Crime prevention steven p lab

This is a clear and comprehensive approach to crime prevention. The focus of the book is applied and practical, which makes it ideal for the classroom. The new edition provides an excellent in-depth coverage of what works in crime prevention, and how prevention programs are evaluated to assess their impact on crime and fear of victimization. It is an essential resource for both students and practitioners.

Jonathan Kremser, Kutztown University

This book, in comparison to others I have seen, offers the widest coverage regarding the different possible approaches to crime prevention—it addresses strategies as diverse as environmental design, block-watch initiatives, media-driven public service announcements, community- oriented policing, correctional rehabilitation, and many, many more. As such, it provides students with the foundation for an impressive breadth of knowledge regarding crime prevention.

Pamela Wilcox, University of Cincinnati

I have used Professor Lab’s text on crime prevention and found that his crime prevention typology is great for the classroom. Grouping tactics by primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention allows students to really think about some of the underlying factors driving these crimes and gives them some basis for critiquing the initial efficacy of a program. This text is great for students and professionals alike.

Eric Martin, George Washington University

2

Crime Prevention

Crime Prevention: Approaches, Practices, and Evaluations, Ninth Edition, meets the needs of students and instructors for engaging, evidence-based, impartial coverage of the origins of crime, as well as of public policy that can reduce or prevent deviance. The book examines a range of approaches to preventing crime and elucidates their respective goals. Strategies include primary prevention measures designed to prevent conditions that foster deviance; secondary prevention measures directed toward persons or conditions with a high potential for deviance; and tertiary prevention measures to deal with persons who have already committed crimes.

This edition provides research and information on all aspects of crime prevention, including the physical environment and crime, neighborhood crime prevention programs, community policing, crime in schools, and electronic monitoring and home confinement. Lab offers a thorough and well-rounded discussion of the many sides of the crime prevention debate, in clear and accessible language.

Steven P. Lab is Professor of Criminal Justice and Chair of the Department of Human Services. He holds a Ph.D. in Criminology from the Florida State University School of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Dr. Lab is the author or coauthor of five books, the editor/coeditor of two readers, and coeditor of one encyclopedia. He is the author of more than 50 articles or book chapters and has presented more than 70 papers to academic or professional societies. He is a past editor of the Journal of Crime and Justice and has been an assistant editor or on the editorial boards of several additional journals. Dr. Lab has been a Visiting Professor at the Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science of University College London and at Keele University in Staffordshire, England, as well as a Visiting Fellow at Loughborough University (England) and a Research Consultant with the Perpetuity Research Group at Leicester University (England). Dr. Lab has received grant funding for several large research projects from the National Institute of Justice, and has served as a consultant to the Ohio Attorney General’s Office, the Arizona Governor’s Office, and various offices of the U.S. Department of Justice. Dr. Lab is also a past-president of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences.

A range of further resources for this book are available on the Companion Website: www.routledge.com/cw/lab

3

http://www.routledge.com/cw/lab
Crime Prevention

Approaches, Practices, and Evaluations

NINTH EDITION

STEVEN P. LAB

4

First published 2016

by Routledge

711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017

and by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 2016 Taylor & Francis

The right of Steven P. Lab to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means,

now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission

in writing from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation

without intent to infringe.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Lab, Steven P.

Crime prevention : approaches, practices, and evaluations/

Steven P. Lab. -- Ninth Edition.

pages cm

Revised edition of the author’s Crime prevention, 2014.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-1-138-94693-4 (hardback : alk. paper) --

ISBN 978-0-323-35772-2 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Crime prevention--

United States. 2. Crime prevention--United States--Evaluation. I. Title.

