2 Crime Measurement and Statistics

Overview

Crime is a multifaceted concept deeply entrenched in the fabric of human society, reflecting not only legal violations but also moral, ethical, and cultural standards. Essentially, crime can be understood as any behavior that violates the established norms, laws, or expectations within a society as agreed-upon standards by a prevailing authority, whether it be a government, religious institution, or community consensus. These norms and laws are the product of social agreements and structures that define acceptable conduct and regulate interactions among individuals. Crime, therefore, represents a deviation from these agreed-upon standards, whether it involves theft, assault, fraud, or other prohibited actions.

Philosophically, crime raises fundamental questions about the nature of law, morality, and human behavior. What drives individuals to transgress established boundaries? Are some actions inherently wrong, or are they defined as such by social constructs? These inquiries delve into the realms of ethics, psychology, and sociology, probing the complexities of human nature and social order.

The definition of crime is not static; it evolves alongside societal norms, legal frameworks, and shifting perspectives on justice. Social structures play a crucial role in shaping perceptions of what constitutes crime and in determining the consequences for those who engage in criminal behavior. These structures include legal systems, cultural norms, economic arrangements, and power dynamics within society. For example, a behavior considered criminal in one society may be accepted or even encouraged in another, depending on the prevailing social values, cultural systems of belief, and legal frameworks.

Crime manifests differently across communities and is influenced by a myriad of factors including sociocultural factors, economic disparities, and power dynamics. Moreover, social structures can influence the distribution of crime within a society. Factors such as socioeconomic status, access to resources, and community cohesion can impact both the likelihood of individuals engaging in criminal behavior and their chances of being caught and punished for it. In societies with high levels of inequality, for instance, individuals may resort to crime as a means of survival or protest against perceived injustices. Additionally, social structures shape responses to crime, including the enforcement of laws, the administration of justice, and the rehabilitation of offenders. The effectiveness and fairness of these responses often depend on the extent to which formal social structures promote equality, access to resources, and accountability. In societies where social structures are characterized by systemic discrimination or corruption, for example, marginalized groups may face disproportionate policing, harsher punishments, and limited opportunities for rehabilitation. Understanding crime as a product of societal norms and structures is paramount as a foundational framework for examining the methodologies and implications of measuring crime and compiling statistics.

In the modern context, the practical task of measuring crime and compiling statistics takes on heightened significance imperative for maintaining public safety, administering justice, and shaping policies. Crime statistics serve as vital tools for policymakers, law enforcement agencies, and researchers, providing insights into patterns of criminal behavior, societal vulnerabilities, and the efficacy of interventions.

Measuring crime and compiling statistics is not merely an empirical endeavor; it is deeply intertwined with broader societal issues such as inequality, access to justice, and the effectiveness of law enforcement. The methods used to collect crime data, the definitions employed, and the interpretation of statistical trends are all crucial elements that are highly influenced by the social contexts in which they operate. Moreover, the reliability and accuracy of crime statistics can vary widely depending on the transparency of data collection processes, the biases of reporting mechanisms, and the inclusivity of marginalized voices.

In this chapter, we will investigate the methodologies, complexities, and challenges involved in measuring crime and compiling accurate statistics, as well as implications of quantifying crime within societies. From the intricacies of data collection to the interpretation of statistical trends, we will navigate the landscape of crime analysis, the tools and techniques used by researchers, policymakers, and law enforcement agencies to assess the prevalence and patterns of crime within American society. By critically engaging with these issues, we endeavor to deepen our understanding of crime as a social phenomenon and to contribute to more informed discussions and interventions aimed at addressing its root causes and consequences. Through this exploration, we aim to not only understand the empirical realities of crime but also to delve deeper into its philosophical underpinnings, enriching our comprehension of this complex and enduring facet of human existence.

 

 

2.1 Introduction to Crime

Crime encompasses a wide array of behaviors that deviate from established norms and laws within a society. Understanding crime involves delving into the philosophical and sociological dimensions that shape its definition, prevalence, and legal consequences. It’s not just about examining its manifestations but also exploring the underlying motivations and repercussions on communities and society as a whole, which is crucial for understanding its multifaceted nature.

In the subsequent section, we will delve into various categories of crime that serve as a framework that allows us to organize and analyze the diverse range of offenses observed in society. By evaluating these categories, we aim to unravel the complexities of criminal behavior, shedding light on the underlying factors driving different types of offenses and their impact on individuals, communities, and the broader social fabric. Through this exploration, we strive to deepen our understanding of crime and its multifaceted nature, laying the groundwork for informed discussions and interventions aimed at addressing its root causes and consequences.

2.1.1 Crime Categories

Every year, millions of crimes occur across the U.S., spanning a wide spectrum from the gravest offenses such as murder, rape, or assault, to relatively minor transgressions like shoplifting, littering, or video piracy (Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 2020b). Statistics and crime research play pivotal roles in elucidating crime patterns, addressing crime-related issues, and even unraveling the underlying dynamics of criminal behavior and social dynamics. However, before delving into crime measurements and statistics, it is imperative to establish a clear understanding of precisely what we are measuring and the parameters guiding our analyses.

Categorizing crime types into distinct classifications serves as a foundational tool for understanding the multifaceted nature of criminal behavior and its implications for society. Through this structured framework, stakeholders can develop more informed strategies to prevent crime, promote public safety, and foster social justice. Due to the broad range of crime types, each reflecting unique aspects of human behavior and societal dynamics, categorization becomes essential for effective analysis and understanding. From crimes of violence that threaten physical safety and wellbeing to offenses against public order that disrupt social harmony, and white-collar crimes that often involve sophisticated schemes targeting financial systems, the spectrum of criminal behavior is vast and multifaceted.

Categorization allows researchers, policymakers, and law enforcement agencies to organize this complexity into manageable frameworks, facilitating deeper insights into the underlying motivations, patterns, and consequences of criminal activity. By delineating distinct categories, we can identify common trends, disparities, and emerging threats within the realm of crime, enabling more targeted interventions and resource allocation.

In the subsequent section, we will explore how these categories—violent crimes, public order crimes, and white-collar crimes—serve as lenses through which to examine the diverse manifestations of criminal behavior, each offering unique insights into the complexities of crime in contemporary society. Through this exploration, we aim to deepen our understanding of the multifaceted nature of crime and lay the groundwork for informed discussions and interventions aimed at promoting safety, justice, and social well-being.

Figure 2.2

2.1.1.1 Violent Crimes

Violent crimes represent some of the most serious and devastatingly impactful offenses within the realm of criminal behavior. This category encompasses a range of actions that involve the use or threat of force against individuals or groups, often resulting in physical harm, injury, or death. Due to the severity of these types of offenses, violent offenders are often punished more harshly compared to non-violent criminal offenders.

Within the realm of violent crimes, we can delineate between two primary types: expressive and instrumental violence. Expressive violence is characterized by acts propelled by intense emotions like rage, anger, or frustration, resulting in impulsive and uncontrolled behavior. On the other hand, instrumental violence involves actions strategically aimed at achieving certain goals or objectives, such as bolstering the perpetrator’s financial or social standing. Consider, for instance, a scenario where an employee is assaulted and tied up during a bank robbery—an exemplification of instrumental violence. In this context, violence transcends being a mere outburst of emotion; instead, it becomes a calculated tool strategically employed to achieve a specific objective, namely, financial gain.

