Images of Crime & Crime Control_Ch2
Perception of Crime
Influences shaping our perception of crime include:
Personal Experience (victimization/engagement in)
Media (journalism & popular media)
Official State Knowledge (police, court, corrections data)
Theoretical Narratives/Knowledge
Activist Organizations/Lobby Groups
Distorting Effects
Public perception of crime is distorted by:
Mass Media:
Exaggerates certain types of crimes over others (e.g., interpersonal violence over corporate or institutional corruption).
Activist Groups:
Exaggerate threats or criticize policies for political gain (e.g., highlights roles of organizations like Black Lives Matter while ignoring data on rising homicide rates).
Personal Experiences:
Emotions can distort personal perceptions of crime.
Knowledge in Criminology
Criminology aims to produce knowledge about criminal behavior.
Knowledge is defined as justified true belief, tied to provisional truths.
Not all truths can be known or proven; truth exists independently.
Justification for knowledge requires necessary conditions.
Inadequate Justification
Naïve methods insufficient for knowledge:
Logical reasoning can stem from false premises.
Authority/Experts can be misleading.
Consensus does not guarantee correct conclusions.
Observation methods (eyewitness testimony) are often low-quality.
Personal experiences can lead to biased interpretations.
Scientific Objectivity
Science is a key method for discovering truth and correcting human biases.
It helps to understand reality better but is fragile and susceptible to various influences (e.g., market forces, advocacy funding).
Fear, greed, power, and ego can corrupt scientific integrity.
Criminological Research Funding
In Canada, government funding impacts research direction, focusing on politically desirable questions.
Researchers face pressure to conform to acceptable viewpoints, limiting inquiry into certain topics (Overton Window).
The Overton Window model shows how ideas evolve, which can restrict academic freedom.
Herd thinking may mislead reliance on consensus from numerous experts.
Corrections of Factual Errors
Misconceptions:
No proven causal link between violent video games and aggression/criminal behavior.
The figure of 460,000 sexual assaults in Canada annually is inaccurate.
Violent Video Games & Crime
Social science has not reliably correlated multimedia violence with anti-social behavior.
Research (Ferguson et al., 2008) shows no link between violent video game play and real-life aggression.
In 2011, the US Supreme Court ruled that psychological studies did not establish a direct impact of violent video games on aggression.
Despite findings, the American Psychological Association maintained a disputed link until 2017.
Christopher J. Ferguson and Sven Smith replicated findings showing no predictive validity for violent gaming on criminal behavior (see: Stetson University study).
Sexual Assault Trends
Sexual assault rates are declining, with 98% categorized as level 1 (sexual integrity offences).
Ontario courts prosecute sexual assault vigorously, second only to murder and attempted murder.
Statistics from 2016 indicate:
21,014 sexual assault charges across three categories.
Level 1 assault rate is significantly higher than level 1 sexual assault rate.
Declining Rates and Public Perception
Between 2006-2016, notable declines observed:
Level 3 (aggravated) assault by -45%
Level 2 (with weapon/body harm) by -13%
Level 1 (integrity offence) by -15%
Public perception often misconstrues the seriousness with which the justice system treats sexual assault, leading to feelings of unsafety among women.
Emotional manipulation, distorted data representation, and extreme case reporting drive flawed perceptions.
Common reasons for not reporting assaults included:
Incident deemed not serious enough (65%)
Perception of crime as minor (63%)
Belief that no harm was caused (48%).