HV7431.L33 2016

364.40973--dc23

2015030160

ISBN: 978-1-138-94693-4 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-0-323-35772-2 (pbk)

ISBN: 978-1-315-71276-5 (ebk)

Typeset in Adobe Garamond Pro

by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire

5

To Danielle

6

Contents

Preface Acknowledgments

CHAPTER 1—Crime and the Fear of Crime

The Problem of Crime in Society

The Costs of Crime/Victimization

The Fear of Crime

Summary

CHAPTER 2—Crime Prevention

Crime Prevention Through the Ages

Defining Crime Prevention

Crime Prevention Classifications

CHAPTER 3—Evaluation and Crime Prevention

Types of Evaluation

Theory and Measurement in Evaluation

The Method for Evaluation

An Overview of the Book

PART I Primary Prevention

CHAPTER 4—The Physical Environment and Crime Prevention

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

Implementation of Environmental Design

Impact of Physical Design

Incivility, Disorder, and Crime

Summary

CHAPTER 5—Neighborhood Crime Prevention

Types of Neighborhood Crime Prevention Approaches

Building Guardianship

Evaluation of Neighborhood Crime Prevention

Citizen Participation and Support

Chapter Summary

CHAPTER 6—Displacement and Diffusion

Crime Displacement

7

Diffusion

Offender Choice and Mobility

Evidence of Displacement and Diffusion

Implications of Displacement and Diffusion

CHAPTER 7—The Mass Media and Crime Prevention

The Media and Crime

Mass Media Crime Prevention Activities

The Media’s Responsibility for Crime Prevention

Summary

CHAPTER 8—Developmental Crime Prevention

Background

Risk Factors and Developmental Prevention

Programs

Developmental Concerns

Summary

CHAPTER 9—General Deterrence

Deterrence

The Deterrent Effect of Legal Sanctions

Perceptions and Deterrence

Summary

PART II Secondary Prevention

CHAPTER 10—Prediction for Secondary Prevention

Predicting Future Offending

Risk Factors and Prediction

Predicting Places and Events

Repeat Victimization

Implications for Crime Prevention

CHAPTER 11—Situational Crime Prevention

The Growth of Situational Prevention

The Theoretical Basis

Situational Typologies

Issues and Concerns with Situational Prevention

Implementing Situational Prevention

Situational Prevention Studies

Summary

CHAPTER 12—Partnerships for Crime Prevention

8

Community Policing

Problem Identification

Partnership Efforts and Assessment

Successful Partnerships

Summary

CHAPTER 13—Drugs, Crime, and Crime Prevention

The Scope of Drug Use

The Drugs–Crime Connection

Interventions and Prevention

Drugs and Crime Prevention

CHAPTER 14—The School and Crime Prevention

Theoretical Views

Educational Factors and Delinquency

School Programs for Delinquency Prevention

The Future of School/Educational Programs in Crime Prevention

PART III Tertiary Prevention

CHAPTER 15—Specific Deterrence and Incapacitation

The Specific Deterrent Effect of Criminal Sanctions

Incapacitation

Future Implications

CHAPTER 16—Rehabilitation

The “What Works?” Argument

Evaluations of Rehabilitation Programs

Assessing Rehabilitation and Crime Prevention

CHAPTER 17—Some Closing Thoughts on Crime Prevention and the Future

The State of the Evidence

Improving Our Knowledge

Recognizing the Diversity in Crime Prevention

Summary

Glossary References Name index Subject index

9

Preface to the Ninth Edition

This ninth edition of Crime Prevention: Approaches, Practices, and Evaluations carries forth the successful format developed over the previous eight editions. While there are many different ways to approach the field of crime prevention, the feedback I have received over the years from a wide range of individuals has consistently pointed out that the format of the text lays a nice pedagogical outline for the academic study of crime prevention. Consequently, I have endeavored to stay true to the approach in the book while simultaneously adding emerging new ideas and prevention initiatives to the discussion. The general organization of the book remains the same following the public health prevention model of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention. Adding more recent materials does not always result in a clean, clear division of prevention into the basic public health model. Many of the topics bridge across the three components. Two easy examples are in discussion of physical design and prevention aimed at high-risk individuals/situations. Physical design is a cornerstone of primary prevention, particularly Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, and also appears in many situational prevention activities, most notably product design for high-emerging items. Prevention that seeks to target high-risk individuals/situations fits both in secondary prevention activities (that by definition target risk) and tertiary prevention where deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation may target high-risk offenders. These facts do not detract from the presentation in the book; rather they point out the growing interest in and focus on emerging prevention techniques.

