RegLanJustice.com

Archive for the ‘Justice’ Category

Criminal justice is becoming an increasing popular career field. They look at the way society controls crime and negligence and deal with the rehabilitation of criminals. Choosing the best school for you can be a daunting task.

Criminal justice education is important before having a successful criminal justice career. Mostly all of them who are professionals hold either an associate degree or a bachelor degree. An associate degree can be completed for just two years while bachelor degree can be finished for four years. These courses also vary be specializations and the type of job. But, all of these educational programs include subjects on general psychology, sociology, political science, forensics and public administration. Every criminal justice career has a specialized skill and requirements. All jobs in this field have a lot of required strength like being attentive to details, ability to work under pressure and must meet deadlines.

Investigative skills are also important. These people should also have the ability to work in places where they may be unfamiliar or uncomfortable. Since these job requires a person to deal with a lot of people, communication skills is important. One also has to know how to work independently or as a member of the investigating team. These skills and knowledge are molded and being taught in all criminal justice schools to prepare the students for their future careers. Job opportunities are everywhere but competing for this job position is a challenge.

The admission process of getting into a college justice program for a four year program can be more competitive. Though a high school or community college GPA plays a big role getting into criminal justice school, but it’s not the only factor that matters in your application for a four year program. To get into a justice school for a four year program you may also require to take the SAT or ACT. Adding to this, you may even require writing an admission essay. In this admission essay, you may require to describe your interest in criminal justice. Adding to this, you may also require submitting the letters of recommendation. Moreover, the next key elements that can easily draw attention to your application are the proper and authenticate evidence of extracurricular involvement. If it’s possible for you, try to attach those evidence that can demonstrate your community mindedness, and responsibility. These are traits that can attest to your readiness to be a criminal justice major.

Utilize your scholarship counselor as they have much experience in this area. Your counselor will also have a running list of any new scholarships and awards that come out so check with your Guidance office often. You can have your guidance counselor assist you in your search for financial aid, help you in the application process and serve as a reference.

Incoming search terms:

• criminal justice

For justice to prevail there must be competent bodies which are charged with the responsibility of making sure justice is seen to be done. The most vital unit is the investigation where by cases are determined by how well investigation has been done. Police are involved in investigation and arrests. Depending on the work of investigation cases are decided so that the real perpetrators are punished to deter criminal behaviors. Policemen have the discretion to determine which suspects are to be arrested and arraigned in court for justice to prevail. It is lesser evil to free one thousand guilty persons rather than punishing one innocent life. The real culprits have to be punished. Like other arms of government the police are there to serve the citizens of any country impartially. Police behaviors are triggered by the culture of police departments in a country. If impunity and corruption are highly rewarded in a country then the culture of corruption is inculcated if integrity is rewarded then culture justice is cultivated. A police may be involved in a criminal case where he made sure he did a commendable investigation to nail the offender only for a judge to use his discretion to release perpetrator on basis of evidence deficiency. At that point the police feel his efforts are wasted.

I first heard about criminals who were being tracked by police after committing several crimes in the city. It was believed they do their business near Times Square. As it believed, all policemen are from the same mother; they behave the same, walk and even talk the same. I decided to go 42nd street and try to see the happenings there. There was one thing in my mind; policemen doing this task must be in plain cloths, so it was my obligation to monitor movements of people in the area. I noticed a group of 8 men and 2 women walking and was not going far from the area; they seemed interested in any one person in the area. They were looking people strait in the eyes and I was sure I have the group to monitor.

There are always high expectations in any society that whenever a policeman is around the process of justice has begun. A police gathers evidence in the scene of crime from witnesses who volunteer to give evidence. Plain clothes policemen are mostly used to avoid suspicion by perpetrators. In order to have substantive evidence the police rely mostly on physical evidence. There is a high perception in the society that policemen are completely not human, they are unpredictable you cant tell when they are supporting justice and when they are fighting justice. I observed some police could stand with some people on the street and then would join other members after those individuals leave. On thing I convinced myself is that, they were not in the same mission, some were playing hide and seek and were advising criminals on the progress and on every new tactic they plan to apply.

The first suspects in mysterious murders are the people who relates with the victim most. Police were looking for anyone may be they thought could have any information that would lead to arrest of culprits. A man was walking on the street, he seemed staggering, I could not establish whether he was drunk or maybe he was unwell. They all gathered and handcuffed the man, people were saying the man was innocent and had never been caught in any crime or any mischievousness. This is where the police use circumstantial evidence. In that connection the policeman gets information about day to day activities of the victim in the course of trying to establish whether there was any disagreement between the victim and the people who he relates with. If such disagreements are established then those people are called forward by the police to give details of what they know about the mystery. They are interrogated in different intervals to try and relate their statements. Those who are arrested are informed about the right to remain silent to avoid self incrimination out of ignorance of law.

