3.2 Describe the contribution of agencies to achieving social control Flashcards
Criminologists argue the built environment can affect crime levels in what ways?
/2
1 Can give possible offenders opportunities, influencing them to commit crime
2 Affect people’s ability to exercise control over their surroundings
What are indefensible and defensible places?
Defensible places are areas with clear boundaries that assert who has authority to be there ; Architect Oscar Newman argues they have low crime rates due to territoriality, surveillance and provide a protected location
Indefensible places, where crime is more likely to happen, are isolated and not watched upon, and belong to no one, e.g. hallways, lifts, stairwells - Newman found that in High-rise blocks in New York 55% of all crimes in public spaces were in indefensible places
List 4 components on what makes a space defensible or not
Territoriality - Where the environment encourages a sense of ownership among residents so they are territorial about it, e.g. Cul-de-sacs
Natural surveillance - Features e.g. easily viewed entrance lobbies or street level windows that allow residents to observe strangers - in contrast, High-rise blocks have concealed entrances that allow crime to go unseen
Safe image - Buildings can give the impression of a safe neighbourhood, or the opposite
Safe location - A neighbourhood located in the middle of a crime-free area are insulated from the outside world
What is CPTED?
Crime prevention through environmental design - A development of Newman’s ideas put forward by CR Jeffery arguing that the built environment can create or deny opportunities for offenders and through altering, crime can be reduced
Examples
Alice Coleman analysing 4099 flat blocks in London, finding the poorer designed blocks with anonymity, lack of surveillance and easy escape produced higher crime rates suggesting no more blocks to be built, gardens to encourage territoriality and overhead walkways to be removed, examples which influenced e.g. the removal of overhead walkways in Lisson Green estate in London which reduced crime by 50%
Explain Gated Lanes, a CPTED example
Lockable gates installed on alleys to prevent offenders gaining access to e.g. burgle or fly tip
They e.g. provide a physical barrier increasing the effort needed to commit a crime, increase territoriality and surveillance as residents must close gates, remove the offenders’ excuse that they thought it was public space and while cost may be a problem some areas have evidences it is not e.g. Sidebottom et al where the average cost was 728GBP and the average benefit was over twice this amount
Limitations: Do not work against criminals living within the area, may not take place in areas where residents do not get on, there may be difficulty installing the gates e.g. if the alley is a public right of way and they can restrict access for emergency services
Link CPTED to 2 theories of criminality
Rational choice theory - CPTED sees offenders acting rationally, as in if offenders fear challenge from residents they are more likely to be deterred
Situational crime prevention - ‘target hardening’, changing the physical environment to make it harder to commit crime e.g. barriers to prevent vehicle access making gate away harder
List Criticisms of CPTED
Focuses on outsiders but not insiders’ crimes e.g. Domestic abuse
Cannot prevent offences that do not require physical intrusion e.g. Cyber crime
If offenders are out at work there is no surveillance and therefore the area is not defended
High crime rates are not always due to the design of an area, instead e.g. a council’s housing allocation policies
What is the Panopticon and how does it link to the surveillance theory?
A style of prison where all prisoners cells are visible from a central watchtower - The guards can see the prisoners but not vice versa, so they must behave at all times in case they are being watched, meaning prisoners by default conduct self-surveillance
The prisons designer, Foucault, argues self-surveillance has become an important instrument in social control, instead of a panopticon, CCTV cameras
Describe ASBOs and Link them to the labelling theory
Anti-Social behaviour orders introduced by Blair in 1998 to reduce crimes e.g. Vandalism, graffiti, public disorder by imposing civil orders that restrained a person from committing actions that threatened the legal rights of another e.g. Loud music outside one’s house at night
Breaching ASBO conditions was punishable with up to 5 years imprisonment
After evidence of inefficiency e.g. 58% of 24000 ASBOs were breached, Labelling theorists state that ASBOs label someone as a criminal, and they can begin to live up to it to earn status from their peers, suggesting ASBOs became badges of honour, enforcing repeat offending instead of reducing crime
ASBOs were replaced by?
In the 2014 Crime and Policing act 2 measures replaced ASBOS:
Injunctions - Dealt with low level nuisance with breaching resulting in up to 2 years imprisonment for adults and 3 months of detention for u18s
Criminal Behaviour Orders - Deal with seriously anti-social individuals lasting from 1-2 years depending on age, forbidding a person to go to certain places or take part in certain activities and unlike ASBOs can require a person to do something to improve their behaviour e.g. rehab for drugs
What are Token economies, how effective are they and link them to the Operant learning theory
Behaviour modification programmes used in some e.g. Prisons, youth offender institutions, to achieve social control by re-shaping inmates behaviour patterns, giving them ‘tokens’ upon their obedience to rules, positive behaviour, purposeful activities e.g. Anger management and being drug free - these can be spent on TVs in cells, sweets, extra phone calls etc, IEPs in UK prisons
Studies on their effectiveness vary but what is widely accepted is that they work while in prison but when prisoners leave the reinforcement is no longer imposed and the desired behaviours disappear, and they return to crime
What are sanctions, an institutional tactic to achieve social control?
Rewards and punishments for desired and undesired behaviour
E.g. Family: If children play outside they with be withheld pocket money, In the army soldiers must obey officers’ orders and can meet a court martial for disobedience
Describe how 3 institutions achieve social control
1 The courts - Achieve deterrence and rehabilitation through imposing prison sentences and community orders - offenders are enabled to change their problem behaviour
2 The probation service - Supervises offender behaviour and ensures they behave according to rules by being able to persecute those who breach their license
3 Prison service - Rules restrict e.g. escape, substance usage, vandalising, possessing forbidden items, threatening to or hurting someone - If broken punishments e.g. Solitary confinement for up to 35 days can be imposed
What is phased discipline?
A common way of achieving social control - An offender is dealt with more leniently e.g. a loss of privileges if in prison or a police warning, and stronger sanctions will be imposed for further offences - attempts to deter repeat offending
Which things can impinge upon the effectiveness of institutions in achieving social control?
1 Budget cuts on social control agencies - Between 2010 and 2018 e.g. the police budget was cut by 19% and the prisons by 16% - this leads to huge decreases in staff
2 New Technology - E.g. Technology creates much larger amounts of data now - according to Alison Saunders in a Tinder rape case police had to look through 600 hours of digital material
3 Unreported crime - Agencies can only deal with offenders who are reported so unreported crime decreases social control - e.g. roughly 1/4 rapes are reported, white collar crime often goes unreported as people are unaware they have been victims e.g. overcharging
4 - Social control can only be achieved with appropriate laws aiding it, so if a new type of harm emerges, there is no laws to permit some of their social control methods e.g. The Christchurch mosque shooter was able to livestream the attack - Book publishers would be held accountable for the content on their material, but not social media companies yet everywhere
However Germany, and after the Christchurch shooting in 2019, Australia, have passed laws requiring social media sites to remove illegal material ASAP, with executives who fail to comply liable to up to 3 years in jail
