Right

• In a nutshell


  Right Realism is more concerned with practical solutions to crime. Relatively simple theories such as rational choice and Broken Windows theory explain crime and Zero Tolerance Policing and Situational Crime Prevention are the solutions
• Right Realism – The Causes of Crime

   The two main theories about the causes of crime associated with Right Realism are ‘Rational Choice Theory’, ‘Broken Windows Theory’, and Charles Murray’s Underclass Theory (also a form of subcultural theory).
• Rational Choice theory


  states that most criminals are rational actors. If the criminal calculates that the risk of getting caught is low, or that the punishment if caught will not be severe, then they are more likely to commit crime, assuming the reward for doing that crime is high enough. They weigh up the costs and benefits.

  Crime will increase if it brings higher rewards relative to working within the rules of society. Rewards could be material, or they could be things like higher status or more security, or

  There is no risk of getting

  There is no punishment
• ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY - Cohen and Felson


  Rational choice theory has been developed by Cohen and Felson in their ‘Routine Activities Theory’ (1979). They argued that in most circumstances social control mechanisms, lack of opportunity and/ or the risk of getting caught prevented crime from taking place. Crime therefore needed three conditions to take place:

  Individuals who were motivated to offend

  The availability of opportunity and targets

  The lack of capable guardians such as parents or police who might prevent crime occurring.
• CRITICISMS OF RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

  Rational Choice Theory rests on a fiction of ‘economic man’. Economic man is continually looking for opportunities to maximise his personal gains, making immoral and asocial choices if this helps him achieve his goals.

  Economic man does not have a past, or complex motives, a rich social life or even a social identity. He just muddles through satisfying based on imperfect information.
• Broken Windows Theory (Wilson and Kelling 1982)

  Wilson and Kelling use the the phrase ‘broken windows’ to stand for all the various signs of disorder and lack of concern for others that are found in some neighbourhoods. This includes undue noise, graffiti, begging, dog fouling ,littering, vandalism and so on. They argue that leaving broken windows unrepaired, tolerating aggressive behaviour etc. sends out a signal that no one cares. There is a lack of social control, which further amplifies crime.
• Charles Murray and the Underclass - 1

  Charles Murray argued that changes to family structure was responsible for much of the increase in the crime rate in the 1970s and 80s – he largely attributes the growth of crime because of a growing underclass or ‘new rabble’ who are defined by their deviant behaviour and fail to socialise their children properly. The children of the underclass fail to learn self-control and also fail to learn the difference between right and wrong.
• Charles Murray and the Underclass - 2


  The underclass has increased because of increasing welfare dependency. Murray argues that increasingly generous welfare benefits since the 1960s have led to increasing numbers of people to become dependent on the state. This has led to to the decline of marriage and the growth of lone parent families, because women can now live off benefits rather than having to get married to have children. This also means that men no longer have to take responsibility for supporting their families, so they no longer need to work.
• Right Realism – Controlling Crime

  Situational Crime Prevention focuses on making adaptations in specific localities, by putting window locks on windows, or putting CCTV in a shop for example.

  Environmental Crime Prevention focusses on making whole neighbourhoods or larger areas more crime-resistant, through putting more police on the streets for example, or adopting a more ‘Zero Tolerance’ approach to minor crimes
• Situational Crime Prevention (SCP)


  Situational Crime Prevention focuses on making adaptations to reduce crime in specific localities. It aims to reduce crime through decreasing the opportunities to commit crime and/ or increasing the risk of getting caught. Examples of situational crime prevention techniques include putting up surveillance cameras and installing lockable shutters on shops.
• SCP - Target Hardening


  Target hardening involves making buildings harder to break into and objects harder to steal, or damage. Examples of target hardening on buildings include door and window locks, lockable shutters and gates. Spiky railings and anti-climb paint are also examples. Gates on alleyways which lead to household’s back gardens have also shown to reduce crime.
• CRITICISMS OF SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION

  It leads to crime displacement. One criticism of situational crime prevention measures is that they do not reduce crime, they simply displace it, or make it move to another place or another time. After all, if criminals are acting rationally, they will simply move on to easier targets.

  Ignore factors such as inequality and deprivation as causes of crime (Garland 2001).
• Environmental Crime Prevention


  Environmental crime prevention strategies involve changing the broader area or environment in which crime occurs through increasing formal and informal social control measures in order to clamp down on anti-social behaviour and prevent an area from deteriorating. These strategies tend to rely much more heavily on the police than situational crime prevention strategies.
• ECP - Zero Tolerance Policing


  Zero Tolerance Policing involves strictly enforcing penalties for relatively minor crimes or anti-social behaviour such as begging, drug possession, public drinking.

  This approach was famously used to crack down on rapidly increasing crime in New York City in the 1980s, which was suffering from a crime epidemic, linked to high levels crack-cocaine use a that time.
• EVALUATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME PREVENTION

  The New York ‘Zero Tolerance’ study suggests that zero tolerance policies work to reduce crime.

  HOWEVER, Levitt and Dubner found that this correlation was coincidental – other factors were responsible for the decline in crime.

  It is more expensive than situational crime prevention – it takes a lot of police to patrol an area and clamp down on anti-social behaviour.

  Reiner (2015) argues that the police would be better deployed focusing on more serious crime hot spots rather than clamping down on minor forms of anti-social behaviour.