In apprehending criminals police under cover mostly are in plain clothes. This is to make sure that they look similar to civilians. In cases of illegal drugs police must know the suspect who involve in drug trafficking to make sure they are constant vigilante to get evidence which can be used to charge the criminals. Mostly they know the dealers and the only thing there are left with is evidence which can be used to arraign them in court. Tracking devices are used by the police keep an eye on the movement of the suspect. The scene where the crime is suspected to be committed there is heavy police vigilante.

Plain clothes policemen usually keep searching those people who they suspect. They have the powers to search the luggage of suspects at their discretion. They are highly trained on behaviors of criminals. They keep looking for physical evidence. Mostly they get culprits in action by using tracking devices. Getting the criminal is one thing and nailing him is a different thing all the same. Some criminals are very fast to give hefty cash to the police to buy freedom. The notorious criminals hardly get themselves behind bars. The police unit is highly corrupt which impedes criminal justice.

Plain clothes police abuse their discretion by harassing innocent citizens in the streets. It does not matter how busy you are all what matters is what are you busy doing. They are busy either taking bribes or busy searching evidence where they can’t find it. When you ask citizens their perception about police undercover they are very unpopular for lack of etiquette in their work.
Undercover police do not fail in their duties for lack of technocapacity and skills. They are well equipped with tools which are highly effective. They can trace criminals from a very long distance. However culture of corruption has affected the police unit as a key investigation unit. The insincerity of undercover police has led to escalating of criminal behaviors in the society.

Obeying seniors in police units is a show of discipline to the orders. However Niccolo machievelli emphasized on been obedient to the idea and not to the authority most. I witnessed police under cover being taken for a ride by the criminals since they have connections from above. At times drugs are trafficked with their knowledge as they well know of the consequences of arresting those who matters in the society. This makes their efforts futile since evidence they collect is not evidence without support from theorist is paramount that we are royal to the idea of serving the people diligently without flouting rules and regulations.

When arresting the suspects there is usurping of powers whereby excessive force is unnecessarily used. Some people are harassed when they are found with incriminating substances. A person was badly injured for been in possession of sample of cannabis sativa. It is illegal put human right violations must be observed most by the people who are responsible for protecting the rights themselves. This kind of behavior portrays unprofessionalism and because whenever their target fails, an innocent substitute is the way to go. This have given a bad name to police and no many who thinks police do the right thing or does anything that will benefit the community. Though there was no actual instance that could lead the police to actual action, compared to other instances I observed them act, they don’t rhyme with the company. I suppose they could have acted more harshly if they were in uniform as they are aware many people fears uniformed police.my evaluation card for police behaviors, for technology they can get honors because they have excellent tracking technology. For professionalism they are Luke worm not because they are not well trained but the culture of obeying the rules is rotten. They are fairly well in responding to an emergency call. Whenever they get information about a crime they have a culture of arriving at the scene of crime very fast. One of experience is when two unlawful groups are involve in dangerous exchange of gun shots police responded in very swift way to rescue innocent citizens from falling victims of fire exchange. They don’t hesitate to arrest criminals but releasing them before getting justice is the problem. How can a law enforcer encourage a person who erk a living from dangerous activities like drug trafficking to buy freedom being well informed that he has the money to do so.That is trading with people’s life.

There are the key to a just society. This means their behaviors are paramount to the relationship between the state and the governed.

1. INTRODUCTION:

“Administration of Justice is the firmest pillar of the Government. It is sovereign and cannot be violated with impunity.” (George Washington)

The most essential functions of a state are primarily two, war and administration of justice. If a state is not capable of performing either or both of these functions, it cannot be called a state The most important and primary purpose of law is to achieve justice and justice can be achieved through administration.

2. DEFINITION OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:

>> By Salmond:

“The administration of justice implies the maintenance of rights within a political community by means of the physical force of the state.”

3. NECESSITY OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
In primitive times might was the sole right Every man was his own judge. A person wronged would seek revenge by his own hands. To stop this loot it appears necessary that some strong tribunal should hold administration and now a state perform this function.

> According to Jeremy Taylor:

“A herd of wolves is quieter and more at one than So many men, unless they all have one reason in them or have one power over them.”

