Repeated victimization refers to a subsequent attack by a criminal or criminal group on the same target. However, near repeat victimization differs from actual repeat victimization as near repeat victimization refers to an attack or victimization of an object, person, or enterprise with the same characteristics as the initial victim of the crime. According to (Fagan & Mazerolle, 2011), repeat victimization and near-repeat victimization provide a basis for formulating strategies for crime prevention in the future. Law enforcement agencies are able to study the weaknesses of the victim that make the victim vulnerable to a crime and the manner in which the criminals are exploiting the weaknesses to commit the crime. An article was written by Farrell (1995) talks about the strategies of preventing repeated victimization in crime. Further, another article by Kleemans (2001) discusses the factors that make a victim of a crime vulnerable to the crime giving a case study of burglary in the Netherlands.
An article written by Grove, Farrell, Farrington, & Johnson (2012), highlights the characteristics of a victim that make the victim continuously vulnerable to the commission of a crime. I learned that if the earlier factors that make a person, an object, or an enterprise vulnerable to a crime are not changed, there are high chances of repeated victimization. For instance, if the location of an object is not changed or the personal weaknesses and traits of a person are not changed, there are high chances of the repeated commission of a crime (Farrell, 1995). Crime prevention strategies should focus on eliminating the conditions that facilitated the commission of the first crime.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Strategies in repeated crime prevention should focus on the strategies used by the perpetrators of the crime and the flags that make the entity, individual, or object a suitable target for the commission of the crime. Characteristics that attract victimization include lack of good physical security installations around the victim, poor judgment of the victim, the behavioral habits of the victim, and poor system security features in an organization (Farrell & Sousa, 2001). The prevention measures should focus on reducing the chances of repeated victimization by addressing weaknesses that make the victim a suitable target for the commission of a crime.
Response
I do agree that repeated victimization is an indication of a lapse in the existing security improvement strategies. According to Tseloni (2003) If good security implementation strategies are used in improving the security of an entity, person, or object, there will be minimal chances of perpetrators of a crime carrying criminal activities against the victim in the future. Turanovic & Pratt (2014) notes that the initial crime incident should be used as an indicator of the weaknesses that exist in the security systems of an entity or the weak traits of an individual, and necessary changes will result in the prevention of crime in the future.
Risk assessment of the security features of an entity or the traits of an individual can help in preventing crime and reducing the chances of re-victimization. According to Walklate (1997) The fact that security audits and risk assessment has been successfully used in the reduction of crime and the risk of commission of crimes its important that these strategies are employed in conducting an analysis of the security of a person or an entity immediately after a crime has been carried against the victim.
References
Grove, L. E., Farrell, G., Farrington, D. P., & Johnson, S. D. (2012). Preventing repeat victimization: A systematic review . Brottsförebyggande rådet/The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (© Brottsförebyggande rådet).
Farrell, G. (1995). Preventing repeat victimization. Crime and Justice , 19 , 469-534.
Farrell, G., & Sousa, W. (2001). Repeat victimization and hot spots: the overlap and its implications for crime control and problem-orientated policing.
Fagan, A. A., & Mazerolle, P. (2011). Repeat offending and repeat victimization: Assessing similarities and differences in psychosocial risk factors. Crime & Delinquency , 57 (5), 732-755.
Kleemans, E. R. (2001). Repeat burglary victimization. Results of empirical research in the Netherlands.
Turanovic, J. J., & Pratt, T. C. (2014). “Can’t stop, won’t stop”: Self-control, risky lifestyles, and repeat victimization. Journal of quantitative criminology , 30 (1), 29-56.
Tseloni, A., & Pease, K. (2003). Repeat personal victimization. 'Boosts’ or 'Flags'?. British Journal of Criminology , 43 (1), 196-212.
Walklate, S. (1997). Risk and criminal victimization: A modernist dilemma?. The British Journal of Criminology , 37 (1), 35-45.