Violent crimes encompass a broad array of acts, each with distinct features and societal ramifications. To enhance research and analysis, violent crimes are often segmented into multiple categories based on similar characteristics, facilitating a more nuanced understanding of each type. For this section, we will use the following categories: gang-related crimes, intimate crimes, hate crimes, and homicide. Examining these groupings offers valuable insights into the intricate dynamics shaping such behavior, pinpointing common patterns, underlying motivations, and risk factors. Understanding these components is vital for developing effective strategies that prevent and address such offenses, while also promoting safety, justice, and resilience within communities affected by violent crime.

In the upcoming discussion, we will delve deeper into the subcategories of violent crime, examining their defining characteristics and societal impacts in greater depth. Through this exploration, we aim to foster a comprehensive understanding of the complexities of violent crime and inform evidence-based interventions that reduce its occurrence and mitigate its harm.

2.1.1.1.2 Gang-Related Violent Crimes

Among violent crimes, gang-related violence stands out as a distinctive subcategory that profoundly impacts communities worldwide. Gang-related violence encompasses a wide array of criminal activities perpetrated by organized groups, driven by a complexity of motivations such as territorial disputes, interpersonal conflicts among gang networks, drug trafficking, and other illicit enterprises.

Gang-related violence extends beyond mere criminal activities; it represents a subculture characterized by its own social norms, hierarchies, and codes of conduct (Anderson, 2000). Although gangs may form as a means of protection or survival within disadvantaged communities, their activities frequently extend beyond mere self-preservation, leading to significant social disruption and harm. These gangs often provide a sense of belonging and identity for marginalized individuals, drawing them into a cycle of violence and criminality. From street gangs in urban neighborhoods to organized crime syndicates operating across international borders, the extent and influence of gang-related violence are broad-spanning and multifaceted.

Territorial disputes lie at the heart of many gang-related conflicts, as rival groups vie for control over lucrative drug markets or other illicit activities. These disputes can escalate into acts of violence, including shootings, stabbings, or other forms of physical aggression, as gangs seek to assert dominance and protect their interests.

Interpersonal conflicts among gang members also contribute to the prevalence of gang-related violence. Disputes over perceived slights, betrayals, or challenges to authority within gang hierarchies can quickly escalate into violent confrontations. Another form of interpersonal conflict arises between rival gangs as they seek retribution for past offenses, often perpetuating cycles of retaliation and escalation, thus leading to a continuous cycle of violence.

In addition to the immediate physical threats posed by gang violence, such as shootings, stabbings, or assaults, gang activity also inflicts extensive consequences for the surrounding communities. Residents of these affected neighborhoods often experience heightened fear and insecurity, compounded by negative economic repercussions resulting from reduced property values and limited business opportunities in gang-controlled areas (Agnew & White, 1992; Ratcliffe & Taniguchi, 2008). Moreover, innocent bystanders, including children, may become unintended victims of gang-related shootings or other violent acts, further exacerbating the impact on community safety and cohesion. Additionally, the involvement of gangs in drug trafficking and other criminal enterprises adds another layer of complexity to gang-related violence. The pursuit of profit and power compels gangs to engage in illegal activities, fueling violence and perpetuating social instability within communities.

2.1.1.1.2.1 The National Youth Gang Survey

Understanding the dynamics of gang-related violence is crucial for devising effective strategies to combat this pervasive societal issue. The National Youth Gang Survey (NYGS) serves as a pivotal resource for policymakers, law enforcement agencies, researchers, and community organizations dedicated to addressing gang-related challenges. Its comprehensive data and analysis greatly contribute to informing evidence-based strategies aimed at reducing gang violence and improving community safety.

The NYGS collects information on the number of gangs, gang members, and gang-related crimes reported in different regions. By tracking these statistics over time, it assists law enforcement agencies, policymakers, and researchers in identifying areas with high gang activity and allocating resources accordingly (National Gang Center, n.d.). Moreover, the NYGS examines various aspects of gang involvement, including demographics of gang members, gang structure, recruitment methods, and the types of criminal activities associated with gangs. This detailed analysis provides valuable insights into the underlying factors contributing to gang formation and violence.

Additionally, the NYGS plays a crucial role in evaluating the effectiveness of gang prevention and intervention programs. By assessing changes in gang-related metrics before and after the implementation of such initiatives, researchers can determine which strategies are most successful in reducing gang activity and violence. Overall, the National Youth Gang Survey is an indispensable tool in the ongoing efforts to address and mitigate the impact of gang-related violence in communities across the U.S.

2.1.1.1.2 Intimate Crimes

Intimate partner violence encompasses a range of abusive behaviors that can occur within romantic or familial relationships, as well as interactions with acquaintances or relative strangers. This form of violence extends beyond physical harm to include emotional and psychological abuse, often leaving lasting scars on victims and survivors.

Within intimate relationships, abuse can take various forms, including physical violence such as hitting, kicking, or choking, as well as emotional manipulation, coercion, and control. Both physical abuse [GL/] and emotional abuse are often characterized by patterns of power and control, where perpetrators seek to dominate and intimidate their partners through threats, isolation, and manipulation.

Sexual abuse represents one form of intimate violent crime that occurs within both intimate and non-intimate relationships. These acts of violence violate the bodily autonomy and consent of the victim, causing profound physical and psychological harm. Rape, in particular, is a deeply traumatic experience that involves non-consensual sexual intercourse or penetration, perpetrated by a partner, acquaintance, or relative stranger. Victims of sexual violence often face significant physical, emotional, and social consequences, including post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and social stigmatization.

In addition to violence perpetrated by romantic partners, intimate violence can also occur within familial relationships, such as parent-child or sibling relationships. In these instances, child abuse may manifest as neglect, emotional manipulation, or physical violence, further complicating the dynamics of power and control within the family unit.

Measuring intimate violent crimes poses unique challenges due to underreporting, victim reluctance to disclose abuse, and certain cultural beliefs that normalize or condone abusive behavior within intimate relationships (Hien & Ruglass, 2009). However, efforts such as victimization surveys, forensic examinations, and specialized law enforcement units dedicated to domestic violence and sexual assault play crucial roles in gathering data and providing support to victims. For additional data on intimate partner violence, see the Office for Victims of Crime fact sheet.

2.1.1.1.3 Hate Crimes

Hate crimes represent a particularly insidious form of violence motivated by prejudice or bias against specific groups based on immutable characteristics such as race , religion, ethnicity , sexual orientation, or gender identity. These crimes are not only attacks on individual victims but also deliberate assaults on the very fabric of diversity and inclusion within society.

Crimes motivated by hate can take various forms, ranging from verbal harassment and physical assault to vandalism and even homicide . Minority group members are often targeted simply because of who they are, leading to a profound sense of fear, vulnerability, and alienation within affected communities.

The impact of hate crimes extends far beyond the immediate victims, reverberating throughout entire communities and exacerbating preexisting social divisions. By instilling fear and intimidation, perpetrators aim to erode the sense of safety and belonging that is fundamental to the well-being of all individuals within their communities.