> According to Hobbes:
“Without a common power to keep them all in awe, it is not possible for individuals to live in society.”

I. REASONS FOR ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
Following are the reasons for the necessity of administration of justice.

(i) No common reason among men:
According to salmond, men do not have one reason in them and each is moved by his own interests and passions. The only alternative is one power over men.

(ii) Man is fighting animal:
Man is by nature a fighting animal and force is the ultima ratio of all mankind.

(iii) To stop criminal minority:
Force is necessary to stop the criminal minority and prevent them from gaining an unfair advantage over the law-abiding majority in the state.

(iv) Check on Injustice:
Without physical force, injustice is unchecked, and the life of the people is solitary, poor, nasty and short

(v) Man is a social animal:
The social nature of the man demands that he must live in society. While living so, man must have experienced a conflict of interests and that created the

necessity for providing the administration of justice.
4. ORIGIN OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
The origin and growth of administration of justice is identical with the origin and growth of man. The social nature of man demands that he must live in society. While living so, he must have experienced a conflict of interests and that created the necessity for providing for the administration of justice. The origin and growth of administration of justice may be divided into three stages.

I. FIRST STAGE:
At the first stage personal vengeance was allowed every man carried his life in his hands. He was liable to be attacked at any time and he could resist by overpowering his opponent. At that stage, every man was a judge in his own cause and might was the sole measure of right.

II. SECOND STAGE:
The second stage started with the rise of political states. However those states were not strong enough to regulate crime and inflict punishment on the criminals. The state merely regulated private vengeance and violent self-help. The state enforced the concept of “a tooth for a tooth”, “an eye for an eye”, “a life for a life”. The state provided that a life shall not be taken for a tooth or for an eye.

III. THIRD STAGE:
With the growth of the power of the state, the state began to act as a judge to assess liability and impose penalty. It provided punishment for private vengeance. The civil law and administration of civil justice helped the wronged and became a substitute for the violent self-help of the primitive days. At present administration of justice is a natural corollary to the growth in power of political state.

5. CLASSIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
Administration of justice is divided into two parts:

I. Administration of civil justice
II. Administration of criminal justice

I. ADMINISTRATION OF CIVIL JUSTICE:
Administration of civil justice is dealt within civil proceedings. The object of civil justice is to enforce rights.

> Kinds of rights:
There are two rights connected with the civil justice:

(i) Primary (ii) Secondary

(i) Primary Rights:

Primary rights are those rights which exist as such. It arises out of a conduct. All fundamental rights are primary rights. A primary right may be enforced by specific enforcement.

(ii) Sanctioning or secondary rights:

Sanctioning rights are those rights which come into being after the violation of primary right.

Sanctioning rights are:

> the right to the compensated by damages by the wrong-doer

> the right to exact the imposition of pecuniary

penalty on the wrong doer by penal action.

> Illustration:

‘A’ enters into a contract his right to have the contract performed is primary right. If contract is broke, his right to damages for the loss caused to him for the breach of contract is sanctioning right.

II. ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE:

Administration of criminal justice is dealt within criminal proceedings. The object of criminal justice is to punish the wrong-doer. From very ancient time, a number of theories have been given concerning the purpose of punishment which may be broadly divided into two classes. The view of one class is that, the end of criminal justice is to protect and add to welfare of the state and society. The view of other class is that the purpose of punishment is retribution.

5. DISTINCTION BETWEEN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE:

The difference between criminal justice and civil justice cannot be considered in terms of natural acts or the physical consequences of the act. Following are the differences between civil and criminal justice.

(i) As to Administration:
Civil justice is administered according to one set of forms.

> Criminal justice according to another set of
forms.

(ii) Place of Administration:

> Civil justice is administered in one set of Courts i.e., civil Courts.
> Criminal justice is administered in different set of Courts i.e., criminal Courts.

(iii) As to object:
> The object of civil justice is to enforce rights,
> The object of criminal justice is to punish the wrongs.

(iv) Proceedings:
> Civil justice is dealt within civil proceedings.
> Criminal justice is dealt within criminal proceedings.

(v) Dealing:
> Civil justice deals with private wrongs.
> Criminal justice deals with public wrongs i.e., crimes against society.

(vi) As to Parties:
> In civil proceedings, private individuals are parties i.e., plaintiff vs. defendant.
> In criminal proceedings state constitutes itself
as a party i.e., state vs. accused.

(vii) Consequences:
> Civil wrongs are less harmful.
> Crimes are more harmful.

