Berikan pengenalan ringkas mengenai latar belakang syarikat atau jabatan

Jabatan Penjara Malaysia merupakan sebuah jabatan di bawah Kementerian Keselamatan

Dalam Negeri Malaysia. Penjara merupakan tempat di mana pesalah disabitkan hukuman
oleh pihak mahkamah. Penjara juga merupakan sebuah institusi penahanan dan pemulihan
yang memiliki jentera dan kekuatan sumber manusia yang berkualiti serta proaktif dalam
melaksanakan visi, misi dan objektif yang telah disarankan.

i) Ulaskan kepentingan tanggungjawab sosial kepada sesebuah organisasi.

ii) Meninggikan taraf hidup komuniti di mana perniagaan beroperasi

iii) Memupuk semangat kerjasama antara pengusaha perniagaan, kerajaan &

orang awam.

iv) Meningkatkan keuntungan syarikat.

v) Mengelakkan bencana alam seperti kejadian tanah runtuh, pencemaran udara &
sungai akibat pengabaian tanggungjawab sosial.

Kenal pasti dan huraikan secara ringkas pihak yang berkepentingan kepada syarikat

Refer note.

a) kelaskan aktiviti tersebut kepada aspek-aspek tanggungjawab sosial. Berikan

justifikasi kepada jawapan anda.

Buat surat dulu to ketua pengarah penjara refer web penjara.

a) kenal pasti jenis strategi yang digunakan syarikat dalam memberi tindak balas
terhadap tanggungjawab sosial. Mengapakah syarikat memilih untuk
mengguna pakai strategi berkenaan?

'manager' ialah individu yang bertanggungjawab sepenuhnya dalam memastikan segala

tugasan yang diberikan kepada pekerja bawahannya telah dilaksanakan dengan jayanya
apabila 'manager' mempunyai satu-satu tugasan, beliau perlu membuat perancangan,
mengurus, memimpin dan mengawal serta membuat pemantauan terhadap pekerjanya
agar objektif dapat dicapai atau kerja tersebut dapat diselesaikan dalam jangkamasa
yang ditetapkan.
'manager' juga perlu menganalisis, memahami dan berusaha untuk menyelesaikan
pelbagai masalah dalam organisasi agar halatuju syarikat tercapai.
'manager' juga boleh bekerjasama dengan pekeja bawahan/ kumpulannya. Ini juga
bertujuan untuk mencapai pengiktirafan ISO.
'manager' juga perlu meluangkan masa bersama pekerjanya melalui perbualan dan
tinjauan serta memberi motivasi kepada pekerja dengan membuat perbincangan 2 hala.
sebagai contoh, dialog bulanan yang bertujuan unuk mencari jalan penyelesaian bagi
sebarang masalah yang dihadapi dalam sesebuah organisasi.

Jenayah merupakan satu perbuatan yang menyalahi undang-undang kerajaan sesuatu tempat.
Orang yang melakukan perbuatan jenayah ini dinamakan penjenayah.
Idea asas apa yang dikatakan jenayah ialah apa-apa yang boleh memberikan masalah atau
kesusahan kepada orang lain. Sebagai contoh, semua orang bersetuju bahawa mencuri dan
mencederakan/membunuh orang lain adalah perbuatan jenayah.
Namun demikian, ada juga perkara-perkara yang dianggap jenayah di sesuatu negara
mungkin tidak dianggap jenayah di negara yang lain. Sebagai contoh, bercium di khalayak
ramai merupakan satu jenayah dari sisi undang-undang Malaysia dan boleh didenda, tetapi
tidak di negara-negara Eropah dan Amerika Syarikat. Banyak undang-undang berkenaan
jenayah diambil daripada undang-undang agama.
Selalunya, tugas mencegah jenayah dan menangkap penjenayah adalah di bawah
tanggungjawab pihak polis. Mereka berhak menahan sesiapa yang disyaki untuk dibicarakan
oleh mahkamah/hakim. Sekiranya sabit kesalahan, pesalah tersebut boleh didenda atau
dipenjarakan. Sesetengah negara juga mempunyai hukuman mati untuk kesalahan tertentu
seperti membunuh dan mengedar dadah. Bagi sesetengah kesalahan kecil seperti memandu
melebihi had laju, pihak polis boleh mendenda pemandu tersebut dengan terus, tanpa perlu
mendakwanya di mahkamah.
[sunting] Jenis Jenayah
Jenayah boleh dibahagikan kepada beberapa kategori (yang bertindan):
• Jenayah berat
• Jenayah komputer dan jenayah siber
• Jenayah terhadap manusia
 • Jenayah ke atas harta benda
• Jenayah terhadap keselamatan negara
• Jenayah hakcipta dan paten
• Jenayah dadah
• Jenayah seksual
• Jenayah senjata
• Jenayah perang
• Jenayah juvana
• JOHOR BAHRU 31 Mei – Sebanyak 1,500 belia di negeri ini menghadiri hari terakhir Karnival
Banteras Jenayah di Kompleks Pasir Gudang dekat sini hari ini.
• Karnival yang mengetengahkan slogan ‘Jom Banteras Jenayah’ itu diadakan selama tiga hari
bermula Jumaat lalu.
• Karnival itu anjuran Gerakan Belia 4B Johor bersama Jabatan Belia dan Sukan Negeri dengan
kerjasama Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM), Majlis Perbandaran Pasir Gudang (MPPG) dan beberapa
agensi lain.
• Timbalan Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Dalam Negeri, Mohd. Nor Hashim ketika berucap pada
majlis penutup karnival itu berkata, kementerian melalui PDRM, Agensi Anti Dadah Kebangsaan
(AADK) dan beberapa agensi lain sentiasa memantau keadaan dan keselamatan negara.
• “Kita tidak menafikan bahawa peningkatan jenayah adalah disebabkan oleh pelbagai faktor.
• “Pihak kerajaan akan mengambil langkah yang perlu bagi memastikan jentera penguatkuasaan
berjalan dengan lancar sekali gus dapat mengatasi kadar jenayah di negara ini,” katanya yang
mewakili Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Datuk Wira Abu Seman Yusuf.
• Katanya lagi, program karnival itu mampu dijadikan sebagai landasan untuk menyedarkan
masyarakat bahawa tugas membanteras jenayah bukan terletak di bahu agensi penguatkuasa
semata-mata.