Addressing hate crimes requires a multifaceted approach that includes robust legal protections, proactive law enforcement efforts, and community-based initiatives aimed at promoting tolerance and understanding. Legislation that enhances penalties for hate-motivated offenses sends a clear message that such behavior will not be tolerated in a civilized society.

Figure 2.3

2.1.1.1.4 Homicide

At the most extreme end of the spectrum, murder represents the ultimate act of violence, resulting in the intentional killing of another person. Whether motivated by personal vendettas, ideological beliefs, financial gain, or other factors, murder carries profound societal implications not only on the victim, their family, and friends, but often elicits strong emotional responses from communities and law enforcement authorities alike.

While many violent crimes can escalate to murder, the underlying motivation behind the crime often dictates the number of victims involved. In cases such as gang-related or intimate partner murders, the violence tends to be more targeted and localized, typically occurring within known or isolated areas. However, in instances of random acts of murder, such as mass shootings or serial killings, the violence is more indiscriminate and unpredictable, instilling widespread fear and anxiety within communities, despite the rarity of such occurrences.

There are three primary categories of multiple murders : serial murders, murder sprees, and mass murders. Serial murder , commonly known as the action of a serial killer , is often defined as the killing of three or more people by an individual over a period of time. Alternatively, other definitions may be utilized, such as “a single offender who killed at least two victims in separate events at different times” (Morton et al., 2014, p. 10). A murder spree , on the other hand, entails a series of killings committed within a relatively short time frame (e.g., days or weeks), often without a clear interval between each event and in different locations. Meanwhile, mass murder involves the deliberate killing of multiple victims in a single location and time frame, typically involving four or more individuals.

Interpreting murder rates accurately is a complex task that extends beyond merely counting the total number of murders in a specific area. The motivations and circumstances surrounding different types of multiple murder crimes vary significantly, profoundly affecting data interpretation. Therefore, examining the underlying causes of murders is equally essential for a comprehensive understanding of murder rates. For example, a region with high murder rates may not necessarily imply a high risk of being murdered. The interpretation and implications of the data vary substantially depending on whether the murders were the result of multiple random incidents at different times or the outcome of a family murder suicide. Moreover, the motives and behaviors of a serial murderer with four victims differ significantly from those of a father who tragically takes the lives of four of his own family members. Despite the same number of victims in both scenarios, the differences in motive, behavior, and timing greatly alter the interpretation of the data and impact on policy.

To gain an accurate understanding of murder rates and devise effective strategies and policies, it’s essential to thoroughly examine a variety of critical variables. By grasping these nuances, policymakers and stakeholders can craft tailored policies and strategies aimed at tackling the underlying causes of homicide-related violent crimes. Furthermore, they can implement interventions and preventive measures to effectively counter the various factors contributing to different types of multiple murders.

2.1.1.2 Public Order and Public Decency Crimes

Throughout history, societies have often prohibited or regulated behaviors perceived as conflicting with cultural traditions, customs, and values, as well as social norms . These behaviors are typically known as public order and public decency crimes. These types of crimes encompass a diverse array of offenses that threaten the social fabric and communal well-being of a society. These offenses often involve behaviors that disrupt public peace, infringe upon societal norms, or compromise public safety and security. Ranging from disorderly conduct and public intoxication to vandalism and indecent exposure, these crimes pose challenges to maintaining a harmonious and orderly environment for all members of the community.

Public order crimes encompass behaviors perceived to disrupt or threaten public order, peace, and safety in society. These offenses typically violate social norms, codes of conduct, or community standards, rather than directly harming individuals or their property. They were essentially criminalized due to the perception that they unreasonably encroach upon and pose risk to public spaces. Examples of public order crimes include disorderly conduct, public intoxication, loitering, vandalism, graffiti, prostitution, and public urination. The enforcement of public order laws aims to maintain social order, preserve community well-being, and promote public safety.

Public decency crimes are offenses that involve behaviors or actions considered indecent, offensive, or inappropriate in public settings. These crimes typically revolve around violations of societal norms, moral standards, or community values regarding public behavior and conduct. Examples of public decency crimes include acts viewed as being harmful to our moral values and the cohesion of society, including indecent exposure, public nudity, lewd behavior, offensive language or gestures, public urination or defecation, and engaging in sexual activities in public places. The enforcement of public decency laws aims to uphold community standards of decency, protect public morality, and maintain the comfort and dignity of individuals in public spaces.

While these two categories of crimes differ, they share numerous similar characteristics, notably their capacity to ignite contentious debates over whether they merit criminal sanctions. Understanding the nature, prevalence, and implications of such offenses is crucial for law enforcement agencies, policymakers, and community leaders in devising effective strategies for prevention, enforcement, and intervention. The following sections explore specific categories of public order and public decency crimes, examining their distinct components and societal impact.

2.1.1.2.1 Prostitution

Prostitution is a complex issue often classified as both a public order crime and a public decency crime due to its perceived disruption of societal norms and public morality. It involves individuals, typically referred to as sex workers or prostitutes, providing sexual acts to clients in exchange for money or goods, occurring in public spaces like street corners or private establishments such as brothels. In many societies, engaging in or soliciting sexual services for compensation is illegal and considered disruptive to public order and decency.

The impact of prostitution on society is multifaceted. Characterized by its clandestine nature and often occurring in secluded or urban areas, prostitution has significant social implications. From a public order perspective, solicitation of sexual services in public spaces may disrupt the peace and tranquility of neighborhoods, leading to concerns about safety and community well-being. Additionally, it can contribute to public safety concerns such as increased crime rates, including drug trafficking, violence, and property crimes in areas where it is prevalent, as well as raises the potential for violence against both sex workers and clients (Kelling & Wilson, 1982).

From a public decency standpoint, prostitution is often seen as immoral or indecent behavior that undermines societal values and norms regarding sexuality and relationships. It raises questions about the objectification of individuals, exploitation, and human dignity. The visibility of prostitution in public spaces can also evoke discomfort or offense among community members, particularly in areas frequented by families or children.

Furthermore, prostitution intersects with various social issues, amplifying its impact on society. It intertwines with poverty, substance abuse, human trafficking, and health matters, deepening its societal repercussions. Many individuals involved in prostitution belong to vulnerable populations, including marginalized women, LGBTQ+ individuals, and those facing economic disadvantages, who may turn to sex work as a means of survival (Dank et al., 2015). Sex workers, particularly those operating in clandestine or illegal settings, often encounter significant risks to their health, safety, and overall well-being. In addition, prostitution relates to broader public health concerns as it can facilitate the transmission of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and other health risks, presenting challenges for community health (World Health Organization, n.d.).

The impact of prostitution extends beyond immediate participants to affect broader societal attitudes and values. It can perpetuate harmful stereotypes and stigmas surrounding sexuality and gender roles. Furthermore, the normalization of prostitution in certain contexts may undermine efforts to promote gender equality and combat exploitation.

Efforts to address prostitution as a public order or public decency crime often entail a multifaceted approach involving law enforcement, social services, and community outreach. While implementing laws and regulations to deter and penalize the solicitation and purchase of sex is a common strategy, providing support services and exit strategies for individuals involved in prostitution is equally crucial.