(viii) As to outcome:
> Civil proceedings result in judgment for damages etc.
> Criminal proceedings result in one or a number of punishment.

(ix) As to Institution of Proceedings:
> In a civil wrong, the injured person need not sue the wrong-doer.
> In a crime, the person injured cannot prevent proceedings being taken to punish the wrongdoer for the state controls the procedure.

6. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF LEGAL JUSTICE:
The legal justice has many advantages as well as disadvantages.

I. ADVANTAGES:
(i) Legal justice ensures uniformity and certainty in the administration of justice,
(iii) Everyone knows what the law is and there is no scope of arbitrary action,
(iv) The judges have to give decisions according to the declared law of the country.
(v) There is a impartiality in administration of justice.
(vi) Impartiality is secured in the administration of justice
(viii) Judges are required to give their decisions according to the pre-determined legal principles and they cannot go beyond them
(viii) Law is already laid down and judges have to act accordingly.
x) Legal justice represents the collective wisdom of the community and that is always to be preferred to the wisdom of any one individual.

II. DISADVANTAGES:
(i) One disadvantage is that it is rigid.
(ii) Law has already been laid down in precedents.
(iii) It is not always possible to adjust it to the changing needs of society,
(iv) Society may change more rapidly than legal justice and may result in hardship and injustice in certain cases,
(v) Arother defects of legal justice is its formalism or technicalities,
(vi) Judges attach more importance to legal technicalities than they deserve.
(vii) The legal justice is complex. Modern society is becoming more and more complicated if law is to serve its needs it has to be complicated.

7. CONCLUSION:
To conclude, I can say, in the words of Prof. Sidgwick “In determining a nation’s rank in political civilization, no test is more decisive than the degree in which justice as defined by the law is actually realized in its judicial administration.” The modern administration of justice is a natural corollary to the growth in power of political state, which began to act as a judge to assess liability and impose penalty.

