The ultimate objective of situational crime prevention is the protection from victimization of prized goods, locations and people. The rationale upon which situational crime prevention is hinged is that alterations can be made to environments to lessen victimization (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2018). These alterations are often at little expense. The alterations include enhanced architectural designs such as in the public housing domain with the aim to offer increased surveillance, curtail the possibilities for escape routes for offenders, all which ought to result in increased security (Wikstrom, Ceccato, Hardie, & Treiber, 2010).
Situational crime prevention involves the deliberate attenuation, or elimination altogether, of opportunities exploited by potential offenders to commit crime. The techniques involved herein include the protection of likely targets to make them less convenient and suitable for exploitation and escalating the presence of capable guardians. Collectively, such deterrent techniques are referred to as target-hardening techniques (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2018).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
For residential burglary, burglars take into consideration various factors to assess the suitability and practicality of executing their intended burglaries. Such factors include the location of their targets, the residential building’s setting, the presence of guardians such as watchdogs or security personnel, the type of alert and alarm systems in place and also the external lighting in and around their targets (Turanovic, Reisig, & Pratt, 2015). Experienced and professional burglars engage in thorough planning which involves the observation of various clues and indicators of owner’s absence, some of them obvious and others subtle such as closed windows coupled with air conditioners that are turned off, uncollected newspapers on doorsteps and mail piled up in mailboxes (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2018).
Various target-hardening techniques may be adopted to combat residential burglary in a high-crime area. Going by the revelation of security studies and reports, corner properties or properties located at the intersection of streets and other access channels are one of the most highly targeted for residential burglaries. The rationale by burglars to target such residential properties is the easy access they provide and also the easy and convenient escape routes they provide for them after they have executed their crimes (Turanovic, Reisig, & Pratt, 2015).
These properties also offer increased visibility for any impeding dangers and they also have fewer adjoining properties. To make such residential areas unlikely targets for residential burglary requires the implementation of target-hardening measures such as increased security camera surveillance and the presence of capable guardians such as security personnel who will be alert and on the look-out for any suspicious activity and intruders (Wikstrom, Ceccato, Hardie, & Treiber, 2010).
Additionally, the erection of functional street lighting would also serve as a target-hardening technique. Further, target-hardening measures that may be implemented include vandal-resistant construction, improved check-in and checkout systems and presence of watchdogs (Turanovic, Reisig, & Pratt, 2015). Communal efforts also go a long way to combat residential burglaries when residents are vigilant and promptly reporting strangers and people who appear not to belong in their neighborhoods. Fencing off residential areas and restricting access by installing effective locking systems also serves as a target-hardening technique that will prevent the observation of clues that are indicative of the owners’ absence (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2018).
There exist situational crime theories upon which the effectiveness of these target-hardening techniques may be assessed. These theories, commonly referred to as opportunity theories, include the rational-choice theory and the routine-activity theory (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2018). The rational-choice theory undertakes that pleasure maximization and pain reduction are the underlying motivators for the decisions that people make, including decisions to commit crime or to refrain. It also makes the argument that people weigh options and make their choices based on the possibility of the highest level of satisfaction for their needs (Wikstrom, Ceccato, Hardie, & Treiber, 2010). By implementing the afore-mentioned target-hardening techniques, the chances for residential burglars getting caught are increased and also drastically reduce the pay-off making the residential targets unattractive to burglars.
The routine-activity approach is premised on the argument that routine patterns “affect the convergence in time and place of motivated offenders who are not “handled,” suitable targets, and the absence of guardians” (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2018). The absence of any of these components translates to low chances of a crime occurring. The convergence of all components, however, increases the likelihood of a crime to occur. The routine-activity approach theorizes that a crime can only be committed in the event that there is a likely offender, a suitable target and a person to control the activities of a potential offender. Crime hardening-techniques such as having the presence of guardians in a residential target, are effective if examined through the routine approach theory since they eliminate one of the essential factors – the absenteeism of a guardian to supervise or control the potential offender’s activities. With the absence of this factor, the likelihood of a residential burglary occurring reduces (Wikstrom, Ceccato, Hardie, & Treiber, 2010).
To reduce residential burglary based on the situational crime prevention approach requires a paradigm that focuses less on the victim and focuses more on the places themselves – the residential areas. This requires the implementation of target-hardening techniques to make the targets less appealing and less convenient for burglars therefore reducing the chances of crime to occur. These target hardening-techniques bear the potential for effective crime reduction based on the situational theories of crime - rational-choice theory and the routine-activity theory.
References
Adler, F., Mueller, G. O., & Laufer, W. S. (2018). Criminology (9th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill Education.
Turanovic, J. J., Reisig, M. D., & Pratt, T. C. (2015). Risky Lifestyles, Low Self-control, and Violent: Victimization Across Gendered Pathways to Crime. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 31 , 183–206. doi:10.1007/s10940-014-9230-9
Wikstrom, P.-O. H., Ceccato, V., Hardie, B., & Treiber, K. (2010). Activity Fields and the Dynamics of Crime: Advancing Knowledge About the Role of the Environment in Crime. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26 , 55–87.