Figure 2.4

2.1.1.2.2 Illegal Drug Use

The impact of illegal drug use extends far beyond its immediate participants, influencing broader societal attitudes and values, undermining societal norms, compromises public safety, and diminishes community well-being. Its detrimental effects reverberate throughout affected neighborhoods, challenging community safety, eroding social cohesion, and diminishing overall quality of life. Moreover, illegal drug use perpetuates damaging stereotypes and stigmas related to addiction, mental health, and socioeconomic status. Consequently, law enforcement agencies, policymakers, and communities face significant hurdles in their efforts to maintain order and uphold societal standards of conduct amidst the prevalence of illegal drug use.

The utilization and distribution of illegal drugs frequently result in behaviors that disturb public peace and safety, thus categorizing them as public order offenses. Drug-related crimes encompass activities such as trafficking, dealing, possession, and drug use in public spaces, alongside drug-related violence. These actions elevate public safety concerns by increasing crime rates, including instances of theft, assault, and property crimes (Stamm, 2020). Additionally, regions with high incidences of drug use often witness heightened levels of disorder, such as loitering, vandalism, littering, and other public disturbances. The presence of drug users in public spaces fosters an atmosphere of fear and unease, detrimentally impacting local businesses and community members. Consequently, law enforcement agencies frequently target drug-related offenses as part of their endeavors to uphold public order and safety.

Illegal drug use is often associated with behaviors deemed indecent or offensive in public settings, rendering it a public decency crime as well. The visibility of drug use in public spaces, such as parks, streets, or public transportation, can be disruptive, offensive, and distressing to members of the community, particularly in areas frequented by families, children, and tourists. Moreover, drug paraphernalia left in public places, such as needles and syringes, can pose health hazards and create an unsightly environment. Additionally, the visible presence of drug users in public spaces may contribute to a sense of discomfort and insecurity among residents, detracting from the overall sense of safety and well-being in the community.

2.1.1.2.3 Loitering and Vagrancy

Overall, loitering and vagrancy are considered public order and public decency crimes due to their perceived negative impact on public spaces, community safety, and social harmony. Loitering typically involves lingering or idling in a public place without a clear purpose, often associated with behaviors like congregating in groups, panhandling, or engaging in drug-related activities. This behavior can infringe on public order by creating an atmosphere of unease or discomfort among residents and visitors and disrupting the peace of public spaces. Additionally, loitering can be seen as a form of disorderly conduct that disrupts the peace and tranquility of public spaces, leading to potential conflicts or disturbances.

Vagrancy, on the other hand, refers to being homeless or without means of support, leading individuals to resort to begging or petty crimes for survival. This condition frequently entails actions such as sleeping in public spaces or participating in loitering, which are often perceived as disruptive and antisocial, thereby violating public order. Additionally, homeless individuals may engage in activities like public urination or defecation, which contravenes public decency and raises concerns about public safety and cleanliness, especially in urban areas with high rates of homelessness.

While laws and ordinances are often enacted to regulate loitering and vagrancy to maintain public order and uphold societal standards, there is debate about their enforcement, as they may disproportionately affect marginalized or vulnerable populations, such as the homeless or those struggling with mental illness or substance abuse issues (American Civil Liberties Union of California, 2021). As a result, efforts to address loitering and vagrancy should ideally involve a balance between public safety considerations and the protection of individual rights and dignity.

2.1.1.3 Economic Crimes

Economic crimes encompass a broad spectrum of illegal activities aimed at achieving financial gain through fraud, manipulation, or deceptive tactics, thereby causing financial harm to victims and eroding trust in economic systems. These offenses typically target individuals, businesses, or government entities and may involve practices such as embezzlement, money laundering, insider trading, bribery, and tax evasion. Given their potential to undermine financial institutions, market integrity, and public confidence, economic crimes represent a significant challenge for law enforcement agencies and regulatory bodies worldwide.

2.1.1.3.1 Larceny

Larceny is one type of economic crime that refers to the unauthorized taking and removal of another person’s property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of that property. This type of theft crime encompasses the wrongful appropriation of goods or belongings without the owner’s consent. Typically, larceny entails physically removing property, such as shoplifting items from a store or stealing goods. However, it differs from robbery in that it does not involve the use or threat of force against the victim. Larceny can occur in various contexts, including theft from individuals, businesses, or even public spaces, and may involve a wide range of items, from tangible goods like money, electronics, or jewelry to intangible assets like intellectual property or confidential information. The severity of larceny charges and penalties varies depending on factors such as the value of the stolen property, jurisdictional laws, and the circumstances surrounding the theft.

Figure 2.5

2.1.1.3.2 Cybercrime

Cybercrime encompasses a vast array of illegal activities conducted through digital means, including but not limited to hacking, malware distribution, phishing, identity theft, and online fraud. While the motivations behind cybercrimes can vary widely, many of these activities ultimately have economic implications. For example, hackers may breach the security systems of financial institutions or businesses to access sensitive financial data, such as credit card numbers or bank account information, which they can then exploit for monetary gain through fraudulent transactions or selling the stolen data on the dark web. Similarly, cybercriminals may deploy ransomware attacks targeting individuals or organizations, encrypting their data and demanding payment in exchange for its release. Additionally, online fraud schemes, such as bogus investment opportunities or deceptive online marketplaces, can defraud victims of significant sums of money. In essence, while not all cybercrimes are explicitly motivated by economic gain, many of them ultimately result in financial losses for individuals, businesses, or even entire economies (Brando et al., 2022; Iftikhar, 2024).

2.1.1.3.3 White-Collar

White-collar crime encompasses financially motivated offenses perpetrated by individuals or organizations in positions of trust or authority. These non-violent crimes involve deceit, manipulation, or abuse of power for monetary gain and include activities such as fraud, embezzlement, insider trading, bribery, money laundering, and tax evasion. Perpetrators often leverage their knowledge of financial systems and regulations to carry out illicit activities, leading to significant financial losses and undermining the integrity of financial markets and institutions (Barnett, 2000). Detecting and prosecuting white-collar crimes can be challenging due to their complexity and sophisticated methods, trial costs, necessitating specialized investigative techniques and expertise.

Figure 2.6

2.2 Crime Statistic Data Sources

Crime statistics are vital for understanding and addressing criminal behavior and trends. Some of the largest and most reliable sources of U.S. crime data include the Uniform Crime Report (UCR), which compiles official data on crime reported to law enforcement agencies across the United States, providing insights into reported crimes and arrests. Complementing the UCR is the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), which provides detailed information on each crime incident, offering a more comprehensive view of crime patterns. The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which gathers data on personal and household victimization through surveys and interviews, including individual experiences with criminal activities as well as crimes that may not be reported to police officials, thereby offering a broader perspective. Additionally, self-report crime surveys collect data by directly questioning individuals about their involvement in illicit activities, often uncovering unreported crimes and shedding light on underrepresented demographics. Together, these sources provide multifaceted insights into the complex landscape of crime, crucial for researchers, policymakers, and law enforcement agencies, enabling informed decision-making and targeted interventions aimed at fostering safer communities.

