Crime Rates in the United Kingdom
Crime refers to the violation of set up laws or rules which govern a system. Upon an individual being convicted for a certain crime, they’re liable to punishment by fine, being imprisoned for specified time period or going through a death sentence.
A study carried out in August, 2012 in which there were riots in Britain showed that suspects were charged and the press focused on ethnicity, age, offenders employment status and neighbourhood. However, and by far, the statistics shockingly revealed that gender ranked highest, with 92 percent out of the first 466 defendants being male. If for instance the crimes committed by men were at the same rate as those by women, £3.4 billion would be saved every year. There’s no much doubt that most crimes in the UK are committed by men. However, at no point will men ever commit crimes at the same rate as women do much as a male-free societies are not an option. With men taking the greater percentage of individuals committing crimes, it is still not convincing that masculinity is the root cause. Violent crime which could be easily associated to males is worrying and there seems to be a continuous rise. Taken as a percentage of the all of reported crime, violent crime has been;
2.4% in 1900
1% in 1937
0.9% in 1967
5.6% in 1997
There was however about 10% in 2011. The study shows that in September 2011, 17.42% comprised of violent crime out of the total of recorded crime.
As per a HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Public_Health_Agency” o “Canadian Public Health Agency” Public Health Agency report, the rate of violent crime doubled among male youth during the late 1980s and 1990s. While it almost tripled among female youth, it rose for the latter from 2.2 per 1,000 in 1988 to a peak of 5.6 per 1,000 in 1996, with a decline beginning in 1999. Researchers have suggested that the high rise on crime statistics could be explained by the compulsory approach to schoolyard fights and HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying” o “Bullying” bullying, thereby leading to criminalization of behaviours now commonly referred as “assault” behaviours. Increase in the proportion of female violent crime would be explained more by a change in policies that govern various laws than by effective behaviour of the population itself. Evidence indicates that aggressive and violent behaviour in children is directly related to family and social factors, such like social and financial deprivation; tough and inconsistent parenting; parents’ marital problems; family problems, whether between parents, by parents towards children or between siblings; poor parental mental health; physical and sexual abuse; and alcoholism, drug dependency or other substance misuse by parents or different other family members.”
Males are typically more openly aggressive than females, which violent crime statistics support. Some researchers have indicated that females are not necessarily less tough, but that they tend to show their aggression in less overt, less physical ways. For instance, females may go ahead to show case more verbal and relational aggression, such like HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_rejection” o “Social rejection” social rejection. Men do on the other hand, however, express their aggression with violence more often than women would do.
Gender considerations in regard to crime have been largely ignored and pushed aside in criminological and sociological studies, until recent years, to the extent of female deviance having been marginalized (Heidensohn, 1995).
Females have an apparently low level of offending’ (Heidensohn, 1995); that they pose less of a social threat than their male counterparts; that their ‘delinquencies tend to be of a relatively minor kind’, but also due to the fear that including women in research could threaten or undermine theories, as Thrasher and Sutherland feared would happen with their research (Heidensohn, 1995).
1.42 million offenders were sentenced for criminal offences in England in the year 2006. 80 per cent of these offenders were male. 82 and 94 per cent of all the crime offenders in England found guilty of, or cautioned for, violence against the person, criminal damage, drug offences and robbery and burglary were male. Even though the number of offenders was quite small, 97 per cent of those found guilty of, or cautioned for, sexual offences were equally male.
The most commonly committed offence by both men and women in England was theft in 2006. 50 per cent of female offenders were found guilty of, or cautioned for, theft and handling stolen goods, compared with 30 per cent of male offenders. Overall, 71 per cent of theft-related offences were committed by men. Of those found guilty or cautioned for sexual offences, 98% were male. Women commit less ‘white collar’ crimes than men. This is at least partly mainly because women are less represented in the top business jobs.
2.7% of the population aged 10 were blacks in England according to a survey carried out in 2009-2010.13.7% made up the prison population. 6% received sentences for burglary, 9% for violence against persons, 16% for drug offences, 19% for robbery, and 22% for fraud and forgery. Blacks however committed crimes that were more severe based on the longer sentence lengths. In 2003, twice as many blacks were in prison as at university as per the Commission for Racial Equality report.
12% of the population in London was Black in 2010. Statistics carried out in June 2010 by The Sunday Telegraph via a Freedom of Information Act request showed that street crimes with an inclusion of muggings, assault with intention to rob alongside snatching of properties had 54% being black people. 59% of the same made up of robbery, 67% were gun crimes and 32% were for sexual offences. In 2004, the British Crime Survey found out that more Whites than non-Whites reported being victims of racially motivated crimes with five times as many Whites as non-Whites reporting being wounded in the attacks. In contrast, hate crime statistics state that whites are a minority of the victims.
