You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘crime prevention’ tag.
Students from the University of Florida are working with local law enforcement to prevent crime through environmental design. Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) is a way of approaching crime prevention by looking at environmental factors like lighting, traffic flow, ambush points and shrubbery.
The UF students are examining local businesses, evaluating them from a design perspective, and making suggestions for improvement. They’ve partnered with police in their efforts and are lobbying the city council to require CPTED compliance for local businesses.
Not only is CPTED a new and effective way to look at crime prevention efforts, but as local law enforcement departments partner with local residents, they will build relationships and create better communication between citizens and law enforcement. And those relationships will help law enforcement and citizens stay in touch and prevent crime before it even happens.
Is there a chance to do this in you area?
For more information on how they use CPTED to evaluate local businesses, read the full article here: http://www.alligator.org/news/local/article_bae8e36e-c37a-11de-ab2b-001cc4c03286.html
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
The Following article was written by Cory Beyer, Crime Analyst for the League City, Texas, Police Department:
League City, Texas
Law enforcement, like all aspects of life, has been revolutionized by technological advances. The technologies we may take for granted now, such as the automobile, radio and telephone, once transformed policing in major ways. Police cars, first used in 1910, increased efficiency by having officers respond more quickly to emergencies. Radios replaced call boxes in 1928 which increase the effective range of a patrolman by freeing them from stationary boxes. Telephones later developed into 911 dispatching, allowed for easier access to police services during times of crisis. When looking back on these innovations it is easy to see the impact they have had. The League City Police Department is committed to identifying new and useful technologies that will have a greater impact on crime and the fear of crime. This September, the League City Police Department has incorporated two innovative web-based programs, CrimeReports.com and Command Central. Both programs will lead to new and exciting developments in police services.
The first is a web-based program accessible to the public called CrimeReports.com. This program was created by the developers for the purpose of making real time crime statistics available to the local citizenry. The program publishes crime data from the League City Police Department’s databases into an interactive mapping website. The police department’s goal is to put near-real time data into the public’s hands so informed decisions can be made by the citizens. One of the more exciting features of the program offers an option for sending daily, weekly or monthly email alerts to League City residents about criminal activity in their neighborhood. The department also expects a new level of collaboration will develop between the citizens and the police as crime and disorder problems become readily assessable for analysis by the public. Please review our efforts at CrimeReports.com and register your name for crime alerts concerning your neighborhood.
The second technological feature being implemented is called Command Central from the makers of CrimeReports.com. Command Central is a web-based analytical program made only accessible to League City police officers. The program puts real-time data into the hands of officers as they patrol their designated areas. Command Central could possibly do the work of three or four paid analysts. Now, officers can instantly substantiate or refute their suspicions with empirical data. This reduces the time spent studying crime problems and increases the problem-solving capabilities of the entire department. One feature of the program gives officers a “normal” crime range by assessing past crime data. Officers can then address emerging trends and patterns when crimes exceed the “normal” range by developing dynamic action plans tailored to contend with the specific problem.
The League City Police Department is committed to forming and promoting partnerships with the residents, businesses, and guests of League City and to providing the greatest services possible. To meet this goal, we are vigorously searching out new technologies that have the potential of revolutionizing law enforcement. Programs such as CrimeReports.com will cultivate a new contract between the citizens and the police as we both explore new and creative solutions to crime, the fear of crime, disorder, and decay. It is our intent to keep the League City Police Department on the leading edge of progress to better serve you.
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
The Death Penalty Information Center released a study last week that highlights the high cost of the death penalty in a time of economic crisis and releases the findings of a poll of police chiefs on the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime.
Death Penalty Not a Deterrent
The study reports that although most police chiefs support the death penalty philosophically, they don’t believe it is an effective law enforcement tool for deterring criminals. As well, when asked what area is the most important for reducing violent crime, chiefs rated the death penalty last, with only 1% placing it in the top three. They also agreed that it was the least efficient use of tax payer’s money to reduce crime.
In general, most chiefs ranked lack of law enforcement resources and drug/alcohol abuse as the top issues interfering with law enforcement. And many believed that being pro-death penalty was more of a symbolic stance by politicians than it was an actual policy to reduce crime.
Poll Results
Here are some charts from the study:
Chiefs Support the Idea of Death Penalty, If Not the Practice
Although this study clearly paints a picture that most police chiefs agree that the death penalty does not aid their crime fighting efforts, it is important to keep in mind that the majority still support it on philosophical grounds. In fact, Mark White, former Governor of Texas, has been recently vocal about the decision to change his stance on the death penalty, saying that he doesn’t want any more innocent people executed for crimes they did not commit. However, he still maintains that, morally, the death penalty “is an appropriate punishment for the most heinous crimes.”
