfaction. The two theories explain juvenile delinquency, but the social learning theory is better in explaining this phenomenon. The reason is that it incorporates the knowledge of Merton's model and recognizes the role of the social environment in shaping delinquency.

Male and Female Delinquency

There is an apparent difference between male and female delinquency besides how the system treats delinquents of both genders. Bright et al. (2016) argued that historically, male juvenile delinquents engage in violent crimes than their female counterparts. They also have a high tendency to delinquent behaviors than females. However, girls are less likely to abuse drugs while their male counterparts tend to use alcohol, and marijuana, among other substances. The differences in crime participation and its severity also lead to differences in the delinquency of both genders. Many male juvenile delinquents, however, participate in severe offenses such as property destruction. These components, thus suggest that there are gender differences in the severity of delinquent behaviors and the tendency to abuse drugs.

Nonetheless, the juvenile justice system treats male and female delinquents differently. The chivalry hypothesis explains these forms of differences. The model states that female juvenile delinquents are accorded lenient treatment than their male counterparts. This scenario exists because the authorities consider females less threatening, helpless, and weaker than their male counterparts. The treatment of the female delinquents is also lenient because they commit fewer offenses and easier to rehabilitate than their male counterparts. Another explanation is the biological characteristics of the females that require lenient treatment.

Why Juveniles Join Gangs

Several factors motivate minors to join organized groups of criminals. First, they do so for protection owing to insecurity in their neighborhood. Juveniles associate themselves with such groups because they live in areas that are subject to violence from rival gangs. Their motivation to join gangs is to form groups that can retaliate in case of transgression from the opposing groups. Secondly, they do so for identity and recognition. The reason is that some minors believe joining gangs is a way to enhance social status in society (Al-Ali, 2012). Thirdly, they join such groups to support and protect their criminal activities such as selling narcotics. Also, youth join gangs because of intimidation from members of specific criminal groups.

Primary methods of gang prevention encompass techniques to discourage the population at risk from joining gang-related groups. These approaches are educational programs to keep the young people engaged, creating awareness on the adverse effects of joining gangs, and providing opportunities for social satisfaction. The other approach is eradicating poverty, among other risk factors that trigger the emergence of gangs. Tertiary methods, on the other hand, targets gang membership and juvenile delinquents. Its approaches are the rehabilitation of juvenile delinquents and addressing high-risk factors of gang membership.

Factors That Contribute to Individual and Social Drug Abuse

Several familial, social, and individual factors influence drug abuse among adolescents. First, juveniles abuse drugs because of the availability of such substances in the neighborhoods. They are exposed to drugs as they associate with friends, peers, and even parents using alcohol and marijuana. Peer pressure, in particular, is a critical individual and social factor that shape the use of drugs. Secondly, it is because of behavioral problems in combination with poor parenting. Erosion of moral values that govern behavior contributes to the development of bad habits that introduce minors to drugs. Thirdly, poor relationship with parents besides permissive attitudes towards specific substances influence drug abuse. This situation makes the adolescents' abuse drugs, considering that they are not close to their parents.

Delinquency and drug abuse among teenagers have a direct relationship. It is no doubt that a significant proportion of all the arrest, interventions, and even adjudications in the juvenile justice system are the eventual consequences of alcoholism and drug abuse. Thus, substance abuse increases the levels of lawlessness and hence, engagement in criminal activities of varying degrees. Precisely, drug abuse has a direct correlation with delinquent behaviors such as property destruction, physical fighting, prostitution, trafficking of narcotics, and joining gangs.

Differences Between Adult and Juvenile Justice System

Juvenile and adult courts have differences in their structure and approaches to dispensing justice. First, the juvenile system prosecutes minors for delinquent acts, unlike the adult justice systems that prosecute adults for their crimes. However, teenagers may be treated as adults when they commit serious offenses of severe impacts. Examples of delinquent acts are theft, assault, and homicide, to mention a few. Secondly, the juvenile justice system uses the adjudication hearing approach, where the judges determine whether a minor committed a delinquent act. Under the adult justice system, an individual has a right to a public trial by juries. Judges, in this case, decides whether the accused is innocent or guilty. Thirdly, the juvenile justice system rehabilitates the delinquent minors, whereas the adult systems punish liable defendants for their crimes. Finally, the juvenile system is more lenient and informal. It means that its court procedures are lenient to the minors. The adult system, in contrast, is formal and strict in terms of court processes and other components.

The juvenile justice system plays essential roles in deterring delinquency. However, reforms are necessary since it negatively impacts on minor's physical and psychological development. Precisely, the system keeps delinquents of petty offenses in detention centers for a lengthy duration, yet they are not public safety threats. Some minors even serve in detention centers and later incarcerated in the adult courts. This scenario suggests that the system has failed to achieve its objective to rehabilitate delinquents.

Delinquency in Developing Countries

The developing nations have lower levels of education and family income than the developed countries. However, these factors may not be predictive of high delinquency in many developing nations. The reason is that a significant proportion of the developing countries are not urbanized and therefore have few towns and cities. As such, it has low-risk factors of delinquency in society. The social environment in the neighborhood does not influence the young generation to engage in drug abuse and other risk factors of delinquency.

According to Burgess (2010), urbanized areas have 'delinquency areas,' which are often the hotspot of crimes. Official delinquents are concentrated in urban areas because of the existence of significant risk factors. In this case, every town and city have overcrowded areas with inadequate recreational facilities, including in its neighborhoods. The presence of poor housing besides overcrowding in towns and cities explain high levels of delinquency. In connection, developing nations do not have delinquency since a significant proportion of people are living in rural areas. This aspect implies that many children in developing countries live in an environment with few risk factors of delinquency and where community emphasizes adherence to norms and social values.

References

Al-Ali, S. (2012). Why Do Youth Become Involved in Gangs? SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2296495

Bright, C. L., Sacco, P., Kolivoski, K. M., Stapleton, L. M., Jun, H., & Morris-Co...