HYPERLINK “http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Kriss_Donald” o “Kriss Donald” Kriss Donald, a fifteen-year-old was a victim of racial crime. He was kidnapped and murdered in HYPERLINK “http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Glasgow” o “Glasgow” Glasgow in HYPERLINK “http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/2004” o “2004” 2004. Five men of British Asian origin were found guilty of racially-motivated violence. They were all convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
A race advisor to the London mayor in 2003, said drugs and gun crime were the greatest threat to the black community. Following a string of murders committed by black people in 2007, Tony Blair the then British Prime Minister associated it to the black culture from the black community. To him, there was need to be mobilize and in turn denounce the gang culture that had been killing innocent young black kids. But we won’t stop this by pretending it isn’t young black kids doing it. As a result of the Africa-Caribbean people being underrepresented in the white-collar crime, gang involvement has been seen to be a continuing problem.
According to commentators, the issue of black people and crime is hidden away or downplayed, and that the fear of accusations of racism is viewed as a contributing factor. As one of the few police forces, the Metropolitan Police Service ranks as having gathered statistics on gang rape. Sorious Samura, a filmmaker gathered 29 such incidents which involved young people from the period January 2006 to March 2009 and came up with findings that 66 out of 92 people convicted were black or of mixed race. The filmmaker indicates that it is quite disturbing to ignore that such a high level of crime statistic was committed by black and mixed-race young men.
1,543 victims of racist crime in Scotland were of Pakistani origin in 2005-2006, while more than 1,000 victims were classed as being Britons. 87,000 people from either the black people or minority ethnic communities mentioned that they had been subjected to racial crimes according to the British Crime Survey in 2004. 49,000 violent attacks were reported with 4,000 being wounded. Similarly, 92,000 whites mentioned they had been victims of racial crimes. 77,000 however was the number of white people who had experienced violent attacks whereas white people who reported having been wounded were five times the number of blacks and minority ethnic victims which was at 20,000.
More than two-thirds of black men are held responsible for crimes like shootings and more than half of robberies in London are equally by black men according to the Scotland Yard figures. Statistics also show that police have held black women accountable for a disproportionate amount of violent crimes. 45 per cent of suspected female perpetrators were black for knife crime offences. Among those women and girls police took action against for gun crime, 58 per cent of women and girls had the police take action against them for gun crimes whereas 52 per cent were robbery related crimes.
Police statistics relate to those persons who were prosecuted – whether convicted or acquitted – whether issued with a caution, a warning or any form of penalty notice.
Over12 per cent of London’s 7.5million population is black. This includes those of mixed black and white parentage, whereas 69 per cent are white. These findings are as per the Office for National Statistics.
Police figures equally demonstrate that black men are more likely to be the victims of violent crimes. This accounts for up to about 832 out of 2,882 of male victims of shootings in 2009-10 being black. Black people as per annual figures indicate that they are six times more likely to be stopped and searched by the police than their white counterparts.
Richard Garside, of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King’s College London, said: ‘Given Britain’s long history of racism and imperialism, it should not greatly surprise us that black and minority ethnic groups are disproportionately members of social classes that have tended to experience greater victimization and to be the subject of police attention. Just because the police treat black men as more criminal than white men, it does not mean that they are.’
In 2009-2010, males aged 16 to 20 years in England were more at risk of being homicide victims with a rate of 34 homicides per million people in the age group.
The proportion of adults aged 16 years and above who thought crime had increased nationally in England fell from 66 per cent in 2009-2010 to 60 per cent in 2010-2011.
Adults aged 16 years and over believe that crime is not going up, while at a national level people believe that it is going up and at a much faster rate than anticipated.
Between 1 June 2000 and 31 December 2009, close to half (49 per cent) of adults aged 21 and above in England with an ASBO breached it at least once while 38 per cent breached it more than once.
In the year 2010, 384 prisoners were sentenced to life imprisonment in England and Wales, which is a decrease of 9 per cent when compared with 421 in the year 2009.
Since arrest rates are especially high for teenagers and young adults, criminologists have long contended that age structure changes affect crime trends. This belief has been drawn into question in recent years mainly because crime has not declined even though high-crime age groups have shrunk. The age/crime relationship is probably exaggerated by high arrest rates for younger persons. They are due partly to their lesser ability to escape arrest, younger persons commit more group crime, maybe as a result of peer influence and the age structure of victims should be considered. A review of 90 studies that touch on crime rates on age structure indicate that only a small minority proceeds to find significant relationships. It is however hard to conclude that the age/crime relationship does not exist, but the strength of evidence indicates that forecasts on demographic trends are not likely to be helpful.
The violent crime arrest rates for persons aged 10 to 24 years in 2009 were 519.6 arrests per 100,000 population for males, and 118.5 arrests per 100,000 for females. The violent crime arrest rates were highest for males aged between 15 to 19 years with a rate of 730.3 per 100,000.
In 2007, reports showed that more than one-fifth of HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_London” o “Crime in London” crimes in London ware committed by immigrants. Up to about a third of all solved, reported sex offences and a half of all solved, reported frauds in the capital were carried out by non-British citizens. A study conducted in 2008 found that the crime rate of Eastern European immigrants was similar to that of the indigenous population. 2006 research found that immigrants have a positive and significant impact on the crime rate. This confirms that larger shares of immigrants are associated with a higher crime rate. This may be caused by the higher unemployment, and thus worse socioeconomic conditions among immigrants. It also demonstrates that unemployed immigrants are still more likely to commit crimes than unemployed non-immigrants.