Memerangi Jenayah Perlu Lebih Dari CCTV

13 Jan 2008 | Community, Current Affairs | by admin | 4 Komen
Keadaan jenayah yang sudah semakin serius beberapa tahun kebelakangan ini makin
menjadi-jadi dengan kisah kehilangan anak gadis Sharlinie Mohd Nasar dan pembunuhan
kejam Datuk S. Krishnasamy, ADUN MIC di Johor.
Nampaknya dari VIP hinggalah rakyat biasa, semua tidak selamat dari jenayah.
Kini kerajaan berhasrat menambah peruntukan CCTV sebagai langkah mengatasi jenayah.
Tidak dinafikan, adanya CCTV boleh membantu usaha memerangi jenayah, tetapi tanpa
usaha bersepadu CCTV semata-mata tidak mampu mengatasinya. Banyak lagi langkah yang
lebih asas yang lebih efektif. Misalnya kajian di Britain mendapati hanya dengan lampu
jalanan yang lebih baik dapat mengurangkan kadar jenayah sebanyak 20%, sedangkan CCTV
hanya mampu mengurangkannya 5%. Di dalam tragedi Nurin Jazlin, kualiti CCTVnya terlalu
rendah hingga suspek tidak dapat dikenalpasti sekalipun selepas menghantar imej tersebut ke
FBI, Amerika Syarikat.
Pastinya jika polis dapat bertindak terhadap penjenayah dengan penuh efisyen sebagaimana
mereka bertindak terhadap pembangkang, kadar jenayah akan turun mendadak. Malangnya
sumber yang terhad banyak disalurkan untuk menyekat program-program rakyat, bukannya
memerangi jenayah.
Semakin ramai rakyat Malaysia khususnya kelas menengah yang mengambil keputusan untuk
menggunakan perkhidmatan keselamatan swasta. Tetapi bagaimana ramai rakyat Malaysia -
termasuk di Kampung Medan di mana Sharlinie diculik - yang tidak mampu menggunakan
perkhidmatan tersebut? Bukannya kami menafikan peranan anggota masyarakat yang lain
namun polis tidak dapat lari dari tanggungjawab tersebut.
Semangat anggota polis juga berada di tahap rendah memandangkan masalah rasuah sudah
menular hingga ke peringkat tertinggi struktur PDRM. Seringkali apabila timbul masalah,
anggota di peringkat bawah akan dikambinghitamkan, sedangkan yang bertanggungjawab
selamat.
Di samping itu, untuk melahirkan suasana yang sejahtera untuk masyarakat, kedua-dua
jenayah dan sebab-sebab jenayah perlu diperangi. Oleh itu isu seperti jurang kemiskinan,
pengangguran, masalah sosial - mesti juga diatasi.
Besar kemungkinan, langkah terbaru pentadbiran Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi akan
menjadi seperti perangnya menentang rasuah - satu lagi usaha melepaskan batuk di tangga!
For other uses, see Crime (disambiguation).

