Written by: Abbey Riendeau, LMHC
Who is responsible for preventing crime? Government, State, police, citizens, politicians, parents, teachers? Who can we point at and tell to do better in order to see some improvement in the safety of our communities? This is important to consider as crime rates, especially for violent crimes like murder, continue to rise in the United States. 2020 saw a 30% increase in homicides nationwide and police data from large cities showed another 7% increase in the year 2021. Over a dozen large cities across the United States experienced the most homicides in the cities’ history in 2021. But there is not a clear answer to who is responsible or even most responsible for addressing these concerning trends. In fact, it’s probably more accurate to believe that we all have a part to play in crime prevention, even if it’s just a small one.
It’s probably obvious that there is not one magic solution to reducing violence and preventing crime. Making a meaningful change will require systemic review, collaboration, input, and execution from a variety of people in a variety of positions and settings. In researching the most effective reactions to recent increases in violence, four principles to guide policy and practice have been identified. First, securing a solution-focused aim emphasizes providing concrete assistance to those in the field. Second, utilizing evidence-informed information from reliable research and data is important for understanding the complex problem of violent crime. Third, community engagement involves collaborating with those who are most likely to be directly impacted by crime and violence. Lastly, keeping resources and assistance humanity-centered is vital to reaffirming the humanity of those impacted by encouraging healing and decreasing harm.
Below are broad suggestions and brief explanations for changes and improvements that have some of the highest likelihood of lowering crime rates and beginning to prevent future crimes. These are the beginning steps; much larger systemic change is needed over a long period of time to effectively address community, state, and national issues.
Preventing crime rather than reacting to crime: Often we react to crime after it has already happened, but crime rates can actually be reduced if crime is prevented before it happens. Prevention is effective because only a fraction of crimes are actually reported to law enforcement, meaning law enforcement and other agencies only react to approximately half of crimes that are committed. If prevention policies were implemented, crime may not get the opportunity to occur in the first place. Prevention policies should be put in place with a clear and measurable goal, such as reducing the occurrence of violent crime this year by 10%. This allows progress to be measured in clear teams and shows citizens that tangible goals are being set and progress is being monitored and measured. This requires investment in prevention programs, which take time and money in order to see the benefits. Proactive policing has the potential to bring together communities and law enforcement but it also has the risk of creating further distance due to possible bias. Education, training, and collaboration is vital for effective proactive policing.
Make accountability more certain, rather than more severe: Increasing the likelihood of someone being caught for a crime is more effective for reducing crime versus increasing the length of a punishment. Therefore, it is more cost effective to spend more money on increasing the likelihood of being caught for a crime instead of spending more money on incarcerating someone longer. Rates of arrest have been decreasing, though the number of crimes being committed has not changed much. This means the majority of individuals who commit crimes are not being arrested for crimes, including murder. It may be helpful to increase resources provided to law enforcement officers to increase their ability to investigate crimes and make arrests. Supporting research-based, deterrence-focused policing strategies for the areas most at risk for crime and victimization.
Set people up with the skills and knowledge to make better choices: How people behave and respond is often a product of their experiences, choices, and conditions of the environment they find themselves in. This may include recognizing factors that limit an individual's options, such as substance use or abuse. Cognitive behavioral interventions have been shown to help individuals respond to situations and make better decisions. These types of interventions could be incorporated into all programs aimed at reducing recidivism, such as substance use treatment programs, life skills training, and parole or probation programs. Leaders can begin by incorporating cognitive behavioral interventions into programs and then ensuring the programs are available and accessible to the intended population.
Make the most out of probation and set individuals up for success: Approximately one third of violent crimes are committed by known offenders, meaning they have previously committed, been caught, and charged for a crime. Many of these repeat offenders are under probation supervision, so why are they engaging in continued criminal behavior? One way to reduce crime rates may be to improve the quality of probation supervision. Many probation systems are under-resourced and do not utilize evidence-based practices to reach their potential to reduce recidivism. Probation programs have the potential to reduce crime and increase safety at a much lower cost than incarceration. State leaders can begin reforming probation programs to focus supervision on individuals who are most likely to reoffend. Programs can also be revamped to include additional training for probation officers so they can help individuals on probation change their behaviors. Many of the current probation programs create a lengthy list of supervision terms that increase the likelihood of returning to prison through technical violations, such as missing appointments or not acquiring a job on time.
Improving and modernizing parole policies to improve the cost-effectiveness of incarceration: The practices and guidelines followed by many current parole boards are often out-dated, unclear, and not transparent. If parole boards cannot accurately assess someone’s risk to public safety and factors that can reduce that risk, these boards are likely to hold individuals in prison longer than is needed (and at a huge cost to taxpayers) and release some individuals too soon or without the appropriate level of supervision and assistance. States can begin to increase the effectiveness of parole by utilizing accurate assessments for risk, creating clear guidelines for release via parole, and ensuring quality supervision and access to resources during parole. States can utilize their own data on assessment of risk, violence, and program completion and success to drive policy decisions related to release. Additionally, investing in community-based reentry services and evidence-based supervision programs can help to improve the success of parole and reduce prison populations and cost to taxpayers.
