Ecology of Crime Flashcards
Where offenders live and what happens:
Chicago’s Zones/Shaw & Mckay (1931) - what did they find?
Crime patterns in Chicago fit into concentric zones.
Where offenders live and what happens:
Chicago’s Zones/Shaw & Mckay (1931) - what are the 5 zones?
Zone 1 - ‘central business district’
Zone 2 - ‘zone of transition’
Zone 3 - ‘working-class zone for independent workers’
Zone 4 - ‘better residences’
Zone 5 - ‘commuters zone’
Where offenders live and what happens:
Chicago’s Zones/Shaw & Mckay (1931) - what are concentric zones?
The different types of zones that traditional cities have.
Where offenders live and what happens:
What is the cycle of crime in zone 2 (‘zone of transition’)?
New people moved in
Successful people move out
More new people moved in
Called ‘social disorganisation’.
Where offenders live and what happens:
What is ‘cultural transmission’? (3)
In zone 2, crime becomes socially acceptable as it’s so common.
Results in more crime or ‘criminal careers’.
Crime becomes culture & generational.
Where offenders live and what happens:
Why does Sutherland & Cressey (1966) argue crime is found in zone 2? (6)
Through ‘differential association’ - learning by experience.
A child born in zone 2 can become criminal by:
Frequency of definition
Duration of message
Priority - critical points in development
Intensity - status of person giving the message
Where offenders live and what happens:
How do UK policies contribute to crime in zone 2?
Morris (1957) - govt housed ‘problem families’ together, creating criminal areas.
Baldwin & Bottom (1976) ‘tipping’ - as more families move in, moral families relied on for informal control move out.
Where offenders live and what happens:
How does disorder contribute to crime in zone 2?
(3)
3 main effects, according to Skogan (1990):
Loss of social control & bonds between people.
People stay home at night, so crime is easier to commit.
Law-abiding people move out.
Where offenders live and what happens:
How social capital contributes to crime in zone 2, according to Wilson (1996):
People in _______ areas form a small _________ group, distanced from ___________.
Creates less ________; these people _______ but don’t provide _____________ for ______ as they feel _________ from __________.
Crime is therefore _________ as they feel they can’t _______ it.
a) deprived, powerless, wider society
b) social control, interact, positive social models, youth, isolated, wider society
c) accepted, control
Where offenders live and what happens:
How collective efficacy contributes to crime in zone 2:
The more _______ a society, the more _______ in _____________.
Even in _______ areas, _____ can be solved with a ___________.
Areas with ____ levels of ___________ had lower _____ rates, regardless the level of ____________.
a) collective, effective, solving problems
b) deprived, crime, collective community
c) high, collective efficacy, crime, social interaction
Higher levels of crime where offenders live:
How do housing policies contribute to higher levels of crime where offenders live?
Housing problem-families together meant that, almost by definition, these areas become high-crime areas.
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live:
How do cognitive maps contribute to lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live?
We have cognitive maps of where we live - offenders are most likely to commit offences where opportunities link with ‘cognitively known’ areas as they know their way around there.
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live:
How does opportunity theory contribute to lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live?
How attractive & how accessible the target is?
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live:
ROUTINE ACTIVITIES contribute to this because crimes are likely to occur where _______ of ______/______ occur & where there’s _____ ways of ______ to prevent _______ from happening, eg where there’s no __________.
+ it depends on the ____ & what’s ________ at that _______.
a) activities
b) victims/offenders
c) little
d) control
e) offences
f) ‘capable guardian’
g) time
h) moment
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live:
SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION contributes to this because it’s more ______ to make the _____ of committing crime ______ rather than _______ its __________, which is what situational crime prevention _________.
a) effective
b) ‘costs’
c) higher
d) studying
e) social causes
f) involves
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live:
How does situational crime involve making the costs of committing crime higher?
Theft - make it more difficult to steal, eg neighbourhood watch schemes.
Violence - limit opportunities, eg plastic glasses in pubs at night.
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live:
SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION - ______ of _________ spaces have taken over ________ them, eg _____, leading to the ________ of _____ space.
The _______ of ________ groups from these ________ areas has _______ crime to less ______ areas.
a) owners
b) private public
c) policing
d) CCTV
e) privatisation
f) public
g) exclusion
h) undesirable
i) private public
j) displaced
k) affluent
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live:
The NIGHT TIME ECONOMY contributes to this because _______ change ______ depending on the _____ of ____.
The _____ of the _______ industry resulted in many ______ people coming ________ in a small ______ in a relatively ________ area.
a) locations
b) meaning
c) time
d) day
e) scale
f) leisure
g) young
h) together
i) time-band
j) restricted
Lower levels of crime where offenders don’t live - how the night-time economy contributes to it:
Almost ___ of __________ in ______ areas occur during ________ between _______, usually by groups of ______ men fuelled by ____/_______.
a) 3/4
b) violent incidents
c) weekends
d) 9pm-3am
e) young
f) drugs/alcohol
