Routine activity theory and its applications to crime prevention

Josiah Faber

RE: M8D1 Routine activity theory

I agree that to some extent there will always be some form of crime on an individualized basis. Viewing crime solely as a social problem rooted in poverty seems to ignore the existence of white-collar crimes, which are often perpetuated by individuals who have all of their basic material needs satisfied. However, I do think the concept of crime reduction has some validity regarding some types of crime, such as selling drugs, which can be fostered by a culture of desperation and a culture of criminality. I do not think individualized therapy is necessitated, merely a better social support network for the poor to prevent some types of crimes.

JOHN RHODES

RE: M8D1 Routine activity theory

I agree that routine activity theory does not purport to be a broad, all-encompassing theory. It is merely one tool amongst many for law enforcement officials and members of the public to use to engage in more effective crime mitigation strategies. Striving to remove factors that make it easier to commit crimes can reduce the likelihood of the crime being committed in the first place. This is obviously the best case scenario for the victim.

To use inductive theory to explain the cellular phone example might be to observe the conditions under which cellphone theft is more likely to take place (such as in crowded areas, for example, or during concerts or arenas with many distractions) and to reduce the ability for those conditions to make it easier to engage in theft, such as encouraging people to keep cellphones in front-lying bags vs. stuffed in backpacks where the phones can be easily accessed by thieves.

JEREMY TOMLIN

The example of noting how the presence of security cameras in London (or other forms of security monitoring) reduces crime is an excellent example of applying routine activity theory in an inductive manner. Increasing law enforcement presence is often used as a solution to reduce crime. I also agree with your example regarding deductive applications of the theory: the idea that increased online usage by teens will result in virtual bullying behaviors common to the age group is based upon the idea that behaviors common to teens in real life will be transferred online, particularly given the absence of parental supervision.

JOSIAH FABER

IRB and Researchers Rights

One of the cornerstones of ethical research is that it must be consensual. Research conducted upon human subjects who are prisoners of war is by definition unethical. It would have profound security and international repercussions for the United States abroad. It is worth noting, however, that any time an American researcher conducts unethical research he or she sets a 'bad example' for the rest of the world and can draw criticism from other nations based upon his or her conduct. Unethical research is not simply bad science -- it can hurt people and violate their civil rights. However, I do agree that not all research is as clear-cut a violation of human rights, and some form or risk assessment is necessary relative to the risks incurred by the subjects and the value of the research.

If you were to use the routine activities theory in your current study, how would you incorporate it and what would be your research questions?

Routine activity theory would suggest that by reducing the conditions likely to give rise to delinquent behavior in a school context, delinquency can be reduced. An additional component of the research might be giving the teachers strategies to help reduce student 'acting out' in their own classes such as removing distractions from the room, and finding non-confrontational ways to address bad behavior. This would reduce the likelihood that certain students would be labeled 'problems' in the first place.

Would the students who were video-taped be informed in advance? What about their parents? Would you need informed consent from them as well?

Absolutely. All students would have to give their consent as well as their parents. Admittedly, the issue of informed consent from a minor can be troubling, but given that the observation was non-invasive and was not conducted by the students' own instructors (and therefore would not potentially prejudice the teachers against the students for the rest of the year); harm would be kept at a minimum. The main issue that would arise would be that the taping would affect student behavior but this could be mitigated by taping several classes, allowing students to slowly grow more comfortable and less aware of the camera.

JOHN RHODES

MENTALLY ILL

I can see the obviously unethical conditions you inserted in your study -- a lack of consent (inmates still have legal volition over their own bodies regarding human experimentation) and also the potentially harmful nature of the treatment. However, I am not certain how shock treatment would illuminate the causes of violent crimes. I would have liked to have seen more information about a redesigned study that addressed issues of violent vs. non-violent inmates, possibly comparing different biological and sociological factors in the lives of randomly selected inmates who gave their consent to be studied.