Societies define crime as the breach of one or more rules or laws for which some governing
authority or force may ultimately prescribe a punishment.
When society deems informal relationships and sanctions, insufficient to establish and
maintain a desired social order, there may result more formalized systems of social control
imposed by a government, or by a sovereign state. With institutional and legal machinery at
their disposal, agents of the State can compel populations to conform to behavioral codes, and
can punish those who do not conform.
Authorities employ various mechanisms to regulate behaviour, including rules codified into
laws, policing people to ensure they comply with those laws, and other policies and practices
designed[by whom?] to prevent crime. In addition, authorities provide remedies and sanctions, and
collectively these constitute a criminal justice system. Not all breaches of the law, however,
count as crimes — for example: breaches of contract and other civil law offences.
The label of "crime" and the accompanying social stigma normally confine their scope to
those activities seen as injurious to the general population or to the State, including some that
cause serious loss or damage to individuals. The labellers intend to assert the hegemony of a
dominant population, or to reflect a consensus of condemnation for the identified behavior
and to justify a punishment imposed by the State (in the event that standard processing tries
and convicts an accused person of a crime). Usually, the perpetrator of the crime is a natural
person, but some jurisdictions and some moral environments also regard legal persons as
capable of committing crimes.
Ilmu mempertahankan diri versus jenayah?
salam permulaan,
"Jenayah merupakan satu perbuatan yang menyalahi undang-undang kerajaan
sesuatu tempat. Orang yang melakukan perbuatan jenayah ini dinamakan
penjenayah.

Idea asas apa yang dikatakan jenayah ialah apa-apa yang boleh memberikan
masalah atau kesusahan kepada orang lain. Sebagai contoh, semua orang bersetuju
bahawa mencuri dan mencederakan/membunuh orang lain adalah perbuatan
jenayah.

Namun demikian, ada juga perkara-perkara yang dianggap jenayah di sesuatu

negara mungkin tidak dianggap jenayah di negara yang lain. Sebagai contoh,
bercium di khalayak ramai merupakan satu jenayah dari sisi undang-undang
Malaysia dan boleh didenda, tetapi tidak di negara-negara Eropah dan Amerika
Syarikat. Banyak undang-undang berkenaan jenayah diambil daripada undang-
undang agama.

Selalunya, tugas mencegah jenayah dan menangkap penjenayah adalah di bawah

tanggungjawab pihak polis. Mereka berhak menahan sesiapa yang disyaki untuk
dibicarakan oleh mahkamah/hakim. Sekiranya sabit kesalahan, pesalah tersebut
boleh didenda atau dipenjarakan. Sesetengah negara juga mempunyai hukuman
mati untuk kesalahan tertentu seperti membunuh dan mengedar dadah. Bagi
sesetengah kesalahan kecil seperti memandu melebihi had laju, pihak polis boleh
mendenda pemandu tersebut dengan terus, tanpa perlu mendakwanya di
mahkamah."

Petikan dari wikipedia ini menerangkan sedikit sebanyak tentang jenayah dan perilakunya.
Seperti yang kita semua sedia maklum bahawa dari hari demi hari kes-kes jenayah semakin
menjadi-jadi. Mungkin kita juga tertanya-tanya mengapa permasalahan ini semakin teruk?
Apakah tidak ada cara untuk menanganinya? Sebagai jawapannya,terdapat banyak cara
untuk menyelesaikannya,bagi mereka yang berfikiran nasionalist ataupun politik maka
akan memilih cara penggubalan undang-undang. Manakala bagi mereka yang berfikiran
Islamik pasti akan berkata "Islamlah jalan penyelesaiannya". Saya sama sekali menyokong
idea ini,Islam adalah jalan penyelesaian terbaik bagi semua permasalahan manusia dalam
setiap segi,begitu juga dalam aspek jenayah. Tapi apa yang menjadi pointnya,bagaimana
cara untuk membuktikan Islam sebagai cara yang terbaik untuk menyelesaikan masalah ini?
Banyak caranya sahabat-sahabat,tapi apa yang saya ingin khususkan dalam posting ini
adalah dengan mempelajari ilmu mempertahankan diri secara umumnya,dan bagi penulis
yang sesuai bagi orang Melayu yang menganut agama Islam,tak lain dan tak bukan adalah
silat.
mungkin sahabat-sahabat akan tertanya mengapa penulis berkata sedemikian,oleh itu mari
kita susuri sejarah silat dan mengapa penulis mencadangkan cara sedemikian.

Adalah sangat-sangat dipercayai bahawa silat adalah warisan mutlak orang Melayu,ini
kerana terdapat beberapa kriteria yang membezakannya dari seni lain,antaranya seni
mengunci pergerakan lawan. Tidak dinafikan ada segelintir silat yang bercampur dengan
perkara-perkara khurafat seperti sihir,tapi itu bukanlah yang ingin difokuskan penulis. Apa
yang menjadi fokus adalah silat yang 'putih' yang mana ada unsur-unsur Islam di dalamnya.