Crime research methods encompass a diverse range of approaches employed to understand and address specific aspects of criminal behavior and its impact. General methods pertaining to social research include quantitative research, which involves collecting and analyzing numerical data to identify patterns and correlations, as well as qualitative research, which focuses on understanding the underlying meanings and motivations behind criminal behavior through in-depth interviews, observations, and case studies. Additionally, experimental research methods involve manipulating certain variables to assess their impact on criminal behavior, while observational research involves observing and recording criminal activities in natural settings. These varied research methods contribute to a comprehensive understanding of crime, informing evidence-based policies and interventions to mitigate criminal behavior and bolster public safety.

2.2.1 Uniform Crime Report (UCR)

In 1930, with the assistance of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Congress passed legislation authorizing the Attorney General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to develop a program to monitor and quantify crime rates across the U.S. (An Act Establishing Division of Identification and Information, 1930). This program, known as the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) (Stogner, 2015), collects data from local and state police departments who voluntarily provide the FBI with information on reported crimes and arrests for specific offenses. For the next 90 years, the UCR became the most readily available source of national crime data.

By the 21st century, the majority of police agencies, covering 98% of the U.S. population, provided data to the FBI (FBI, 2014). To organize this massive amount of data, the UCR separates crime data into two primary groups: Part I offenses and Part II offenses. The UCR collects reported crime data on 10 Part I offenses, which are seen as more serious criminal offenses and include criminal homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, arson, human trafficking for commercial sex acts, and human trafficking for involuntary servitude. Part II offenses are considered less serious and include only arrest data rather than reported data. Part II offenses consist of 20 less serious crimes, such as vandalism, gambling, simple assault, and vagrancy.

The UCR presents data in three primary ways. First, it provides raw numbers of arrests or reported crimes. For example, in 2019, there were approximately 16,425 murders reported nationwide (FBI, 2020a). Second, the UCR presents crime rates using per capita of a rate per 100,000 people. Simply stated, this is achieved by dividing the numerical value by the total population and subsequently multiplying the result by 100,000. To illustrate, let’s revisit the previous example of 16,425 estimated murders in the U.S. in 2019. By dividing this figure by the estimated total U.S. population of 328 million, then multiplying it by 100,000 (16,425 / 328,000,000 X 100,000), we ascertain that the 2019 per-capita murder rate in the U.S. was approximately 5.0 murders per 100,000 people. Third, the UCR supplies a year-to-year comparison with information regarding changes in crime rates from previous years. For example, there was a 0.2% decrease in the U.S. murder rate from 2018 to 2019 (FBI, 2020a).

2.2.1.1 Drawbacks of the Uniform Crime Report

One drawback of the UCR data is its reliance on reported crimes, which means that only incidents reported to the police are included. As discussed in the [crossref:1]previous chapter[/crossref], not all criminal activities are brought to the attention of law enforcement, resulting in underrepresentation of the total number of criminal acts (Levitt, 1998). Additionally, the voluntary nature of police department participation in the UCR program poses another challenge. When a department chooses not to share crime data with the FBI, crime rates for that jurisdiction are estimated by comparing them with those in nearby jurisdictions of similar size. Furthermore, even when departments do participate and provide data voluntarily, variations in laws, policies, and procedures regarding the collection and recording of crime can lead to discrepancies. The fact that some departments may report certain criminal behaviors that others do not further complicates the accuracy and reliability of the collected UCR data.

One significant challenge with UCR data is the Hierarchy Rule, which establishes a ranking of offenses based on their severity. Under this rule, murder ranks higher than aggravated assault, which in turn ranks higher than larceny (FBI, 2015). According to this rule, if multiple offenses occur in a single criminal incident, only the most serious offense is counted. For instance, if a murder takes place during a burglary, only the murder would be recorded in the UCR data because it ranks higher in the hierarchy. This presents a notable issue as it results in fewer crimes being recorded than actually occur, providing an inaccurate understanding of the full scope of criminal activity. Additionally, it can create the impression that more serious crimes constitute a larger proportion of criminal activity than they do in reality.

Another drawback of the UCR is that it does not distinguish between attempted and completed Part I offenses. This means that if an individual is stopped before completing a Part I offense and the action is reported, it is recorded as a completed crime in the UCR database. This can lead to an overestimation of the actual number of Part I offenses occurring.

Over the years, numerous modifications have been made to the UCR, including the addition of information concerning incidents involving police officers being killed or assaulted, as well as data on hate crimes. While these changes have generally been beneficial, changes in definitions have sometimes been problematic, as they can cause shifts in recorded statistics and lead to misconceptions when comparing statistics from before and after the definition change.

For instance, one of the more controversial issues with the UCR was the definition used for rape between 1929 and 2012. Prior to 2013, the definition of forcable rape used in UCR data was “the carnal knowledge of a female focibly and against her will” (FBI, 2017, p. 3). This definition meant that only females were included in rape statistics, and only rapes involving force or the threat of force were recorded. As shown in Figure 2.7 below, changing the definition of rape in 2013 to include men and omitting the use-of-force standard significantly altered the number of rapes recorded in the UCR.

Figure 2.7

2.2.2 National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)

In 1982, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) along with the FBI conducted a study to determine the feasible and benefits of adapting a more comprehensive national crime data collection system (Poggio et al., 1985). The results of the study indicated a significant need to improve the data-gathering process to include more detailed information in several areas including weapon use, gang violence, and crimes against children (Strom & Smith, 2017). In 1989, the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) was introduced (FBI, 2018). However, it was not until 2021 that the NIBRS became the mandated national standard for law enforcement agencies reporting crime data to the FBI (BJS, 2022a).

The NIBRS differs from the original UCR data collection practices in several key ways. First, UCR only used aggregate data, which does not include specifics of each crime. In contrast, the NIBRS incorporates disaggregated data, providing demographic information about the offender and victim, the relationship between the victim and offender, details on the context of offense characteristics, and incident-level data (Loftin & McDowall, 2010). Secondly, the NIBRS does not adhere to the Hierarchy Rule and can include up to ten offenses per incident. Additionally, the NIBRS encompasses a broader range of crime offenses. For example, while the UCR included only 10 Part I offenses, the NIBRS includes 49 Group A offenses, encompassing high-level crimes such as murder, assault, and arson, as well as ten Group B offenses, which cover low-level crimes such as public drunkenness, curfew violations, and writing faulty checks.

2.2.2.1 Weaknesses of the National Incident-Based Reporting System

While the data provided by the NIBRS is superior to the traditional UCR data, it has a number of weaknesses. One prevailing issue is the failure of police departments to report their data to the NIBRS. For instance, in 2022, only 77% of U.S. police agencies submitted data to the NIBRS (FBI National Press Office, 2023). Although an additional 16.6% of departments report UCR data during that same year, the DOJ and FBI must devise crime estimates for all jurisdictions that fail to submit their data to the NIBRS. These approximations hinder the overall strength and accuracy of the statistics produced by NIBRS, which could be improved if more police agencies reported their crime data to the NIBRS. Lastly, while the NIBRS data is much more robust than the original UCR data, it still fails to capture unreported crimes. This limitation makes it difficult to accurately compare crime rates across cities, counties, and states. For example, if citizens lack trust in the police or believe the police will be unable to solve the crime, they might be less inclined to report crimes. Similarly, if a police department is understaffed or focused only on serious crimes, it might fail to report all crimes it deems unsolvable or insignificant.