Crimes among residences have in most cases led to people deserting their houses. This in turn as effect on a city’s employment leading to low population growth, low growth of towns.
Arrival of immigrants has resulted in a lack of progress in the reduction of offences against property and in a minor increase in the number of offences against Collective Security (i.e. drugs and trafficking). In the case of nationals, their contribution to the increase in the crime rate is primarily concentrated in offences against persons. Econometric results confirm the result even after controlling for all the observed socioeconomic and demographic factors. The report indicates that a higher proportion of American, non-European, and African immigrants tend to widen the crime differential, the effect being larger for the latter ones. The paper generally supports that labor market related conditions seem to supersede other potential explanations for the relationship between crime and immigration. However, given the limitations of the dataset and the available statistics of crime in, the econometric analysis cannot exclude other alternative explanations such as ethnical related activities or misperceptions about the law. Cultural differences were statistically detected, endorsing the view that some communities of immigrants might not see criminal law as a body of rules capturing their own views of society.
Students are seen as rich pickings by some criminals who tend to assume that they have a mobile or smart phone, television, CD or DVD player, a laptop, digital camera and mp3 player, and maybe even a bike, a car or some designer gear. All are relatively easy to dispose of in the world they frequent.
Estimations are that a third of students become victims of crime, mainly theft and burglary, but many of these incidents ought to have been prevented.
Most students are in most cases not aware of crimes in our towns and cities until they bump into them one day. This happens to be particularly true for freshers partying in their first few weeks at university who are not ‘street-wise’ about the local area. Student victims may often be the worse for wear, perhaps having taken advantage of drinks promotions in a club or restaurant.
The figures speak for themselves. Up to about 20 per cent of student robberies do take place in the first six weeks of the academic year.
There is a correlation between unemployment and crime. Similarly, joblessness is a major motivator in theft, burglary and violent crimes that can have a monetary motivation. Unemployment is linked to a greater extent to certain types of crimes which are mostly perpetrated by men without a college education. Wage fall has a greater effect on crime, given low wages don’t always provide workers with everything they want and need as it comes to fending for themselves and their families.
The greatest correlation between unemployment and crime is found with theft and burglary crimes, mainly because persons without an income, are in most instances desperate for money therefore end up stealing it, or steal things they need, can sell in exchange for money. These crimes are carried out by less-educated men in society. Wages for less skilled, poorly educated men decreased from 1979 to 1992 thereby resulting to a high rise in crime rates. 1993 to 1987 saw the same types of workers wages increase whereas crime rates decreased.
Lower wages rates, unemployment are equally linked with higher assault rates. Money, not only hatred, anger or revenge, can be a big motive in violent crimes. For the case of theft and burglary, this type of relation in assault cases will mainly, only exist in men without college education. Given money is rarely a motive in rape or murder — consequences of these crimes far outweigh any monetary gain — there are no strong correlation whatsoever between these crimes and unemployment or lower wages. This therefore does show how unemployment affects certain crimes — those with monetary motives — but does not raise the crime rates in all areas of crime.
It has been found that a bad labour market has a profound impact on the crime rates.
A fall in wages does increase the relative payoff of criminal activity. It is obvious that economic conditions do have an impact on crime. Analyses to examine the links between wages, unemployment and crimes between 1979 and 1997 for men without college educations were conducted. In one analysis, crime rates in several counties across the country were looked at. All counties with populations greater than 25,000 persons were compared with state wages and unemployment rates. Next analysis focused on statistics from 198 metropolitan areas. Researchers took into consideration factors like arrest rates and number of police who may have equally influenced crime rates. Researchers calculated that the 20 percent fall in the wages of non-college-educated men over the entire period accounts for a 10.8 percent increase in property crime and a 21.6 percent increase in violent crime. Wage declines are thus responsible for more than half of the long term increase in both property and violent crime.
Wages in turn had a greater effect on crime than was the case with unemployment rates. Reason being unemployment rates are cyclical and there are no strong long-term trends. Wages, however, fell steadily during most of the period under research. Long-term trend in wages was a big dominant factor on crime during this period under research.
Among less educated men, lower wages and higher unemployment rates where people lived made it more likely that they had participated in crimes. Cognitive ability and background on family makes it true for the researchers.
Low-skilled workers are clearly the most affected by labor change opportunities, making results remain after controlling for a wealth of personal and family characteristics.
HYPERLINK “http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/crime.html” http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/crime.html
HYPERLINK “http://ukcrimestats.com/blog/2011/11/” http://ukcrimestats.com/blog/2011/11/
HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_Kingdom” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_Kingdom
HYPERLINK “http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8681469/Crime-in-Britain-the-key-statistics.html” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8681469/Crime-in-Britain-the-key-statistics.html