Research Methods in Criminal Justice - ATTEN: Phyllis Young

ashey.8

ip_week_two.docx

Home >Law homework help >Research Methods in Criminal Justice - ATTEN: Phyllis Young

Running head: FINANCIAL DEPRIVATION AND CRIME 1

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN FINANCIAL DEPRIVATION AND CRIME 14

FINANCIAL DEPRIVATION AND CRIME

Individual Project 2

Ashley Williams

American Intercontinental University

Dr. Telesco

Abstract

The correlation between low income areas and crime has been one of the most contentious subjects over the last couple of decades. This proposal will explore the state of security in low income areas and analyze why it supersedes that of high income areas. It argues that the state of income in every neighborhood should be explored with utmost seriousness as it has a likely correlation with the rate of security in the neighborhood.

The treatise made some important contributions to the correlation between low income areas and security. It analyzes why high crime rates are synonymous with low income areas compared to the high income areas. It redefines the aspect on which some of these assertions are proved. The study also unravels some of the critics who may have opined a different opinion regarding the same and exemplifies some of the assertions they evoked.

Despite the assertions by some of these researchers being true to some extent, low income areas and neighborhoods continue to be the breeding hub on which some of the most serious crimes happen and this is solely blamed on the financial deprivation of the local population. The study argues that the lack of financial freedom may be one of the reasons that have triggered crimes around the world. Viewing crime from this context as opposed to the conventional norm of researching criminals can be one of the most prudent ways of purging the high rates of crimes that have become prevalent in the low income areas. Some possible solutions have been cited including the liberation of some of these populations from their financial lack and formulating ways through which they can steer themselves towards financial freedom.

Introduction and Variables

The proposal starts from the premise that financial freedom is indeed one of the greatest determinants of crime in any area, state or neighborhood. Many people view the lack of financial freedom as the root behind the lack of basic amenities, jealousy and immorality. These negative assumptions have greatly led many individuals deprived of their financial freedom into believing that crime is the only way out of their problems.

The correlation between the high rate of crimes and income inequality is a subject that has not only baffled economists and scientists but it has also been one of the most debated subjects in the legal and justice arena. The recent developments in these two areas have particularly directed the notions and assumptions behind this subject. Income inequalities have been soaring high in the United States from the 70s with the rate of crime decreasing slightly from the 60s.

This proposal argues that the only prudent way of solving the exacerbating rate of crime in low income families is by ensuring that individuals in low income areas and neighborhoods are empowered financially through community cooperation and microfinance institutions. In addition, it argues that that in spite of low income areas being abuzz with a high rate of crime, some upper income areas also experienced a similar rate of crime and high rate crimes are not therefore entirely synonymous with low income areas. However various researchers such as Reardon and Bischoff (2011) still argue that a majority of the criminals who cause havoc in these upper income earners originate from the low income neighborhoods.

The study also argues that despite some developmental, social and environmental factors contributing equally to the high rates of crime as postulated by various researchers, the issue of financial freedom remains thorny and a great contributor to some of the crimes committed.

The purpose of the study was to examine the correlation between financial freedom and crime and particularly regarding why the low income neighborhoods are likely to experience a higher rate of crime compared to the high income neighborhoods. One of the fundamental basis on which some of these arguments are based is got from the microeconomic theory that asserts that people are generally driven by their wants and needs which is usually restricted by the limited resources. When the ability to purchase some of these resources is superseded by the desire for the same resources, individuals are prompted to look for the most desperate means to acquire them where some go as far as stealing and robbing what has been acquired by others.

Another factor that has also been mentioned as a great contributor to the rise in the rate of crime in low income areas is social degradation (Pitner & Brown, 2012). A close analysis between the high income areas and the low income areas reveals that social degradation is high in the low income areas compared to the high income areas and this can all be traced to the disparity in the financial freedom between the two areas.

The treatise concludes by affirming that there is indeed a correlation between financial lack and the high rate of crime and assertions by various researchers is sound proof to these arguments.

Research questions:

1. What is the correlation between financial freedom and the rate of crime?

2. Why do low income areas have a higher rate of crime compared to the high income areas?

3. Which factors have greatly contributed to the rise in crime in low income areas?

4. What are some of the measures that can be put in place to reduce the exacerbating rate of crime in low income areas?

5. What are some of the other factors that can contribute to the high rate of crime in low income areas other than financial freedom?

