‘’Crime is inevitable, and the ‘solutions’ to crime do not solely lie with criminal justice institutions.’’
‘’Crime is not a self evident & unitary concept. Its constitution is diverse, historically relative & continually contested. As a result an answer to the question ‘What is crime?’ depends upon which of its multiple constitutive elements is emphasized. This in turn depends upon the theoretical position taken by those defying crime.’’ McLaughlin and Muncie 2001 (p. 78)
The above suggests that crime isn’t as clear cut or black and white as some may think. The interpretation of an act differs from person to person and cultural and religious beliefs, this could be down to a number of factors including self-tolerance, location, and circumstances.
In a western society a crime is an act that breaks laws imposed to protect society. Laws are implemented to protect against crimes occurring. Civil laws are imposed to resolve disputes and types of disorder where non-pacific crimes take place with the use of statutory powers made available to organisations designated within the remit of community safety.
The fear of a crime alone can have detrimental consequences to the perception of the crime, and the location the crime took place at; this again is dependent on the circumstances around the crime. For example McLaughlin and Muncie (2001) suggest that a pervasive fear of crime encourages psychological withdraw from a community, weakens social control and undermines the communities response to the problems. This suggestion will be explored further in the this report.
When dealing with localised issues of crime and anti-social behaviour, a partnership approach is at the forefront of resolving tensions and implementing reassurances in order to deter further acts taking place and addressing community issues, which could escalate to the extreme of McLauglin and Muncie above suggestion.
The partners that work together to tackle crime and anti-social...