1. INTRODUCTION:
“Administration of Justice is the firmest pillar of the Government. It is sovereign and cannot be violated with impunity.” (George Washington)
The most essential functions of a state are primarily two, war and administration of justice. If a state is not capable of performing either or both of these functions, it cannot be called a state The most important and primary purpose of law is to achieve justice and justice can be achieved through administration.
2. DEFINITION OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
(i) By Salmond:
“The administration of justice implies the maintenance of rights within a political community by means of the physical force of the state.”
3. NECESSITY OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
In primitive times might was the sole right Every man was his own judge. A person wronged would seek revenge by his own hands. To stop this loot it appears necessary that some strong tribunal should hold administration and now a state perform this function.
> According to Jeremy Taylor:
“A herd of wolves is quieter and more at one than So many men, unless they all have one reason in them or have one power over them.”
> According to Hobbes:
“Without a common power to keep them all in awe, it is not possible for individuals to live in society.”
I. REASONS FOR ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
Following are the reasons for the necessity of administration of justice.
(i) No common reason among men:
According to salmond, men do not have one reason in them and each is moved by his own interests and passions. The only alternative is one power over men. (ii) Man is fighting animal:
Man is by nature a fighting animal and force is the ultima ratio of all mankind.
(iii) To stop criminal minority:
Force is necessary to stop the criminal minority and prevent them from gaining an unfair advantage over the law-abiding majority in the state. (iv) Check on Injustice:
Without physical force, injustice is unchecked, and the life of the people is solitary, poor, nasty and short
(v) Man is a social animal:
The social nature of the man demands that he must live in society. While living so, man must have experienced a conflict of interests and that created the
necessity for providing the administration of justice.
4. ORIGIN OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
The origin and growth of administration of justice is identical with the origin and growth of man. The social nature of man demands that he must live in society. While living so, he must have experienced a conflict of interests and that created the necessity for providing for the administration of justice. The origin and growth of administration of justice may be divided into three stages.
I. FIRST STAGE:
At the first stage personal vengeance was allowed every man carried his life in his hands. He was liable to be attacked at any time and he could resist by overpowering his opponent. At that stage, every man was a judge in his own cause and might was the sole measure of right.
II. SECOND STAGE:
The second stage started with the rise of political states. However those states were not strong enough to regulate crime and inflict punishment on the criminals. The state merely regulated private vengeance and violent self-help. The state enforced the concept of “a tooth for a tooth”, “an eye for an eye”, “a life for a life”. The state provided that a life shall not be taken for a tooth or for an eye.
III. THIRD STAGE:
With the growth of the power of the state, the state began to act as a judge to assess liability and impose penalty. It provided punishment for private vengeance. The civil law and administration of civil justice helped the wronged and became a substitute for the violent self-help of the primitive days. At present administration of justice is a natural corollary to the growth in power of political state.
5. CLASSIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
Administration of justice is divided into two parts:
I. ‘ Administration of civil justice
II. Administration of criminal justice
I. ADMINISTRATION OF CIVIL JUSTICE:
Administration of civil justice is dealt within civil proceedings. The object of civil justice is to enforce rights. > Kinds of rights:
There are two rights connected with the civil justice:
(i) Primary (ii) Secondary (i) Primary Rights:
Primary rights are those rights which exist as such. It arises out of a conduct. All fundamental rights are primary rights. A primary right may be enforced by specific enforcement.
(ii) Sanctioning or secondary rights:
Sanctioning rights are those rights which come into being after the violation of primary right. Sanctioning rights are:
> the right to the compensated by damages by the wrong-doer
> the right to exact the imposition of pecuniary
penalty on the wrong doer by penal action. > Illustration:
‘A’ enters into a contract his right to have the contract performed is primary right. If contract is broke, his right to damages for the loss caused to him for the breach of contract is sanctioning right.
II. ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE:
Administration of criminal justice is dealt within criminal proceedings. The object of criminal justice is to punish the wrong-doer. From very ancient time, a number of theories have been given concerning the purpose of punishment which may be broadly divided into two classes. The view of one class is that, the end of criminal justice is to protect and add to welfare of the state and society. The view of other class is that the purpose of punishment is retribution.
5. DISTINCTION BETWEEN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE:
The difference between criminal justice and civil justice cannot be considered in terms of natural acts or the physical consequences of the act. Following are the differences between civil and criminal justice. (i) As to Administration:
Civil justice is administered according to one set of forms > Criminal justice according to another set of
forms. (ii) Place of Administration:
> Civil justice is administered in one set of Courts
i.e., civil Courts. > Criminal justice is administered in different set
of Courts i.e., criminal Courts.
(iii) As to object:
> The object of civil justice is to enforce rights, > The object of criminal justice is to punish the
wrongs. (iv) Proceedings:
> Civil justice is dealt within civil proceedings. > Criminal justice is dealt within criminal
proceedings. (v) Dealing:
> Civil justice deals with private wrongs. > Criminal justice deals with public wrongs i.e.,
crimes against society. (vi) As to Parties:
> In civil proceedings, private individuals are parties i.e., plaintiff vs. defendant.
> In criminal proceedings state constitutes itself
as a party i.e., state vs. accused. (vii) Consequences: > Civil wrongs are less harmful.
> Crimes are more harmful. (viii) As to outcome:
> Civil proceedings result in judgment for damages etc.
> Criminal proceedings result in one or a number
of punishment. (ix) As to Institution of Proceedings:
> In a civil wrong, the injured person need not sue the wrong-doer.
> In a crime, the person injured cannot prevent proceedings being taken to punish the wrongdoer for the state controls the procedure.
6. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
OF LEGAL JUSTICE:
The legal justice has many advantages as well as disadvantages.
I. ADVANTAGES:
(i) Legal justice ensures uniformity and certainty
in the administration of justice, (iii) Everyone knows what the law is and there is no
scope of arbitrary action, (iv) The judges have to give decisions according to
the declared law of the country.
(v) There is a impartiality in administration of justice.
(vi) Impartiality is secured in the administration of justice
(viii) Judges are required to give their decisions according to the pre-determined legal principles and they cannot go beyond them
(viii) Law is already laid down and judges have to act accordingly.
x) Legal justice represents the collective wisdom of the community and that is always to be preferred to the wisdom of any one individual.
II. DISADVANTAGES:
(i) One disadvantage is that it is rigid.
(ii) Law has already been laid down in precedents.
(iii) It is not always possible to adjust it to the
changing needs of society, (iv) Society may change more rapidly than legal
justice and may result in hardship and injustice
in certain cases, (v) Arother defects of legal justice is its formalism
or technicalities, (vi) Judges attach more importance to legal
technicalities than they deserve.
(vii) The legal justice is complex. Modern society is becoming more and more complicated if law is to serve its needs it has to be complicated.
7. CONCLUSION:
To conclude, 1 can say, in the words of Prof. Sidgwick “In determining a nation’s rank in political civilization, no test is more decisive than the degree in which justice as defined by the law is actually realized in its judicial administration.” The modern administration of justice is a natural corollary to the growth in power of political state, which began to act as a judge to assess liability and impose penalty.