6. What are some of the recommendations to these concerns?

Statement of the Purpose

This research proposal was carried out with the intended purpose of unraveling the correlation between financial freedom and crime. It exemplifies how the low income areas experience a higher rate of crime compared to the high income areas and underlines some of the factors behind this. It is an eye opener to the economic, social and legal arena to not only view the social aspects of a criminal but to also consider the social aspects of the entire neighborhood of a criminal as it could unravel some important aspects on how the financial state of the local neighborhood could trigger the emergence of more crimes in the area and therefore the only feasible way to bring an end to these crimes is to economically empower the locals.

Literature Review

Low wages, lack of employment and opportunities are some of the factors that were cited by Braithwaite (2011) as key contributors to the high rate of crime in low income areas. Experts such as Jackson (2011) have also revealed that in as much as the poor are suspects of crimes they have also been key victims of similar crimes.

Despite most quarters citing poverty as one of the leading contributors to crime, unemployment has constantly been cited in the research as the key factor that contributes to crime.

Foley (2011) was however quick to point out that in as much as the high rate of crime is synonymous with the low income areas, this does not in any way assert that criminals can only be found among poor people. He postulated that the high income areas as in as much risk of criminal attacks just as low income areas and crime is therefore not entirely synonymous with low income areas. He however agreed that the high rate of unemployment and poverty in low income areas is a huge issue of concern and can be a breeding root to crime.

Contrary to the opinions of many, Reardon and Bischoff (2011) asserted that there is indeed some proof that despite the high rate of crime in the low income areas, the residents of these neighborhoods tend to show more care for their communities compared to the high income area but some critics such as Freedman (2012) have however refuted these assertions.

Annotated Bibliography

Braithwaite, J. (2011). Inequality, Crime and Public Policy. NewYork, NY: Routledge.

In this publication, Braithwaite uses concise and user-friendly language to capture the interest of the readers. He cites the disparities in the purchasing power and consumer index as some of the factors that have contributed to the high rates of crime in the low income areas. Despite deviating slightly from the research carried out by Foley (2011), he achieves his objective of underlining the correlation between financial freedom and crime. This is a publication that suits any economist or scholar and the easy to understand scripts is one reason why this book should at the hands of every reader with a particular interest in this subject.

Foley, F. C. (2011). Welfare Payments and Crime. Review of Economics and Statistics 93, 97-112.

Foley in this review underline some solutions that should be considered in order to purge the rising rate of crime in the low income areas. Some of the solutions include an improved apprehension system, modernization of the police force, stricter enforcement of laws and punishments. Despite highlighting some of these fundamental solutions, his research fails to capture the key subject of the research by failing to elucidate the correlation between the low income areas and a high rate of crime. Some critics such as Freedman (2011) have also questioned why he left some vital solutions such as the empowerment of the locals but despite the apparent dearth in his research, it provides some useful information on crime.

Freedman, M. (2012). Teaching new markets old tricks: The effects of subsidized investment on low-income neighborhoods. Journal of Public Economics 96, 1000-1014.

This journal provides some useful insight on the life of residents in low-income neighborhoods. His research has however dwelled more on subsidized investments rather than the correlation between financial freedom and income and this has led some critics such as Braithwaite (2011) to question his research. His analysis on the subsidized investments however provides an insight on how the lack of opportunities in low income areas has contributed to the high levels of crime. Economists who are the core target audience for this journal have therefore some significant knowledge to gain on the correlation between the inadequate opportunities in these low income areas and the high rate of crime in such areas.

Freedman, M., & Owens, G. E. (2011). Low-income housing development and crime. Journal of Urban Economics 70, 115-131.

This previous treatise by Freedman extends the previous assertions mentioned above on how the lack of opportunities has contributed to the high rate of crime in the low income neighborhoods. Through concise and properly crafted scripts, Freedman captures the interest of the reader and articulates how the deplorable state of development in the low income areas could be a key contributor of crime. These assertions were backed by Martinez and Martinez (2013) in their book when they claimed that the deplorable state of social amenities could be one of the main reasons why crime could be high in the low income areas compared to the higher income areas.

Jackson, J. (2011). Revisiting Risk Sensitivity in the Fear of Crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 48, 513-537.