The field of academic crime prevention continues to see major advances. These changes cover the entire gamut of prevention, from physical design to developmental prevention to identifying high-risk individuals to situational initiatives to partnerships and beyond. Across almost all topics it has become necessary over the years to expand the discussions to cover the many emerging programs and approaches in crime prevention, while preserving the more classic bases of crime prevention. This current edition has been modified in the following ways:

Data on crime and crime prevention have been updated throughout the book. Chapter 1 has updated crime/victimization data and expanded discussion of identity theft and forms of victimization not found in official measures. Chapter 4 offers a new discussion of CPTED that places territoriality at the apex of initiatives for prevention activities, with surveillance, activity support, image, and other elements as components in the building of territoriality; expanded discussions of the use of CCTV; a new Third-Generation CPTED for consideration; and shifts the topic of product design to another point in the book. Chapter 5 offers a new logic model for neighborhood crime prevention, adds a more in-depth discussion on guardianship, and enhances the material on leveraging guardianship. In Chapter 6 the presentation on crime pattern theory has been reworked for clarity, and more research on displacement has been added. The material on mass media and prevention (Chapter 7) now includes a discussion of the use of social media both in terms of crime and crime prevention. Chapter 8 has added more examples of effective developmental prevention programs, including a new section on Mentoring Programs. The discussion on risk factors (Chapter 10) now includes materials on risk assessment instruments used at various points in criminal justice system processing. The Situational Prevention chapter (11) has added material on how to make prevention techniques more useful for practitioners (the 11Ds), has added a revised discussion of product design, and eliminated sections on Organized Crime and Crowd Violence (these topics can be found on the book web site).

10

Chapter 12 has a new section on Hot Spot Policing, has added Civil Injunctions to the discussion of abatement, eliminated sections on Weed and Seed and Business Improvement Districts, and expanded on the discussions of PSN and gang suppression. Chapter 13 has a reworked discussion on drug use by offenders, including a new section on ADAM II, and presents information on the most recent incarnation of D.A.R.E. The schools chapter (14) has updated information on the G.R.E.A.T. program and police in schools. The final chapters on specific deterrence/incapacitation and rehabilitation have been updated but are largely unchanged.

11

Acknowledgments

Over the various iterations of this book, there are many people who deserve mention and thanks for helping me along the way. First and foremost I need to thank my friends and colleagues who have supported me in numerous ways and prompted me to look at things in different ways. This group includes Bob Langworthy and John Whitehead, who have remained good friends and colleagues. Since entering the crime prevention arena, I have had the great pleasure and honor to get to know many people who have provided insight, material, and friendship—Paul and Pat Brantingham, Ron Clarke, Ralph Taylor, George Rengert, Paul Cromwell, Tim Hope, Graham Farrell, Shane Johnson, Kate Bowers, Marcus Felson, Gloria Laycock, Martin Gil, Nick Tilley, Jim LeBeau, David Farrington, Brandon Welsh, Dennis Rosenbaum, and Wes Skogan. Finally, I have to thank my editor, Ellen Boyne, who has endured the changes in publisher and continues to watch my back and make sure I don’t look foolish in print. I am certain that I have missed some people who deserve to be mentioned. The fact that they know me means that they are probably aware of my penchant for forgetting names and will forgive me for the oversight. I thank you all for helping make this book a success. The errors and omissions, of course, are mine alone.

Hopefully you will find this edition helpful in your individual pursuits. Please do not hesitate to let me know what you think. It has been the feedback of many people over the years that has helped make this book a success.