There is absolutely no doubt about the fact that you can always secure a good job if you get a criminal justice degree. The encouraging thing is that even if you are currently employed but want a better pay, you can opt for a higher degree in field of criminal justice.

This is when you can opt for an online criminal justice degree and secure your future in the right way. But before you go any further, you need to keep in mind that the university or college you choose can have a direct impact on your hiring and advancement opportunities.

When considering the idea of earning a degree online, you need to ensure that you get the finest quality education. You will be investing a lot of your time, energy, and money. Therefore, you need to pay attention to a number of important points when opting for a criminal justice degree online.

A. When you prepare yourself to take part in an online criminal justice program, you should ensure that you are opting for an accredited university or college. Criminal justice job recruiters and law enforcement agencies are now extremely careful about credentials.

They offer jobs only when they are done verifying your college and university accreditation. Nevertheless, there are several benefits of opting for an accredited criminal justice degree online. For instance, you can easily trust these universities, their curriculums, and the faculty. They offer quality education and are world-renowned and widely accepted.

B. One of the most important points to consider is the quality of online criminal justice degree courses. Here you will have to pay special attention to the curriculum, which should provide you with a solid foundation in this particular area.

You should get more information about the whole criminal justice system along with getting detailed info about research methods, legal system, theories of criminal behavior, crime analysis, law enforcement systems, and homeland security. So, always consider the types of courses covered by a specific online criminal justice program.

C. It is also a good idea to take your time and opt for a regionally accredited university or college. Actually, accredited universities are always better because they continually undergo reviews and inspections. This compels universities to maintain the high standard of education. When you talk about regional accreditation, it means you really cannot go wrong with these types of universities and colleges because they pay more attention to quality.

These are the few important things that you need to consider when selecting an online criminal justice degree program. However, you should also bear one important thing in mind that a criminal justice class online can be quite tough and demanding. Since you have to invest more time as compared to what you spend when earning another degree online, it is advisable to stop and think if you are in a position to maintain a balance between your job and degree.

Introduction

The criminal justice system is evolving with time. Gone are the days when it simply focused on long prison sentences as the only way to deal with crime. Public opinion is changing and so should the criminal justice system. There is more emphasis on attacking underlying causes and not just surface issues. More and more experts agree that crime prevention is the way to go in this situation. They assert that prison sentences, especially for non-violent offenders, only deal with the problem temporarily. They also believe that crime prevention should be the centrepiece of the criminal justice system. (Pfeiffer, p 55, 2003)

Crime prevention should be the focus of the criminal justice system because it has overwhelming public support

A Research conducted by the Heart Research Associates Inc. on the perception of the public on crime prevention found that majority of the people believed in a more pro-active rather than reactive approach. This research was conducted in the year 2002. But ten years ago, when the public was asked about what they thought about crime prevention, 42% said the criminal justice system should focus on punitive action while 48% supported crime prevention. These statistics have changed drastically with time. In 2002, when a similar research was conducted by the same research company, it was found that 65% of the public believe in dealing with root causes while 32% wanted more severe measures to take precedence in the criminal justice system. The survey also indicated the following preferences.

Prevention

39-Yes

37-No

Punishment

21-Yes

20-No

Enforcement

18-Yes

19-No

Rehabilitation

17-Yes

17-No

Source; Peter D. Hart Research Associates, Inc (2002): Changing Public Attitudes toward

the Criminal Justice System; Journal for Open Society Institute

Crime prevention deals with root causes

It should be noted that most of the time, there are cases in which people break the law because they have no where else to turn to. Such people normally come from deteriorating neighbourhoods. They feel that there is not much that can be done about their situation and they opt to choose crime as their only means for survival. Most of these criminals normally have very low educational backgrounds. Consequently, their options in the formal employment sector are quite limited. They need to earn a source of livelihood and still have to meet their daily needs. However, the public only offers them temporary jobs that do not pay as much. Some individuals may feel the need to deal with this lack of necessities through crime. Overly, the underlying problem is education, if the government was to invest in education of such criminals then there would be no need to commit crimes and all the other issues will fall into place. (Maguire, p 207-265, 2000)

Most criminals commit their crimes because their neighbourhoods make it easy for them to do so. In most Cities, there are certain localities that have been ignored by the governing authorities of the day to such an extent that their buildings and other infrastructural facilities are simply deplorable. It is therefore easier for criminals to break into such systems and take what they would want without to much struggle. If some investments had been made into those neighbourhoods, then there would be better facilities and better security for its residents thus discouraging crime.