2.2.3 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)

Crime victimization surveys are a valuable tool for capturing some unreported crimes or “dark figures.” Presently, the nation’s primary victimization survey is the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). Commencing in 1973 through a joint effort of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration [GL/] (LEAA) and the U.S. Census Bureau, the NCVS has been conducted annually (Eckroth, 2023). Despite the disbandment of LEAA in 1979, the BJS continued the yearly administration of the survey.

The NCVS collects a plethora of victimization data through interviews and surveys of individuals aged 12 years and older (Morgan & Smith, 2023). One of the most beneficial aspects of the NCVS is its ability to capture dark figures by measuring unreported crimes. This is invaluable for understanding the extent of underreported crimes and the reasons why victims may choose not to report crimes to the police. Additionally, the data collected by the NCVS provides crucial information about the nature of the crime, the victim, the relationship between the victim and offender, and the consequences of victimization.

More specifically, the NCVS collects highly detailed demographic information from victims, including age, income, race, ethnicity, gender, and geographical location. This information plays a pivotal role in identifying patterns and disparities in victimization rates, enabling tailored prevention and intervention efforts for underrepresented populations. Moreover, due to its annual administration, the NCVS facilitates longitudinal analysis. These analyses enable researchers, law enforcement agencies, and policymakers to identify changes in crime patterns over time, leading to more effectively adjusted crime prevention strategies.

2.2.3.1 Shortcomings of the National Crime Victimization Survey

Like any research and data collection method, the NCVS has its limitations. One such shortcoming is its exclusion of certain populations, including children younger than 12, homeless individuals, and those living in institutional settings such as nursing homes and correctional facilities. As a result, the data from the NCVS underrepresents these groups and fails to provide a comprehensive understanding of all cross-sections of society. Another limitation is its predominant focus on personal and property crimes, often neglecting other types of crime such as white-collar crime, organized crime, and cyber crimes.

Another challenge with the NCVS, akin to all interview and survey data collection methods, is the potential variation in the interpretation of victimization definitions among respondents and interviewers. This variability can result in inconsistencies in both reporting and classification of victimization incidents. Furthermore, some respondents may encounter difficulties accurately recalling details about their victimization experiences, including the timing, nature, and circumstances of the crime.

2.2.4 Self-Report Surveys

Another method of monitoring crime is through the use of self-report surveys. Unlike crime data collected through police reports or victimization surveys, self-report crime surveys directly inquire about individuals’ participation in illegal activities, irrespective of whether or not the activity was reported to the police. These surveys are particularly effective in uncovering data on victimless crimes, where there may not be a direct victim, such as illicit drug use. Typically, these surveys are administered anonymously to large groups of individuals, often in school, community, or household settings.

One of the largest self-report crime surveys is the Monitoring the Future (MTF) national survey. Administered annually by the University of Michigan Survey Research Center since 1975 (Monitoring the Future, n.d.), the original MTF survey was distributed to approximately 16,000 senior high school students in 133 public and private high schools. Since 1991, the MTF survey has expanded to include 8th, 10th, and 12th graders, totaling around 50,000 students and 420 public and private schools yearly. Additionally, a subset of participants receives yearly follow-up surveys throughout secondary school, college, and adulthood. This longitudinal approach allows researchers to gain insight into how perceptions of crime and drug use evolve over the lifespan.

2.2.4.1 Limitations of Self-Report Crime Surveys

Self-report crime surveys, such as the MTF, offer valuable insights into “dark figures” and juvenile perspectives on crime and drug use. However, these surveys also have limitations. Firstly, despite being anonymous, participants may still feel ashamed or fearful of providing truthful information. Additionally, individuals may exaggerate their criminal behavior or forget important details of these acts. Furthermore, like any survey, misinterpretation of the questions may lead participants to provide inaccurate information.

Figure 2.8

2.3 Crime Trends

Certain types of crime fluctuate in prevalence over time, while others remain relatively constant. By analyzing statistical data from the sources discussed in the previous unit, we can identify these patterns in criminal behavior. However, analyzing statistical data alone is insufficient for obtaining a comprehensive understanding of crime trends. Qualitative and contextual factors such as the implementation or removal of laws, changes in population density among criminogenic age groups, and even weather conditions can significantly influence contemporary crime trends. Considering these additional factors is imperative for obtaining more accurate interpretations of crime statistics that curtail misleading conclusions. The following section provides a general overview of current nationwide crime trends, highlighting recent changes in the landscape of criminal activity and some of the factors underpinning these shifts.

2.3.1 UCR and NIBRS Crime Trends

The UCR and NIBRS provide valuable data for identifying short- and long-term crime trends in America. According to UCR and NIBRS data, U.S. crime rates prior to the 1960s, particularly violent crime rates, remained fairly consistent (Blumstein & Wallman, 2006). However, crime rates in most categories began to increase throughout the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. By contrast, both violent and property crime rates steadily decreased between the early 1990s and the 2010s. During the early 2020s, certain types of crime, such as homicide and auto theft, experienced slight increases, while other forms of criminal activity remained relatively constant over this same time period.

2.3.1.1 Violent Crime

This section will discuss violent crime trends in the U.S. using UCR and NIBRS data, focusing on homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. By examining these data sources, we can identify patterns and shifts in violent crime rates over time. Historical data reveals a significant rise in violent crime from the 1960s through the 1980s, followed by a notable decline starting in the early 1990s and continuing into the 2010s (Blumstein & Wallman, 2006). Despite this overall downward trend, recent years have seen slight increases in certain violent crimes, such as homicide and aggravated assault, while burglary has steadily decreased over the past several decades.

Figure 2.9

Figure 2.10

UCR and NIBRS Rape Crime Rates in the U.S. (1985-2022)

Figure 2.10 illustrates rape rates per capita in the U.S. between 1985 and 2022. Overall, there has been a gradual decline in rape rates since the early 1990s (FBI, 2022g). While UCR and NIBRS data are beneficial for evaluating rape rates, it is essential to consider legal and cultural changes. For example, as discussed in Section 2.2.1.1, the UCR changed the definition of rape in 2013, leading to a sharp increase in recorded incidents. Additionally, providing more resources and support to victims may have increased the willingness of victims to report rape. Consequently, it is difficult to discern if the number of actual rapes has changed over this time period.

Figure 2.11

Because homicide is often considered the “ultimate violent act,” police tend to allocate more resources and effort to investigating and recording this crime. Similarly, robbery is another offense that is well-defined in law and receives intensive police attention (Blumstein & Wallman, 2006). Like homicide, the rates of robbery have decreased since the peak in 1991, when there were over 250 robberies per 100,000 people. The robbery rates in 2022 were less than 66 per 100,000 people, which is lower than the rates during the 1960s (Blumstein & Wallman, 2006; FBI, 2011, 2022h).