S.P.L.

12

Chapter 1 Crime and the Fear of Crime

Chapter Outline

The Problem of Crime in Society Official Measures of Crime Measuring Victimization Summary

The Costs of Crime/Victimization The Fear of Crime

Defining Fear Measuring Fear The Level of Fear Fear and Crime Fear and Demographics Explaining the Divergent Findings Fear Summary

Summary

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter you should be able to:

Identify and discuss two different measures of crime and victimization. Discuss the changing crime rates in the United States. Identify shortcomings with the UCR. Explain how a panel survey works. Discuss the NCVS and what it shows about victimization. Provide information on the costs of crime/victimization. Give a definition of fear and discuss how it manifests itself. Explain the differences between fear, worry, and assessments of crime. Discuss the levels of fear in society and how fear relates to crime and victimization. Define vicarious victimization. Provide reasons for the reported levels of fear. Define incivility and show how it relates to fear.

Crime remains an indisputable fact of life for many, if not most, members of modern society. This is true despite the frequent declarations that crime continues to fall and is reaching levels not seen in years. While the overall level of crime has fallen in recent years, large numbers of citizens are still victimized every year and the impact of crime on everyone in society is substantial. Beyond those who are actually victimized, many individuals are fearful of crime and victimization. That fear has consequences of its own for both individuals

13

and our communities. Crime and fear lead most individuals to turn to the criminal justice system for help. The ability of the criminal justice system to single-handedly alleviate crime and fear in society has been seriously questioned by both proponents and opponents. Despite the claims by some that the reductions in crime since the early 1990s are due to concerted police actions, there is little reason to believe that actions of the criminal justice system are the primary (or sole) cause of the reductions. At the same time, crime and fear still impact the lives of many individuals. Society clearly needs to continue to pursue means of preventing crime and fear.

This first chapter attempts to show how crime and fear have changed over time and remain problems that need to be addressed. It is this information that forms the basis for continued calls for crime prevention actions. After examining the level and change in actual crime in society, this chapter will examine the impact of crime on victims and society. It will also examine the companion issue of fear of crime. Indeed, the “fear of crime” poses a greater, more far reaching problem for society and its members. Demonstrating a need for crime prevention is not difficult to accomplish when you consider the levels of crime and fear in society.

14

The Problem of Crime in Society

The magnitude of the crime problem can be evaluated using both official and victimization measures of crime. The use of official crime statistics, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports, provides a view of crime from the standpoint of what the formal criminal justice system must handle. Many critics argue that this provides an inaccurate and incomplete analysis of the true levels of crime in society. These individuals point to the results of victimization surveys as a basis for their argument. While each presents a different absolute level of crime, both tend to reveal similar patterns in criminal activity over time.

Official Measures of Crime

The FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) are the most widely used and cited official measures of crime in the United States. The UCR represents the number of criminal offenses known to the police. The reported crime rate reflects only those offenses known as Part I crimes (violent crimes: murder, rape, robbery, and assault; property crimes: burglary, larceny, auto theft, and arson). A host of other offenses (i.e., fraud, kidnapping, and drug offenses), known as Part II crimes, are not included in the computations and reported crime rates. The resulting crime rates, therefore, reflect only a portion of the offenses with which the formal criminal justice system comes into contact.

According to the UCR, there were more than 9.75 million index crimes committed in 2013. Of that number, almost 1.2 million were personal crimes (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) and 8.6 million were property offenses (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2014). This translates into 3,099 index crimes for every 100,000 people in the United States (also known as the “crime rate”). The corresponding crime rates for personal and property crime are 367.9 and 2,730.7, respectively. Conklin (2003) notes that many individuals compare these figures to those from the mid-1980s and early 1990s and trumpet the great decreases in crime. Even further, these figures are used by various groups to take credit for the decreases: police leaders claim that aggressive police tactics caused the decline, mayors have pointed to wider ranging community policies as the cause, and politicians claim that mandatory sentencing laws caused the changes (Conklin, 2003). While determining the cause of the reductions is important, it is beyond the scope of this book to attempt that task. What is more important is to place the “great reductions” in crime into context.