In this Journal, Jackson revisits the issue of crime and cites the high rate of poverty coupled with the lack of opportunities in low-income areas as some of the factors that have contributed to the high rate of delinquency in low income areas. Social and developmental issues such as drug and substance abuse, sexual promiscuity and criminal versatility that are synonymous with low income areas could be some of the reasons why the low income areas are more ‘unsafe’ compared to the higher income areas. His failure to revisit the issue of financial freedom and how it relates with the aforementioned issues has been questioned but despite the slight deviation from the core subject, it underlines some important factors that were useful to the research.

Martinez, J. R., & Martinez, R. (2013). Latino Homicide: Immigration, Violence, and Community. New York, NY: Routledge.

In this publication by the Martinez’s, the lack of social amenities is cited as one of the key factors that have contributed to the high rate of crime in low income areas. Martinez asserts that residents in such areas engage in crime for the sole reason of acquiring the social amenities that lack in their neighborhoods.

McKinnish, T., Walsh, R., & White, T. K. (2010). Who gentrifies low-income neighborhoods? Journal of Urban Economics 67, 180-193.

McKinnish and White in their 2010 journal pose the question that has constantly been posed by many researchers including Reardon and Bischoff (2011) on the gentrification of low-income neighborhoods. Citing crime as one of the inhibiting factors behind this gentrification, these authors takes the reader through the life of low income earners, underlining some of the factors behind the high rate of crime in such areas. The deplorable state of infrastructure coupled with the high rate of unemployment and low wages are some of the factors that have affirmed why crime is prevalent in low income areas compared to the higher income areas. It is a good read for any scholar with a particular interest in public economics and provides some important factors that were essential for this research.

Pitner, O. R., & Brown, E. M. (2012). Making neighborhoods safer: Examining predictors of residents’ concerns about neighborhood safety. Journal of Environmental Psychology 32, 43-49.

Having worked on similar researches in the 90s, Pitner and Brown underline some important factors on how the low income neighborhoods can be made safer. They cite economic empowerment of the local residents as one of the most integral solutions to the high rate of crime in these neighborhoods. Secondly, he proposes that local residents should also consider joining microfinance institutions and cooperatives as some of the most prudent ways to gain financial freedom and consequently alleviate the rate of crime in their neighborhoods.

Reardon, S. F., & Bischoff, K. (2011). Income Inequality and Income Segregation. American Journal of Sociology 116, 1092-1153.

In this journal, Reardon and Biscoff echo what McKinnish and White (2010) asserted when they cited the low wages and high rate of unemployment as some of the factors behind the high rate of unemployment in low income areas. Despite giving a blurred analysis on the correlation between financial freedom and crime, his study was crucial in this treatise and underlined important aspects regarding how income inequality and segregation contributes to crime.

Santiago, D. C., & Wadsworth, E. M., & Stump, J. (2011). Socioeconomic status, neighborhood disadvantage, and poverty-related stress: Prospective effects on psychological syndromes among diverse low-income families. Journal of Economic Psychology 32, 218-230.

Santiago, Wadsworth and Stump are some of the greatest contributors in this subject. In this journal they outline some important factors such as the poverty related stress and how it may contribute to the high rate of crime in low-income neighborhoods. His study is properly researched and captures the interest of the reader through properly crafted and explicit analysis and is therefore a good recommendation for any reader with a particular interest on this subject.

Research methodology

Data Collection Methods

The study incorporated both quantitative and qualitative data with the main quantitative techniques for the methodology that were used including questionnaires, interviews and observation and the incorporation of these techniques enabled me to explore and examine the concrete data from an connoisseur perspective.

Statistical Analysis

Some of the methods that can be used to analyze the data include structural equation modeling that measures the variables in order to access the latent structures. One of the key advantages of this method is that it is able to cover large amounts of data and it is also relatively cheap to carry out. The disadvantage however is that it consumes a lot of time. The generalized linear method is a method that focuses primarily on discrete dependent variables and it is advantageous in that it is easy to carry out. The general linear model is one of the most renowned methods of analyzing data and it assesses the impact of several predictors on various continuous dependent variables. It is advantageous in the fact that less time is consumed when carrying out the analysis. Reardon and Bischoff (2011)however cited this method as being one of the most expensive to carry out but despite the humongous costs involved it has proved to be the most effective and efficient methods of conducting data.

In conclusion, it is evidently clear from the research that there is a correlation between financial deprivation and crime. Despite low income areas having the highest rates of crime, empowering the locals economically can go a long way in enabling the residents in these locations to gain financial freedom and consequently purge the high rate of crime that is synonymous with such areas.

References