Reducing Crime Through Crime Prevention Crime prevention can be an effective way to reducing crime (Tiley, 2014). Increasing prison sentences, on the other hand, can be a costly means of keep criminals off the streets. Indeed, the most recent study by VERA -- Institute of Justice (2012) found that "the full price of prisons to taxpayers -- including costs that fell outside the corrections budgets -- was $39 billion, $5.4 billion more than the states' aggregate corrections department spending, which totaled $33.5 billion" (p. 6). In other words, incarceration is expensive and a drain on taxpayer funds -- funds that do not even cover the expense. Increasing incarceration times would only burden taxpayers more and add to the debt that already exists. For that reason, crime prevention should be the focus when it comes to reducing crime in the nation.

There are many ways in which crime prevention can be exercised effectively. The Broken Windows theory of crime prevention is one way. This theory asserts that when a community bands together to keep small crimes from occurring in the neighborhood, it bars the chance of large-scale crime happening. The theory views crime as a slippery slope: once it begins, it escalates quickly and communities can rapidly go downhill and descend into havens of crime. But by preventing the incremental decline in the first place and keeping the community in a constant state of equilibrium or advancement upwards, crime can be prevented. It is like nipping it in the bud or tearing it out by the roots.

The Broken Windows theory holds that vandalism and minor disturbances are the seeds of more serious acts of criminality. When vandalism, graffiti, broken windows and abandoned buildings are seen within communities, it is a sign that this sort of behavior is acceptable and that no one in the community is going to stop it -- not watch groups, not police, not a mayor or city council: no one is willing...

By eliminating the broken windows, so to speak, in a neighborhood, and making sure minor acts of vandalism are quickly corrected and the perpetrators caught and punished, a neighborhood shows that it will not allow crime to flourish. This is thus considered a preventative measure and an effective one by theorists (Wilson, Kelling, 1982).
Preventing crime is much less costly than allowing crime to happen and then incarcerating the perpetrator for extended periods of time. Plus, prevention has the added bonus of providing a positive force for society. Prevention demands upkeep and community watch groups; it demands interaction among community members so that tight-knit social organizations are formed and that they work together to take responsibility for their own neighborhoods. It reinforces the idea of pro-social behavior rather than the anti-social behavior connected to vandalism and other forms of small crime. It fosters civic activity and a sense of civic duty, whereas doing nothing and "dealing" with crime afterwards by just locking up criminals for longer does not address the issues that allow for criminals to come into being in the first place.

If one's surroundings or environment are rooted in an anti-social spirit then that is what will be fostered in the young, regardless of whether incarceration periods are extended. This stems from the concept of strain theory, which is that acts of delinquency and crime are extensions and manifestations of negatives that are nursed and facilitated by a society. An individual who is affected by these negative states essentially lashes out at the community that has allowed them to be nursed and thus commits acts of criminality within…