On the Web

Detailed information on official crime numbers and rates from the UCR can be found at the FBI UCR site at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013

The trend in violent and property crime since 1962 is shown in Figures 1.1 and 1.2. Figure 1.1 illustrates that the 2013 violent crime rate has fallen almost to the levels in 1970. Thus, it is a true claim that violent crime is lower today than any time in almost 45 years. Similar claims can be made about property crime, although the reference point would be roughly 1968 (see Figure 1.2). Interestingly, all of the levels in these two figures are significantly higher than they were in the 1960s when the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice lamented the great growth in crime and the need to do something about it.

The crime rates today are significantly higher than throughout the 1960s. This is especially problematic if you consider the data for violent crimes, which are those crimes that most concern people. Figure 1.1 shows that the violent crime rate in 1962 was 162 offenses for every 100,000 persons. This was less than one-third of the rate in 1977 and roughly one-third of the rate in 1992. Similarly, the property crime rate in 1962 (1,858) was less than half of the 1971 rate and only about one-third of the 1980 property crime rate (Figure 1.2). In both cases, the recent figures are still significantly higher than those of 40 years ago when society was lamenting the

15

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013
high crime it was facing. The property crime rate in 2013 is 126 percent higher than the rate in 1962, while the personal crime rate is roughly 46 percent higher. This suggests that those who point to the great strides made combating crime should be careful not to congratulate themselves too much.

Figure 1.1 Change in Violent Crime Rate (per 100,000 population)

Source: Constructed by author from UCR data.

Figure 1.2 Change in Property Crime Rate (per 100,000 population)

Source: Constructed by author from UCR data.

While the UCR shows a large number of crimes are committed in the United States, it still comes under fire from a variety of sources for underreporting the actual level of crime in the country. O’Brien (1985) points out that concerns over the way the data is collected and how the police learn about crime lead many to question the validity of the results. Foremost among the concerns is the question of whether the police records and reports provide an unbiased, complete view of crime in society. Popular wisdom would answer this question with a resounding “No!” Examination of the UCR reveals three major points at which the UCR can be inaccurately adjusted.

First, the UCR is a voluntary system of data collection. It is possible for police departments to adjust their figures in order to enhance the image of their operation and/or their jurisdiction. Police funding is based on service delivery and productivity is often measured by the crime figures they report (O’Brien, 1985). As a result, it may be in the best interests of the department to alter its collection and reporting practices in order to make itself look better. Interestingly, this may be accomplished through both increasing and decreasing the level of crime. For example, an increase in the reported crime rate may be touted as an indication of better

16

police work and improved police effectiveness. This would be especially true if the police had previously announced a “crackdown” on a selected crime and then wished to demonstrate their success. Similarly, a decrease in the level of crime may be pointed to as deterrence brought on by improved police performance.

A second major problem with the UCR involves the ability of individual police officers to adjust the crime rate. Any officer can refrain from making an arrest or a formal report on an incident. Such activity may allow the officer to deflect minor or unimportant events away from an already overburdened criminal justice system. More importantly, however, such discretion factors into a distorted and underrepresented crime rate. Departmental policies may also contribute to this shift in reported crimes. Administrative procedures concerning the handling of crimes may alter the level of reported offenses. McCleary et al. (1982) found that, by requiring all reported cases of burglary to be investigated by detectives, the number of officially recorded burglaries showed an immediate drop. This was attributable to the detectives reclassifying offenses that were not burglaries (i.e., thefts) to their correct UCR categories. Less experienced officers who used to handle these offenses elevated many instances to the burglary category. It is clear that the UCR crime rates are subject to unintentional, as well as intentional, manipulation.

