Dominant Approaches to Crime Prevention: Compare and Contrast
This paper examines and compares the dominant approaches to crime prevention used across the criminal justice system in the United States. Drawing on Schneider's consequentialist definition of crime prevention, the paper surveys strategies employed by law enforcement—including situational prevention, community policing, hot spot policing, and crime prevention through social development—before turning to courts and corrections, which rely on deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and community restraint. The paper also addresses community-based prevention methods such as neighborhood watches and ad hoc law enforcement activities. A concluding comparison evaluates the relative effectiveness of each approach, arguing that community prevention is the most promising strategy because it integrates public participation with formal law enforcement efforts.
- Introduction: Defines crime prevention and introduces dominant approaches
- Law Enforcement Approaches: Situational, community, policing, and social development strategies
- Courts and Corrections Approaches: Deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and community restraint
- Community-Based Crime Prevention: Neighborhood watches, ad hoc activities, and community policing
- Comparing and Contrasting the Approaches: Similarities and differences across all three institutional actors
- Conclusion: Community prevention identified as most effective overall approach
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Applies a clear definitional framework at the outset—Schneider's consequentialist approach—to anchor the entire comparison in a shared understanding of what "prevention" means.
- Organizes distinct institutional actors (law enforcement, courts/corrections, community) into separate sections, making parallel comparison straightforward for the reader.
- Supports each approach with specific named programs and models (e.g., SARA, Weed and Seed, electronic monitoring), which adds concrete detail beyond abstract categorization.
- Synthesizes the comparison in a dedicated section rather than only implying differences within individual sections, demonstrating deliberate analytical structure.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates the compare-and-contrast analytical technique by first describing each approach on its own terms and then explicitly identifying shared goals (crime reduction) alongside key differences (pre-crime prevention vs. post-offense intervention). The concluding evaluation goes a step further by offering a reasoned judgment about relative effectiveness, showing that comparison can lead to argumentation rather than merely description.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a definitional introduction, then devotes three body sections to law enforcement, courts and corrections, and community prevention, respectively. A short compare-and-contrast section synthesizes the differences and similarities across all three, and a brief conclusion makes the case for community prevention as the most effective approach. This structure mirrors a classic academic compare-and-contrast essay: define, describe separately, then synthesize.
Introduction
Given the diverse definitions of crime prevention, Schneider approaches the concept from a consequences perspective. He defines it as a program or strategy that serves the purpose of preventing criminal acts or behaviors from occurring (2014). This definition has led to crime prevention being understood as a "reduction in or prevention of specific criminal events" (Schneider, 2014, p. 6). It is also defined in terms of a reduction in the number of criminal offenders, indicating that harm has been either reduced or prevented, and in terms of a reduction in the number of victims harmed. Prevention is regarded as the fourth pillar of the criminal justice system, alongside institutions such as courts, police, and corrections.
Crime prevention has dominant approaches employed by law enforcement, courts, corrections, families, and communities — all components of the criminal justice system. This paper identifies those approaches, evaluates their effectiveness, and considers which is most appropriate for tackling growing crime levels in the United States.
References
Ad Hoc Police Practices Review Commission. (2015). Final report. Retrieved from
Braga, A. A., & Weisburd, D. (2010). Policing problem places: Crime hot spots and effective prevention. Oxford University Press.
Bureau of Justice Assistance. (2014). Crime prevention. Office of Justice Programs.
Shaw, M., & United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2010). Handbook on the crime prevention guidelines: Making them work. United Nations.
Schneider, S. (2014). Crime prevention: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). CRC Press.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.