B.A.Ware

What are the causes of crime, is it poverty is it unemployment or is it the materialistic society we have created. I think it is a mixture of all three. Look at what has happened in the Welsh mining villages after the pit closures, unemployment above 50%, drug crimes going through the roof and crime rates rocketing, youngsters with no future and no foreseeable future.
Who is responsible for this crime I lay the blame squarely at the governments door. If you do not provide employment for your citizens what happens they are surrounded with material things they cannot afford. This is no excuse to steal but I think it has some basis on one of the causes of crime.
What are the true costs of crime I watched a programme on the cost of one youth who was involved in crime from an early age with police, social services, courts, Probation officers and jail; by the time this youth was 21 he had cost the public purse about £500,000. Now if a portion of that money were to go INTO phpbb_subsides i.e. like the pits surely we would save money in the long run and it would reduce the fear of crime.
I am not saying this is the sole reason for crime but I think it is one of the causes of crime that this government has not addressed.
As more and more unskilled and vocational jobs are shipped abroad or people are bought in to do these jobs more young people will have a sense of hopelessness and the problem will escalate. This is just my opinion and I would like to hear from others what they think the causes of crime are.
I would be interested in an opinion from anyone from one of the welsh pit villages

Bluemerle

What are the causes of crime?

Probably boredom, and drugs :roll:

Aardvark

I agree, there is no one cause.

Part of the cause, however, IMHO, is the break down of 'traditional values'. There was poverty in the past, far worse than anything we have now, but crime was lower. Don't get misled by either of the big parties throwing statistics about, they are all based on recent history. Recorded crimes in the fifties were few and far between. Each policeman dealt with an average of 2 crimes per year and spent a lot of time checking lock ups and walking the beat less than 50 years ago. Today each policeman deals with 40 to 50 crimes per year.

In the interim period the church has evaporated and gone wishy washy, materialism and consumerism have taken over and shopping is now a key hobby, mass movement of peoples with different values has further eroded the common ground that society once had, schools have lost both the power and the will to deal with anti-social behaviour at source. Parenting skills are no longer passed down in a society where one in three children are born outside of wedlock/stable relationships and divorce and instability is rife.

The values which were inculcated over 150 years will not be replaced overnight.

Incidentally, which is worse - a dissillusioned youth with no hope and no prospects mugging for a few pounds, or, for instance, a middle class former director with a decent schooling who syphons off, allegedly, £60K+ of benefits from our taxes? Who has the lesser moral right?

social observer

I dream of just dealing with 50 crimes a year ! try doubling that and throw in 5 times the beaurocracy associated with each one and you're closer to the truth.

I agree there is a whole range of things that have contributed to it.

1/ A total lack of understanding about one's responsibilities.
2/ An ingrained perception that everyone should pander to YOU (collective noun).
3/ There are many more things that are counted as crimes nowadays, and people are much more willing to report and see people prosecuted for very minor things than before - example, a 50p plastic gnome gets kicked over and broken by the neighbour, annoying? - Yes, would you call police and demand he gets arrested? Believe it or not, a good number of people would now. Even if they only report it still adds to the figures.
4/ The 'I want it so I'll have it now' society
5/ Drugs - definitely, primarily the aquisitive drugs like heroin and crack cocaine.
6/ The growing irresponsible attitude to alcohol, both by individuals and society in general.
7/ Lack of positive role models in the media. Try making a series where the main characters aren't scrapping, stealing, shagging other people's partners, unemployed, slackers, or doing drugs. Then see if you can get funding for it, let alone see if it gets good ratings.
8/ Lack of balanced home life, ie two parents offering some stability in the early days.

There are loads more, but I've got to go to work now and pull my hair out dealing with all the above.

__________________
If you don\'t like what I think, attack the opinion with Logic and reason, don\'t attack the opinion holder!

C_steam

Interesting subject I think. Let me throw in a slightly curved ball:-

I had a long discussion regarding work thefts - people who stole from their employers, petty things really, then lost their job - maybe over a theft of something that might even be worthless.

At the disciplinaries necessary, of course the employer always asks "why" did the employee do this thing - and the answer, almost invariably, is "I don't know - I just did it"

Further discussions, including with the police and also relating to people who defraud their employers in other ways (extended and false sick leave, for example) led to some agreement that for a large percentage of offenders the reason for commiting the crime is nothing less than "Because they can".

I'm not suggesting that this is the reason for major crime, or crime relating to feeding drug habits, but for a large majority of smaller crimes, and particularly vandalism and anti-social behaviour, one potential main reason is this 'because I can' attitude.

By committing such acts the perpetrator is affirming to themselves that they have some control over events and over authority - they have "got one over" on what they perceive to be 'the system'. And once they have done this once, and got away with it, they will continue. This is backed up by the fact that most of the people who carry out such acts have little real control over their own lives, exacerbated by reliance on the state / employer for money and a place to live.

In other words, there is no 'reason' for the crime to be committed, except for the sociological reasons. The only way to stop it is to both make the crime harder to commit in the first place and really hammer down on the offence the first time an individual commits such.