The third criticism of the UCR revolves around the claim that many offenses are not brought to the attention of the police. The police are a reactive force. This means that they primarily respond to calls for service. Despite their patrol function, little crime is encountered directly by the police. They must rely on victims and witnesses to call them for help. The absence of such calls when offenses do occur translates into crimes that are not known to the police and that do not become part of official crime figures. The fact that there is much unreported crime, along with the potential problems of data collection, has prompted many individuals to rely on victimization surveys in order to assess the extent of the crime problem.

A fourth concern is that most UCR data is restricted to Part I offenses and ignores the Part II crimes. While the UCR does collect some information on Part II offenses, it is related almost exclusively to data on the number of persons arrested for various categories of crimes. Included here are other assaults (besides aggravated assault), forgery and counterfeiting, fraud, vandalism, sex offenses (besides forcible rape and prostitution), drunkenness, and disorderly conduct. Assuming that greater attention is paid to the Part I offenses and the clearance (arrest rate) for those crimes is roughly 20 percent, it can be assumed that the arrest data for Part II offenses are serious underreports of the number of such offenses. Nevertheless, the arrest rate for other assaults is 360.5 (per 100,000 population), fraud is 46.2, vandalism is 66.0, drunkenness is 145.7, and disorderly conduct is 152.7 (FBI, 2014). Looking solely at the known Part I offenses, therefore, presents a limited picture of crime, even given limitations with UCR figures.

Limitations of the UCR suggest that other means of measuring crime are needed. Perhaps the main alternative source of data involves surveys of the public.

Measuring Victimization

Victimization surveys are surveys of the population carried out to measure the level of criminal victimization in society. This form of crime measurement was prompted by the 1967 President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, which commissioned surveys to assess the accuracy (or lack thereof) of the UCR. The results of those early surveys suggested that the police data reflected only half of the crime in society (see, for example, Ennis, 1967). Based on those early investigations, victim surveys became a common method for measuring crime by the late 1970s, with the federal government institutionalizing the National Crime Victimization Survey (originally the National Crime Survey) in 1972. These surveys typically inquire about the victimization experiences of a subject and/or his household over a specified period of time (usually the preceding six months or year). Such surveys have been lauded as a more accurate reading of crime in society because they circumvent the problems of official records and they uncover crimes that are not reported to the police.

On the Web

17

In-depth discussion of the NCVS can be found at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm? ty=dcdetail&iid=245 and http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2173

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is the best known of the victimization surveys. It is a panel survey of households drawn from across the United States, in which a panel of subjects (in this case addresses) are surveyed repeatedly over a specified period. The NCVS contacts the same households every six months for a period of three years, with one sixth of the sample dropping out and being replaced every six months. Interviewers attempt to talk with every household member aged 12 and older. While the NCVS has undergone considerable change in data collection methods in recent years, including the use of computer-aided interviewing and changes in preliminary screen questions, the findings relative to official statistics have remained fairly stable. The success of the NCVS has prompted similar victim surveys in other countries, most notably the British Crime Survey (BCS).

According to the 2013 NCVS, there were almost 23 million victimizations in the United States against persons aged 12 or older (Truman and Langton, 2014). Of that number, 6.1 million were violent crimes and almost 17 million were property crimes. These raw figures translate into victimization rates of 2,380 violent crimes (per 100,000 population) and 13,140 property crimes (per 100,000 households). These figures, both the raw numbers and the crime rates, are significantly higher than the UCR data. Indeed, the NCVS violent crime rate is almost 6.5 times as high as the UCR violent crime rate. While the NCVS property crime rate is considered for households instead of individuals as in the UCR, the fact that the rate is almost five times as high as the UCR rate is indicative of the fact that property crime is larger than reported in police data. The claim that the UCR underreports crime, therefore, is supported in these figures.

On the Web

Detailed information on the 2010 NCVS can be viewed in Truman and Langton’s (2014) report that can be found on the textbook’s web site.