Health, education, labor, and housing agencies and programs need to be enlisted to strengthen communities: Incarceration and corrections are insufficient on their own to reduce recidivism and crime. Those who are most likely to reoffend are also the most likely to face increased barriers to reentry, including securing stable housing, employment, education, and healthcare. Additionally, the neighborhoods that have the highest proportion of incarcerated individuals are also the neighborhoods with the fewest available resources and support for reentry from incarceration. State and local governments should connect the leaders in health, education, labor, and housing to the leaders in the justice agencies to ensure those who have the greatest need for these resources are among the individuals who are receiving the available resources. This coordination between agencies and support programs is crucial for reentry.
Address trauma to prevent future trauma: Hurt people hurt people. This is because trauma is a cycle. Trauma impacts an individual’s expectations, perceptions, interpretations, and communications with others, which can perpetuate further victimization and crime. By ensuring that those who have experienced trauma receive the appropriate support and resources, the cycle of trauma can be interrupted to prevent it from being passed onto others. This can be done by investing in resources to meet the needs of victims, regardless of the victim’s decision to report or to not report the crime. This may include ensuring all individuals are treated with empathy, and have access to programs to support immediate needs, including emergency financial assistance and housing programs. These resources and programs should use trauma-informed approaches, which includes acknowledging and recognizing the impacts and symptoms of trauma and ensures that services are delivered in a way that does not retraumatize. For example, reducing the administrative burden to apply for financial assistance may be one way barriers could be reduced for victims of trauma. Additionally, taking into account an individual’s trauma history and the impact that trauma can have on decision making during sentencing is one way to recognize factors contributing to crime. Following this up with the appropriate mental health treatment is even better. Working to reduce and address trauma for all individuals, including law enforcement and corrections staff, can help prevent trauma from being passed onto others.
The quality of programs, resources, and assistance matters! Not just any program will work, only high-quality and evidence-based programs will be effective. Providing a program that is not being monitored for quality and effectiveness is like providing someone with clothing without asking for their size or providing drinking water without testing it to ensure it’s safe for consumption. The solutions won’t be effective if they are not addressing the actual problems and they may even create more problems! State and local governments need to review their investments in programs to ensure they are investing wisely in quality programs that are creating favorable outcomes. Having resources is not enough; the resources need to be high-quality, research-based, and individualized to each person’s needs. Reviewing the outcomes of current programming and conducting routine audits and evaluations is a way in which leaders can begin reviewing the effectiveness of their programs. Leaders also need to commit to continuous improvement and be willing to change directions if necessary. Leaders may actually find that they can save money by investing in higher quality programs due to the great positive impact these quality programs can have on reducing recidivism. Policy makers and leaders should also leave room for adjustments in their money allocations. That is, they should leave room to allocate money to innovative programs and new leaders in addition to analyzing the quality of current programs.
Reporting, collecting, and analyzing better data to reduce crime: It may be surprising to some that getting accurate statistics on crime and punishment is difficult, for a variety of reasons. One reason is a lack of consistent and accurate reporting. In 2021, almost 40% of law enforcement agencies failed to report their crime data for the year. It’s difficult to recognize and fix problems within the system if data on those problems is not being collected and measured. To effectively reduce crime and provide services in the necessary areas, cities need accurate and complete data to draw from and to analyze and identify areas in need of increased policing or other resources. Additionally, what data is collected, measured, and reported on varies between jurisdictions. For example, although focus on the effectiveness of reentry programs has increased, only half of the states report on the outcomes of probation supervision. This makes it difficult for the states who do not have that information to analyze if their probation programs are effective. State and local leaders can take charge by putting in place requirements for data collection and review as aggressively as these issues demand.
Make the criminal justice system a collaborating system: The criminal justice “system” as it is known currently is not much of a system as much as it is a collection of independent justice agencies. Each of these agencies have different goals, policies, funding, and methods of accountability. But people do not live in siloed boxes; people move around and often come in contact with different agencies in various places. It’s common for local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies to have their own systems, records, and regulations. Additionally, these agencies typically do not coordinate across agency lines or with other groups or programs. This means that someone’s record with one state agency will not be available to another state’s agency without purposeful coordination between those agencies. By identifying functional ways for various local, state, and federal agencies to come together, collaborate, and coordinate data, resources, and support, we could actually have a criminal justice system. Throw in partnership and collaboration with other agencies, resources, and programs, and the criminal justice system might actually be more helpful than harmful.
Overall, the leaders in our communities who have the ability to make policy changes and begin to impact crime need to step up and do more. But it isn’t just on those in positions of power to make changes. The parents, teachers, and citizens in those communities need to voice their requests for improvement and change. We need to use our vote to advocate for what we believe in and use our voices to demand that those in power make decisions for the good of the community as a whole. It comes down to each individual citizen to be the change they want to see in the community, state, nation, and in the world.
If you or a loved one are involved in the legal system and are in need of psychological services, please contact our office at 508-296-0229 or email us at info@forensicinsightgroup.com to inquire about services we can provide. If you work in the forensic or legal fields, such as attorneys, law enforcement officers, or correctional officers, we can also provide you or your clients with support and services.
Citation:
Saving Lives: Ten Essential Actions Can Take to Reduce Violence Now. (2022, January 12). Council on Criminal Justice. https://counciloncj.org/10-essential-actions/
10 Ways States Can Lower Crime. (n.d.). Tools for States to Address Crime. https://projects.csgjusticecenter.org/tools-for-states-to-address-crime/10-ways-states-can-lower-crime/