What about all the law enforcement officers, chiefs, and sheriffs out there? What do you think about the death penalty, and does it help you do your job?
Download the entire study here.
Download the executive summary here.
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
With the news that the Winter Garden Police Department has released its own interactive crime map, Florida’s WKMG (channel 6) website has compiled a list of the police departments and sheriff’s offices that have adopted crime mapping as an effective way to communicate local crime information to the public.(Click here to see the list)
Currently 22 Florida law enforcement agencies publish their crime data through CrimeReports, including St. Petersburg, Daytona Beach, Atlantic Beach, and Fort Myers, with more joining in the next few weeks.
The WKMG list is not comprehensive, but it does give a good picture of the way that Florida is quickly adopting crime mapping statewide. If you live in Florida or are interested in various crime mapping interfaces, check out the list or go to CrimeReports.com and click on Florida.
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
Last November, by a margin of 65% to 35%, the citizens of Massachusetts passed Ballot Initiative #2: “An Act Establishing Sensible State Marihuana Policy.” The law, enacted on January 2, 2009, established civil penalties for adults possessing less than an ounce of marijuana. The law reduced the penalty from up to six months jail time and a $500 fine to a $100 civil fine and forfeiture of the marijuana. Additionally, possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is no longer a CORI (Criminal Offender Record Information) offense; citizens now found in possession of less than an ounce of marijuana no longer face the stigma of a criminal record and remain eligible for public housing, federally subsidized student loans and jobs.
Public Consumption Fines
In the wake of the passage of Ballot Initiative #2, many cities and towns immediately began to take steps towards passing additional measures that fine those who publicly consume marijuana, up to an additional $100 to $500—an option made available to individual cities and towns through the language of the original ballot initiative. Attorney General Martha Coakley drafted model legislation that called for an additional $300 fine for the public consumption of marijuana in essentially “any place accessible to the public.”
As of March 2009, Duxbury, Lynn, Methuen, Medway, Milford, Salem and Springfield had all passed public smoking fines ranging from $100 to $300 in addition to the statewide $100 fine for possession. Other cities and towns such as Braintree, Medford, Quincy, and Plymouth have considered additional fines as well. The city of Everett, which borders Boston, recently passed a $300 public smoking fine as well.
Questions to Consider
Several questions come to mind. First, are these cities and towns seeing an increase in public consumption since the passage of the new law? If so, what is the best approach to discourage public use, and do additional fines accomplish this goal? After all, shouldn’t criminal justice be something more than simply “getting tough” on crime? Shouldn’t we aim to “get smart” on crime by enacting policies that actually accomplish the underlying goal?
What Are We Trying to Accomplish?
The underlying goal in this case should be to discourage people from smoking marijuana in public, especially in places that would expose children to this practice. That would seem to be a “smart on crime” goal behind which most citizens of the Commonwealth can get behind. How, then, can we best accomplish this?
Instead policymakers seem to be enacting fines because they are displeased with the decriminalization of marijuana, despite the overwhelming approval of the voters. Several policymakers enacted the suggested $300 fine, a fine that is three times the fine for possession. These fines often penalize economically disadvantaged citizens in heavily patrolled, densely populated areas, the type of cities and town where the citizens who can least afford the fines are most likely to receive them.
Let’s compare two cities with similar fine structures: Everett and Duxbury, both with $300 public smoking fines, in addition to the $100 possession fine.
- The City of Everett, primarily a working class city, has a median per capita income of $19,845 (per the 2000 Census).
- The town of Duxbury, more affluent than Everett, has a median per capita income of $40,242 (per the 2000 Census).
- A resident in Everett paying a $400 fine ($100 for the possession and $300 for public smoking) pay a median of 2% of their yearly income for public smoking of marijuana while a resident in Duxbury pays a median of only 0.99% of their yearly income.
Is THIS policy, the right policy?
Public consumption of marijuana can already be addressed under the current statewide penalties; the law already calls for a $100 fine and forfeiture of the still illegal substance for possession of less than an ounce. If cities and towns are seeing an increase in public consumption why not follow the fine structures already in place for public tobacco use and public alcohol consumption?