Consistent with UCR figures, the NCVS reveals decreasing victimization levels, with great reductions in violent crime over the past decade. The NCVS estimates that there were 35,646,755 offenses in 1973. This number rose to 41,267,496 in 1981. Since 1981 there has been a relatively steady decline in property victimizations (Rand et al., 1997; Rand, 2009). Conversely, the violent crime rate held fairly steady throughout the 1970s, decreased in the early 1980s, increased from about 1986 until 1994, and has steadily declined since that time (Rand, 2009; Rennison and Rand, 2003). This trend varies somewhat for individual crimes (motor vehicle theft, for example, increased steadily between 1985 and 1991) but the overall trend is consistent with the findings from the UCR. See Table 1.1.

Victimization surveys have the ability to uncover crime and victimization not typically seen in official measures or the traditional NCVS data. Identity theft is one growing area of concern, particularly due to the growth of the Internet and electronic records. As society has moved toward paperless records and the storage of information on computers, offenders no longer have to have physical access to the records. Instead, they can access the information over the Internet by either having lawful access to the files, or illegally gaining entry to the records by hacking into a computer system. Electronic methods can be used for theft from next door or from around the world. Based on findings from a national survey of almost 5,000 adults conducted in 2006, most victims did not even know they were victimized or how it was done (56 percent) (Synovate, 2007).

Identity theft can take a variety of forms. The NCVS has included questions on identity theft since 2004 (Baum, 2007). The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has surveyed the public on identity theft since 2003 (Synovate, 2007). According to the NCVS, roughly 7.9 million households were the victims of identity theft in 2012 (see Table 1.2). Theft involving existing credit cards or other existing accounts is the most common form of identity theft. The establishment of new accounts and the theft of personal information are also prevalent forms of theft.

18

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=245
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2173
Table 1.1 Criminal Victimization, 2013 (number and rates per 100,000)

Type of Victimization Number Rate

Total violent crimes 6,126,420 2,320  Rape/sexual assault 300,170 110  Robbery 645,650 240  Aggravated assault 994,220 380  Simple assault 4,186,390 1,580

Total property crimes 16,774,090 13,140  Household burglary 3,286,210 2,570  Motor vehicle theft 661,250 520  Theft 12,826,620 10,050 Source: Adapted by author from J.L. Truman and L. Langton (2014). Criminal Victimization, 2013. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice

Statistics.

Table 1.2 Types and Extent of Identity Theft

Type Number

Existing Credit Cards 7,698,500 Existing Bank Accounts 7,470,700 Other Accounts 1,696,400 New Account 1,125,100 Personal Information 883,600

Total 7,928,500 Source: Constructed by author from E. Harrell and L. Langton (2013). Victims of Identity Theft, 2012. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice

Statistics.

Information on identity theft offers a wealth of additional information. The NCVS data show that most victims of identity theft are from households with incomes of $75,000 and more (Harrell and Langton, 2013). Information from the NCVS suggests that this form of crime has been on the increase since the first survey was completed in 2003. Many victims fail to realize that a theft has occurred until long after the event. The most common means by which victims discovered the theft was being contacted by a financial institution about account activity (Harrell and Langton, 2013).

Another form of theft not typically found in data involves mass-marketing fraud. This can occur through schemes that seek to obtain relatively small amounts of money from a large number of victims or through maximizing the return on a smaller number of wealthier victims. Again, this type of fraud can target victims virtually anywhere in the world. The use of mail, telephones, the Internet, and the mass media makes borders, whether physical or symbolic, almost meaningless. While there are a number of different mass-marketing fraud schemes, there are several commonalities in the approaches. First is the use of some form of mass

19

communication to reach a wide range of potential victims spread over a large geographic area (often internationally). A second common feature is the attempt to convince victims to provide funds or access to funds in return for a promised service or benefit. Some of these schemes can appear very similar to those seen earlier under identity theft.

On the Web

Read more about mass-marketing fraud and responses for victims and society at http://www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/internet/