Certain criminals do not have a sense of moral values. Their environment has served a fertile ground for moral deterioration. They see no benefit in caring about what other people around them may feel as a result of their actions. Consequently, most of these criminals end up committing their crimes because they do not know what is expected from them form society. Crime prevention as a strategy for crime prevention could deal with this by targeting youth offenders. Most of them could be placed in community prevention centres where they could go taught a number of societal norms. (Kenney, p23, 1998)

Many of the neighbourhoods that some of these youth come from are usually associated wit low levels of family support. Some offenders may be tempted to commit crimes because they feel that they have nothing to loose. They do not feel loved and cared for and consequently have low self esteem. According to them, crime is a way of letting out some of their pent up anger and frustrations. It should be possible to prevent crimes of this nature if youth were targeted. The reason why it is useful to target the youth is because they are not yet that far gone; they are still at a point when they can be moulded and transformed. At their age, they have not hardened already. Such youth can be taught fundamental truths in and their psychological problems can be addressed adequately in community centres.

Since the issue of employment contributes to many criminal cases, crime prevention strategies can deal with that issue and eliminate the need to commit crimes due to that reason. This can be achieved through the process of instilling potential offenders with job skills. Consequently, such people will have no need to result to crime as a means of earning a living since they have other alternatives available

Failure in past approaches

Crime prevention should take precedence within the criminal justice system because the punitive approach has failed. Most psychologists argue that when criminals are simply arrested and taken into prisons for a certain period of time, they may not feel the need to reform. They actually claim that this serves to reinforce certain criminal activities. This is because they get to interact with fellow criminal and even learn more tricks to the trade and by the time they leave their prison cells, they are worse of than when they came in. What this means is that the criminal justice system is just going around in circles; criminals commit crimes, stay in prison, then go back to where they started from. When criminals go back to their neighbourhood, the very reason why they committed their crimes in the first place still exists. They will still be faced with family problems, lack of employment and other social evils. These circumstances will propel them into crime and they will end up going back to prison. This is the reason why drug related cases still continue. Psychologists believe that criminals perform criminal behaviour because of these social pressures and they need to be addressed if the criminal justice system hopes to be effective in the future. The ultimate solution would therefore be crime prevention. (Austin, p 34, 2001)

Crime prevention would be quite favourable in drug related cases instead of punitive actions. For example, those caught should be placed in mandatory drug treatment centres. They could also be subjected to community service instead of locking them up in prison cells. There was some sort of disparity in the way the criminal justice system has been handling perpetrators. A person who has committed a burglary and another who has been caught using drugs are given more or less the same treatment through prison sentencing. This is not a fair or effective way of going about the crime problem.

It should also be noted that there may be certain individuals who lack the ability to move on with their lives because the way the criminal justice system has been in the past is that it condemns and segregates offenders. For expel, when one has been convicted to serve a prison term and they complete their term, they not allowed to drive a car even if they have a driving licence. Besides this, they are not allowed to own houses or get certain jobs. What this does is that it frustrates them the more. Such individuals have no room to have fresh start because most of them lack public goodwill. What this does is that it encourages them to continue with a life of crime because they feel that society is already biased towards them. One can therefore conclude that the criminal justice system has not been very effective in the process of dealing with future crime incidences. Crime prevention is the only alternative to this endless cycle of crime. (Oxford Handbook of Criminology, p13, 2003)

Nipping crime at the bud

Many experts have argued that crime prevention will be more successful since most hard core criminals started out as youthful vandals who were shown the right direction. Some people have argued that the countries that have implemented crime prevention strategies have been very effective in crime stoppage. A case in point is the battle against alcohol and drug abuse in Sweden. The campaign was started by psychologist and criminologist Nils Bejerot. He believed that the drug control system used in Sweden before his reforms was quite inadequate. He asserted that if the new carriers of the drug taking habit were dealt with before hand, then there would be chances of preventing them from becoming ambassadors for the drug taking problem. He conducted an experiment in the year 1965 at Stockholm.