While few people, including myself, would argue the merits of public consumption of marijuana, one has to wonder if the current approach to eliminating public consumption actually works. Is it smart to simply tack on additional fines and if so, what is the appropriate fine? Are such high fines cost prohibitive to some residents and therefore counterproductive? At some point the fine is too expensive relative to one’s income to be meaningful as either a general or a specific deterrent. Furthermore, does the fine address the actual underlying problems associated with marijuana consumption and if not, why use it?
For more information on relevant law enforcement issues, please see Question 2, Law Enforcement Q & A.
Meridith Spencer is an adjunct Professor of Criminal Justice and Sociology at Bridgewater State College and Fisher College and an advocate for public policy that is “smart on crime.” She can be reached at meras28@gmail.com.
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
According to the Daily Express, a brand new national crime map covering England and Wales launched today. The new website, http://maps.police.uk/, covers all streets in England and Wales, replacing an existing system of individually maintained crime mapping websites by local police agencies. Any citizen can go to the website and search for crime information in their neighborhood.
The new system has experienced a few problems, though. According to the Daily Express, citizens in London, Manchester, and Yorkshire were unable to access the map on its first day up. The home office is working on the problem and hopes that the entire map will be accessible to all citizens as soon as the problem is fixed.
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
The Officer of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) is always a great resource for community policing resources, and they have recently released a study on the way that community developers and law enforcement can partner to design and build crime out of their communities.
Building Our Way Out of Crime: The Transformative Power of Police-Community Developer Partnerships is a guide for policymakers to inform them about the power of approaching crime prevention and reduction from a community design perspective. For example, Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Providence, and Minneapolis all saw substantial decreases in crime once implementing this type of program.
Learn more about building your way out of crime by reading the entire publication here: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/files/RIC/Publications/building.pdf
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
I recently posted a poll asking readers to give their input on the current 2nd amendment debate within the context of crime rates. My question was, specifically, “Could banning handguns reduce or increase crime?” The response was amazing, over 300 readers have voted so far, with the clear majority responding that banning handguns would increase crime (89% of responses—and you can add your vote here).
However, of the responders who took the time to leave a more detailed comment, many broadened their responses to comment on how banning ALL guns would affect crime. For example, at least one commenter suggested that without an armed citizenry, the government could take military control of the country very easily.
I agree that nullifying the 2nd amendment might have gigantic repercussions for the US population, the government, and law enforcement. But what would be the effect of only banning handguns, not all guns? Because the majority of guns used in crimes are handguns, would banning only handguns impact crime rates?
What do you think? What studies/books can shed light on this issue? Leave a comment and let me know your thoughts.
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
Just recently, LAwS Communications, web solutions for law enforcement, announced the first Social Media in Law Enforcement (SMILE) Conference. Now the official SMILE conference website is up and running with more details about the upcoming conference.
The conference will be held in Washington, DC, April 7-9, 2010 at the Washington Court Hotel on Capitol Hill. The conference will include workshops, plenary sessions, and a town hall-like meeting to discuss issues concerning social media and law enforcement.
Get information for submitting a presentation proposal, registration information, and an early conference schedule here: http://cooloftheweek.typepad.com/social_media_in_law_enfor/
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
From a presentation given by Donald J. Loree, Ph.D., Center for Criminal Intelligence Research and Innovation, RCMP, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
With technological advances in transportation, which made transportation easier and cheaper, the mid-1800s saw a shift in the way that communities are formed. With ease of travel also came shifting demographics in communities. As immigrants began to move around the globe, existing communities started to change in ways that they had never needed to before. Today, we live in a very dynamic global community, and demographics in any one law enforcement jurisdiction can change very quickly—in as little as five to ten years—and law enforcement needs to be aware of trends in shifting demographics in order to better police the communities they serve.
Here are some key questions to ask to understand the way that community demographics may change:
- What are the age demographics of your community? How will they change in the next 5, 10, 20 years?
- What is the ethnic breakdown of your community? How will it change in the next 5, 10, 20 years?
- What are the income demographics? How will they change in the next 5, 10, 20 years?
- What about your department? What is the age and ethnic breakdown of your own department, and how will it change in the coming years?
- Are offender demographics changing? How will changes in the community affect offender demographics?
Of special concern is the growing elderly population. The age of citizens 65+ is growing worldwide. New challenges arise with an aging population, like increased elder abuse, financial scams, burglary, and more.
But how can you keep track of your changing population and shifting demographics if you are not engaging that community? Community policing becomes very important in engaging the community, understanding it, responding to its changing needs, and preparing for future challenges as the population changes.
Get on the crime map at CrimeReports.com
Stumble It!
The Crime Map 