To prevent it in the first place society HAS to make individuals much more self reliant and hugely emphasise the individuals responsibility for their own actions.

Tom Wilde

I remember once reading a newspaper article by a wishy-washy dogooder who had had an interesting conversation with a friendly retired burglar. He had asked the former burglar about why he felt it was okay to pinch stuff. (This is from memory - I probably have the details wrong)

The ex-burglar set out to explain himself:

"Well John, suppose you walked past a house and you saw the door had been left open, and there was a stereo there. You'd take it, wouldn't you?"

"Er, no."

"No, no, you don't understand. Suppose there was no chance at all of you being caught. Suppose you'd definitely get away with it. You'd take it then, wouldn't you?"

"Er, no...."

etc.

Complete mutual incomprehension. The ex-burglar thought the only reason for not pinching stuff was the fact that you might get caught, and that people who don't pinch stuff are held back only by fear of punishment. He genuinely didn't 'get' the idea that pinching stuff is something you just shouldn't do.

You could try saying to him "Suppose it was your stereo? You wouldn't like it then if somebody nicked it, would you?" I suspect he'd reply that if he left his door unlocked it would be his own silly fault.

You could try telling him that if he steals, God will smite him. However, the available evidence suggests that God is too busy smiting other people, such as hotel-staff in Thai beach resorts. Maybe God will smite him in an afterlife, but if the burglar doesn't believe in an afterlife, that doesn't help us.

You could try telling him that he'll have more self-respect, and more respect from other people, if he works at an honest trade rather than burglary. That might do it, assuming he can find an honest job. Of course, if he is a junkie too, then he might not be too bothered about self respect any more.

Other than that, you need to get him to see the people he is stealing from as people with feelings, people who are his brothers and sisters and not just anonymous mugs. But lots of adults don't have the imagination to do this, especially with regard to people they've never met. If you want people to have that sort of empathy you need to bring them up right and educate them right.

In other words, I think I agree with C_steam on this one. It is about developing a sense of individual responsibility.

social observer

This is one of those threads where everybody is giving the subject some serious thought, which I think is the best way to approach these things, especially such wide ranging issues as this.

Whilst agreeing that self responsibility, and instilling the necessary sense of 'right verses wrong' is important, what actual mechanism do we use to achieve this?

Something once occurred to me when chatting to one 'regular' who knew the system well enough to know what can and cannot be levied against him.

We are aware of the bill of rights in the US, and the pale, vague twisted version that the EU have forced upon us.

All very well to have a bill of rights/human rights act. But nowhere in either of those documents are there any references to people's responsibilities.

So how about we have both a bill of rights and a bill of responsibilities?

Crimes could be based on a breach of one section or another and no one would be able to ignore their own role in society.

Eg. (and these are top of head suggestions);

You have the right to travel on a public road by any means you wish.
You have the responsibility to ensure you travel safely with due regard for other's safety.

You have the right to own and use a vehicle on the public road;
You have the responsibilty to ensure it is suitably road worthy and you have reached the appropriate driving competance (ie passed your test)

You have the right to own and enjoy your own property;
You have the responsibility to permit others to enjoy their own property unless it impinges on you.

Case law would soon settle grey areas, new laws would not really be necessary in many cases because disputes such as damage, rowdy behaviour, aggression, theft, assault etc would almost certainly breach one or more sections of those bills.

People's responsibilities would be enshrined in writing, they would be lawfully required to act like civilised human beings rather than just crossing our collective fingers and hoping they will 'do the right thing'.

I know its very simplistic, but does anybody think there is any merit in considering a system like this?

__________________
If you don\'t like what I think, attack the opinion with Logic and reason, don\'t attack the opinion holder!

Nick Moody

I have nothing particularly against a bill of responsibilities but perhaps it should be remembered that most responsibilites are already in law, such as keeping the peace, vehicle regulations, going to school, protecting others etc, etc. If you think about a subject where you feel that it should be in a bill of responsibilities I'm fairly certain that there will be a law somewhere to say that people should be doing just that. Some of the law maybe archaic and probably unknown by many people so there could be some justification for reminders. However it would be impossible to encode all responsibilities so there would be the danger of responsibility exclusion if not in the bill, ie if it's not in the bill we don't have to do it.

social observer

I have to admit, you've got me on that one, opt out if its not in the bill.

The question remains then, what devices/methods do we employ to improve people's desire to act in a responsible manner. How do we instill that sense of right and wrong.

The question suggests a stronger input in early education. But I know very little about the education system, only the fall out in later life.

__________________
If you don\'t like what I think, attack the opinion with Logic and reason, don\'t attack the opinion holder!

kernow

The whole problem with most laws ( apart from motoring) are not enforced. As far as I know riding a bike on the pavement is against the law, but when did you last read about someone being convicted for this offence. My village had two policemen when I was a child, the village has now doubled in size and no-longer has any police at all. Can't afford them, probably because all our money is either going to Brussels or providing homes for immigrants!