This psychiatrist suggested that those who had been caught by police using small amounts of drugs should be placed in treatment program that is mandatory in nature. This would go along way in ensuring that all the future cases of drug dealing were taken care of. In line with the program, local authorities should conduct follow ups to ensure that those particular candidates stay committed to the prevention program. This has gone along way in eliminating drug abuse cases in Sweden. Statistics testify to the effectiveness of this strategy. In Sweden only one in 1,400 may be imprisoned for possession of illegal drugs. This is such an achievement given the fcat that other countries like the United States arrest about one in very 136 people or the possession of illegal drugs. It was also found that due to crime prevention in Sweden, there are much fewer chances of getting students with drugs in comparison to the seventies. Statistics have also shown that in Sweden there are less chances of drug abuse in the entire continent of Europe. This also applies to cases of drug abuse recently and five years ago. Their crime prevention strategy has received more enforcement from the criminal justice system over the past years ago and this corresponds to less cases. Sweden does not apply its drug policy to new offenders only, it also has a follow up program for convicted offenders.

Accidents that occur due to alcohol abuse or drunk driving are quite common in countries that have not implemented certain crime prevention strategies. Local authorities should go out of their way to ensure that crimes resulting from alcohol intake are eliminated. This can be achieved by introduction of breath-testers. Drivers who exceed allowable limits should be prevented from driving by placing them into rehabilitation centres. Such a proactive approach will ensure that there will be limited cases in the future. (Cox & Wade, p 105, 1998)

Gang violence can also be prevented through the use of the overall community. The police can work hand in hand with local residents to monitor the activities of these gangs and these collaborative efforts will help police during the prevention of such kinds of offences.

There should be more emphasis on the youth in order to ensure that future crimes are not committed. Crime prevention efforts need to be directed to the youth because they account for about twenty percent of all the cases reported to the police. It was also found that those who happened to be caught once were less likely to get caught again. However, there are cases of persistent offenders that would be arrested more than once. A research conducted among these repeat offenders found that there were certain characteristics common to most of these offenders. They are as follows;

aggressiveness and anger
impulsiveness
alcohol and drug abuse
anti-social peer pressure
no vocational skills
lack of parental supervision(Sherman, p 54, 1997)

The research also identified the fact that these behavioural traits could be prevented by a strategy called early intervention. Most of these youth had potential o become worse but with the right approach more could be done to ensure that this did not continue again. Crime prevention among the youth can be made in such a way that there are coordinated efforts towards dealing with youth offenders. First of all, there can be creation of bodies to coordinate work done towards these efforts. On top of this, there should be greater involvement of other stakeholders. The police should cooperate with the departments of children and youth affairs.

Early intervention needs to be conducted in cases where families seem particularly vulnerable to future crimes. Such families are normally characterised by the traits that were listed above. These are efforts that can be conducted by the policing unit in conjunction with other local authorities. However, there may be instances when some youth are at higher risks than others. Those at higher risks need to be placed under closer and more severe programs.

Prevention of crime needs to be done through the involvement of families too. In case youth offenders have been caught, their family members need to be consulted on what they feel could be the best methods to use when tackling their child. This can be achieved through the conduction of conferences that involve law enforcement officers, social workers and the parents. This will help in unveiling some of the underlying problems and will also help in the customisation of solutions to suite specific cases. (Sherman, p 54, 1997)

Conclusion

Crime prevention should take the greatest precedence in the criminal justice system because it has overwhelming public support. A survey asking people what the law enforcement authorities need to prioritise indicated that there was a need to place more emphasis on crime prevention rather than other strategies. The second reason why crime prevention should take up priority in the criminal justice system is the fact that most crimes are committed as a result of certain social problems. Crime prevention identifies those problems and deals with them thereby eliminating future cases of crime. It should also be noted that past systems have not been effective in the criminal justice system. They have only enforced criminal behaviour; crime prevention is a better approach because it tackles the problem from the inside out. Lastly, countries that have prioritised crime prevention have shown statistically, that this is an effective method; their crime rates have reduced. With all this backing, crime prevention should be made top priority.

References

Austin, J. (2001): Sentencing Guidelines: A State Perspective; Ph.D., Executive Vice-President, journal for the National Council on Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 3, No. 8, p 34

Cox, S. & Wade, J. (1998): The Criminal Justice Network: An Introduction; New York: McGraw-Hill, p 105

Kenney, D. (1998): Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach. Police Executive

Research Forum Journal, Vol. 8, No. 13, pp. 23

Maguire, E. (2000): Have Changes in Policing Reduced Violent Crime? Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000. pp. 207-265

Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2003); Oxford University Press, p 13

Pfeiffer, C. (2003): Trends in Juvenile Violence in European Countries; McMillan Publishers, p. 55

Sherman, L. et al (1997): Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising; Routledge Publishers, p 54