Figure 2.12

Between 1972 and 1992, aggravated assault rates grew by 132%, from just under 200 per 100,000 people to close to 450 per 100,000 people (Blumstein & Wallman, 2006). According to UCR and NIBRS data demonstrated in Figure 2.12, the rate of aggravated assault crime decreased since the early 1990s, similar to homicide and robbery rates during this period (FBI, 2022a). Data from the NIBRS indicates that aggravated assault rates dropped to less than 250 per 100,000 people in 2013 but rose to almost 280 per 100,000 people in 2020. However, it is essential to acknowledge the subjectivity inherent in how police officers and departments categorize aggravated and simple assault when analyzing aggravated assault data (Blumstein & Wallman, 2006). Understanding this subjectivity is crucial as it can impact the comparability and accuracy of crime statistics over time and across different jurisdictions, influencing our interpretation of trends and the development of effective policies.

Figure 2.14

2.3.1.2 Property Crime Trends

Similar to violent crimes, data from the UCR and NIBRS indicate that property crime rates have declined over the past 40 years. The following sections will examine four types of property crimes—arson, burglary, larceny, and auto theft—to illustrate trends in property crime in the U.S.

Figure 2.15

UCR and NIBRS Arson Crime Rates in the U.S. (1985-2022)

As illustrated in Figure 2.15, arson crime trends have decreased considerably over the past 35 years (FBI, 2022b). The motivations for arson can vary greatly, including covering up evidence for other crimes, committing insurance fraud, protesting, or stemming from mental health issues such as pyromania. Additionally, arson is difficult to investigate as the evidence is often destroyed in the fire. Even when investigators determine that a fire was caused by arson, only a small percentage (21%) of offenders are apprehended (Brett, 2004). Increased surveillance, such as home security cameras, and improved mental health practices may help explain the national decrease in arson rates. Research has also identified a pattern linking arson to motor vehicle theft, showing an observed increase in vehicle arson in areas or during periods with higher rates of motor vehicle theft and joyriding (Potter, 2000).

Figure 2.16

UCR and NIBRS Burglary Crime Rates in the U.S. (1985-2022)

According to the NIBRS, burglary and breaking and entering are defined as “the unlawful entry into a building or other structure with the intent to commit a felony or a theft” (FBI, 2012, p. 2). While larceny/theft offenses are defined by the NIBRS as “the unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession, or constructive possession, of another person” (FBI, 2012, p. 4). As illustrated in Figure 2.16 and Figure 2.17, both burglary and larceny exhibited comparable trends between the mid-1980s and 2022 (FBI, 2022c).

Figure 2.17

UCR and NIBRS Larceny Crime Rates in the U.S. (1985-2022)

The analysis of larceny crime rates in the United States from 1985 to 2022, as depicted in Figure 2.17, reveals notable trends. Initially, there was a discernible peak in 1991, indicative of heightened criminal activity during that period (FBI, 2022e). However, subsequent years witnessed a consistent downward trajectory in larceny rates, possibly reflecting effective crime prevention measures or shifting societal dynamics. Despite this overall decline, there was a slight uptick observed in 2022, suggesting potential fluctuations in crime patterns or the efficacy of law enforcement strategies in recent years. However, to fully understand the reasons underpinning these criminal behavior trends, additional qualitative information is needed to complement the quantitative data provided by the figures.

Figure 2.18

Motor vehicle theft, as depicted in Figure 2.18, peaked in the early 1990s, followed by a decrease until 2019 (FBI, 2022f). However, there has been a small increase in motor vehicle thefts in 2020, 2021, and 2022, prompting questions about the factors contributing to this recent uptick. While advancements in technology and theft-prevention features in cars would typically lead to a decrease in car thefts, the evolution of technology also enhances offenders’ capabilities to commit such crimes. For instance, a popular TikTok trend in 2021 demonstrated how to steal 2010-2021 Kia and Hyundai vehicles using a USB cord and mechanical key (DiLella & Day, 2022). As such, further qualitative research is essential to comprehensively understand these trends and devise effective strategies to combat auto theft in the evolving technological landscape.

Figure 2.19

2.3.2 NCVS Crime Trends

The following section provides an analysis of NCVS crime data spanning from 1993 to 2022, focusing on four crime types: rape/sexual assault, robbery, motor vehicle theft, and burglary. These specific crime categories were selected to offer insight into a broad spectrum of criminal trends, encompassing both violent and property crimes. It is crucial to consider the data collection method, which involves surveying approximately 240,000 individuals from around 150,000 households (Harrell et al., 2009). While this is a large population for a survey, this approach represents a significantly smaller population within the dataset compared to NIBRS and UCR data. Therefore, the NCVS data will yield more varied results from year to year than the NIBRS and UCR data. This variability could stem from factors such as changes in reporting behavior, shifts in survey demographics, or fluctuations in respondents’ perceptions of crime or interpretations of survey questions.

Figure 2.20

According to the NCVS data presented in Figure 2.20, there has been a notable decrease in rape/sexual assault victimization from 1993 to 2022 (BJS, 2022d). However, it’s important to note that the year-to-year variance in these rates appears to be more erratic compared to the NIBRS rape data illustrated in Figure 2.10. Despite this variation, the overall trend exhibits a similar pattern of decline.

Figure 2.21

Figure 2.21 illustrates the trends in robbery victimization between 1993 and 2022 (BJS, 2022e). Overall, there has been a substantial decrease in robberies during this period. The findings suggest that participants in the NCVS were 250% more likely to report being a victim of robbery in 1993 than in 2022. Despite this long-term decline, the survey indicates a slight increase in robberies in 2021 and again in 2022, mirroring a common trend observed in several crime category charts.

Figure 2.22

NCVS Motor Vehicle Theft Crime Rates in the U.S. (1993-2022)

Similar to the trends observed in violent crimes reported in the NCVS, property crimes, such as motor vehicle theft (depicted in Figure 2.22), have experienced significant declines over the past 30 years (BJS, 2022c). This pattern is evident in the decrease in reported motor vehicle thefts between 1993 and 2020. However, there was a slight increase in respondents reporting being victims of motor vehicle theft in 2021 and 2022, which corresponds with data concerning other criminal activity patterns during this same timeframe.

Figure 2.23

Consistent with trends in other property crimes, burglary victimization (see Figure 2.23) has declined among respondents over the past 30 years (BJS, 2022b). When comparing findings concerning burglary trends from the UCR/NIBRS (see Figure 2.16) with their counterpart findings from the NCVS, a consistent pattern emerges.

Figure 2.25

 

References

Agnew, R., & White, H. R. (1992). An empirical test of general strain theory. Criminology, 30(4), 475-500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01113.x

American Civil Liberties Union of California. (2021). Outside the law: The legal war against unhoused people. https://www.aclusocal.org/sites/default/files/outsidethelaw-aclufdnsca-report.pdf

Anderson, E. (2000). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. W.W. Norton & Company.

Barnett, C. (2000). The measurement of white-collar crime using Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) data. U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Systems (CJIS) Division. https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/nibrs_wcc.pdf

Blumstein, A., & Wallman, J. (2006). The crime drop in America (Rev. ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Brando, D., Kotidis, A., Kovner, A., Lee, M., & Schreft, S. L. (2022, May 12). Implications of cyber risk for financial stability. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/implications-of-cyber-risk-for-financial-stability-20220512.html

Brett, A. (2004). ‘Kindling theory’ in arson: How dangerous are firesetters? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 38(6), 419-425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1614.2004.01378.x

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2022a, August 2). National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. https://bjs.ojp.gov/national-incident-based-reporting-system-nibrs

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2022b). Rate of burglary, 1993-2022 [Data set]. Quick Graphics, National Crime Victimization Survey Dashboard, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://ncvs.bjs.ojp.gov/quick-graphics

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2022c). Rate of motor vehicle theft, 1993-2022 [Data set]. Quick Graphics, National Crime Victimization Survey Dashboard, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://ncvs.bjs.ojp.gov/quick-graphics

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2022d). Rate of rape/sexual assault, 1993-2022 [Data set]. Quick Graphics, National Crime Victimization Survey Dashboard, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://ncvs.bjs.ojp.gov/quick-graphics

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2022e). Rate of robbery, 1993-2022 [Data set]. Quick Graphics, National Crime Victimization Survey Dashboard, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://ncvs.bjs.ojp.gov/quick-graphics

Dank, M., Yahner, J., Madden, K., Bañuelos, I., Yu, L., Ritchie, A., Mora, M., & Conner, B. (2015). Surviving the streets of New York: Experiences of LGBTQ youth, YMSM, and YWSW engaged in survival sex. Urban Institute. https://www.urban.org/research/publication/surviving-streets-new-york-experiences-lgbtq-youth-ymsm-and-ywsw-engaged-survival-sex

DiLella, C., & Day, A. (2022, September 9). TikTok challenge spurs rise in thefts of Kia, Hyundai cars. CNBC.com. Retrieved on June 2, 2024, from https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/08/tiktok-challenge-spurs-rise-in-thefts-of-kia-hyundai-cars.html

Eckroth, S. (2023, July 28). Historical perspective on the National Crime Victimization Survey… 50 years of data and counting. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. https://bjs.ojp.gov/blogs/historical-perspective-national-crime-victimization-survey50-years-data-and-counting

FBI National Press Office. (2023, October 16). FBI releases 2022 Crime in the Nation statistics [Press release]. Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice. https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-releases-2022-crime-in-the-nation-statistics

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (n.d.). NIBRS resources for law enforcement. U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 5, 2024, from https://le.fbi.gov/informational-tools/ucr/nibrs-resources

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2011). Crime in the United States, 2010: About the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/aboutucrmain

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2012). NIBRS offense definitions. U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2012/resources/nibrs-offense-definitions

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2014). Crime in the United States, 2013: Summary of the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/about-ucr/aboutucrmain_final.pdf

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2015). Effects of NIBRS on crime statistics. U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2014/resource-pages/effects_of_nibrs_on_crime_statistics_final.pdf

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2016). Data discovery tool query for recorded rape cases in the United States from 2000 to 2016 [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 6, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2017). Crime in the United States, 2016: Rape addendum. U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/resource-pages/rape-addendum.pdf

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2018, December 21). NIBRS 101 [Video transcript]. U.S. Department of Justice. https://www.fbi.gov/video-repository/nibrs-101.mp4/view

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2020a). Crime in the United States, 2019: Murder. U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/murder

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2020b). Crime in the United States, 2019: Violent crime. U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/violent-crime

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022a). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS aggravated assault crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022b). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS arson crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022c). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS burglary crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022d). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS homicide crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022e). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS larceny crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022f). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS motor vehicle theft crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022g). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS rape crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2022h). Data discovery tool query for UCR and NIBRS robbery crime rates in the U.S. (1985-2022) [Data set]. Crime Data Explorer, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved June 8, 2024, from https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/explorer/crime/query

Harrell, E., Morgan, R., Thompson, A., Truman, J., Tapp, S., & Coen, E. (2009, May 18). National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). https://bjs.ojp.gov/data-collection/ncvs

Hien, D., & Ruglass, L. (2009). Interpersonal partner violence and women in the United States: An overview of prevalence rates, psychiatric correlates and consequences and barriers to help seeking. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.11.003

Iftikhar S. (2024). Cyberterrorism as a global threat: A review on repercussions and countermeasures. PeerJ Computer Science, 10, e1772. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.1772 CC BY.

JobDescription.org. (2023, September 19). Crime analyst job description. Retrieved June 5, 2024, from https://jobdescription.org/job-descriptions/public-sector-crime-analyst-job-description

Kelling, G. L., & Wilson, J. Q. (1982, March). Broken windows. The Atlantic Monthly, 249(3), 29-36, 38. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/

Levitt, S. D. (1998). The relationship between crime reporting and police: Implications for the use of Uniform Crime Reports. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14(1), 61-81. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41954178

Loftin, C., & McDowall, D. (2010). The use of official records to measure crime and delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(4), 527–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-010-9120-8

Monitoring the Future. (n.d.). About MTF. Regents of the University of Michigan. Retrieved June 5, 2024, from monitoringthefuture.org/about/

Moore, K. S., Tom, R., & O’Neil, J. (2022). The truth behind crime statistics: Avoiding distortions and improving public safety. Thurgood Marshall Institute, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. https://www.naacpldf.org/the-truth-behind-crime-statistics/

Morgan, R., & Smith, E. L. (2023). The National Crime Victimization Survey and National Incident-Based Reporting System: A complementary picture of crime in 2022. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. https://bjs.ojp.gov/document/ncvsnibrscpc22.pdf

Morton, R. J., Tillman, J. M., & Gaines, S. J. (2014). Serial murder: Pathways for investigations. Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice. https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/serialmurder-pathwaysforinvestigations.pdf/view

National Gang Center. (n.d.). National Youth Gang Survey analysis. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved June 6, 2024, from https://nationalgangcenter.ojp.gov/survey-analysis

Poggio, E. C., Kennedy, S. D., Chaiken, J. M., & Carlson, K. E. (1985). Blueprint for the future of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program: Final report of the UCR study. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/blueprint-future-uniform-crime-reporting-program-final-report-ucr

Potter, R. (2000). Arson on the increase: Motor vehicle theft and arson in South Australia. Information Bulletin on Motor Vehicle Theft Issues. http://www.carsafe.com.au/docs/arson_paper.pdf

Ratcliffe, J. H., & Taniguchi, T. A. (2008). Is crime higher around drug-gang street corners? Two spatial approaches to the relationship between gang set spaces and local crime levels. Crime Patterns and Analysis, 1(1), 23-46. https://ttaniguchi.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Ratcliffe-Taniguchi-2008-Is-crime-higher-around-drug-gang-corners.pdf

Stamm, J. B. (2020). An examination of the relationship between drugs and crime in the Midwest. Midwest High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas. https://www.ottumwa.us/files/police/report_of_drugs_and_the_midwest.pdf

Stogner, J. M. (2015). Uniform Crime Reports. In W. G. Jennings (Ed.), The encyclopedia of crime and punishment. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118519639.wbecpx164

Strom, K. J., & Smith, E. L. (2017). The future of crime data: The case for the National Incident‐Based Reporting System (NIBRS) as a primary data source for policy evaluation and crime analysis. Criminology & Public Policy, 16(4), 1027-1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12336

World Health Organization. (n.d.). Global HIV, hepatitis, and STIs programmes: Sex workers. Retrieved June 6, 2024, from https://www.who.int/teams/global-hiv-hepatitis-and-stis-programmes/populations/s