Untuk pengetahuan kita,telah menjadi kebiasaan di kalangan guru-guru agama di zaman

lampau menggunakan pendekatan silat untuk menarik minat orang-orang kebiasaan untuk
mempelajari agama,sambil mereka menurunkan ilmu persilatan,secara halus mereka
mengajar ilmu-ilmu agama,jadi kesannya orang-orang kebanyakan tersebut
berkemungkinan akan beringat supya tidak menyalahgunakan ilmu tersebut,di samping
dapat menjaga diri sendiri,keluarga dan harta.

Pointnya,apa yang penulis ingin sampaikan adalah,apabila seseorang mempelajari sesuatu

seni mempertahankan diri secara betul,tahu tujuan belajar,maka dia tidak akan
menyalahgunakan ilmu tersebut dengan menyerang orang lain secara membabi
buta,mencederakan orang lain ataupun merampas harta orang lain.

di sebelah pihak yang satu lagi,seandainya mereka diserang maka mereka tahu untuk
mempertahankan diri.jadi kes jenayah tidak akan terjadi.

wallahu a'lam..

Crime
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Criminal)

Jump to: navigation, search

A crime is when a person does something that is against the laws of a country. A person who
does this is called a criminal.
The basic idea of what things are called crimes is that they are thought to be things that might
cause a problem for another person. Things like killing another person, injuring another
person, or stealing from another person are crimes in most countries.
But different countries have many different ideas of what things are crimes. Some things that
are crimes in one country are not crimes in other countries. Many countries get their ideas of
what things are crimes from religions.
In many countries, if people say they made or wrote a book, movie, song, or Web page that
they didn't really write or make, it is a crime against the laws of copyright. In many countries,
helping to grow, make, move, or sell illegal drugs is a crime.
In most countries, police try to stop crimes and to find criminals. When the police find
someone who they think might be a criminal, they usually hold the person in a jail. Then,
usually, a court or a judge decides if the person really did a crime. If the court or judge
decides that the person really did it, then he or she might have to pay a fine or go to prison.
Sometimes the judge might decide that the criminal should be executed (killed). This is called
Capital punishment (or the Death Penalty). There are countries in the world who execute
criminals, and others who do not.
When some criminals make money from crime, they try to stop the police finding out where
the money came from by money laundering.
Etymology
The word crime originates from the Latin crīmen (genitive: criminis), from the root of Latin
cernō = "I decide, I give judgement" and Greek κρινω = "I judge". Originally the Latin word
crīmen meant "charge (in law), guilt, accusation".[1]
[edit] Definition
A normative definition views crime as deviant behavior that violates prevailing norms –
cultural standards prescribing how humans ought to behave normally. This approach
considers the complex realities surrounding the concept of crime and seeks to understand
how changing social, political, psychological, and economic conditions may affect the current
definitions of crime and the form of the legal, law-enforcement, and penal responses made by
society.
These structural realities remain fluid and often contentious. For example: as cultures change
and the political environment shifts, societies may criminalise or decriminalise certain
behaviours, which will directly affect the statistical crime rates, influence the allocation of
resources for the enforcement of laws, and (re-)influence the general public opinion.
Similarly, changes in the collection and/or calculation of data on crime may affect the public
perceptions of the extent of any given "crime problem". All such adjustments to crime
statistics, allied with the experience of people in their everyday lives, shape attitudes on the
extent to which the State should use law or social engineering to enforce/encourage any
particular social norm. One can control/influence behaviour in many ways without having to
resort to the criminal justice system.
Indeed, in those cases where no clear consensus exists on a given norm, the drafting of
criminal law by the group in power to prohibit the behaviour of another group may count as
an improper limitation of the second group's freedom, and the ordinary members of society
may lose some of their respect for the law in general — whether the authorities actually
enforce the disputed law or not.
Legislatures pass laws (called mala prohibita) that define crimes which violate social norms.
These laws vary from time to time and from place to place: note variations in gambling laws,
for example, and the prohibition or encouragement of duelling in history. Other crimes, called
mala in se, count as outlawed in almost all societies, (murder, theft and rape, for example).
[edit] Criminalization
Main article: Criminalization

One can view criminalization as a procedure deployed by society as a pre-emptive, harm-

reduction device, using the threat of punishment as a deterrent to anyone proposing to engage
in the behavior causing harm. The State becomes involved because governing entities can
become convinced that the costs of not criminalizing (i.e. allowing the harms to continue
unabated) outweigh the costs of criminalizing it (i.e. restricting individual liberty in order to
minimize harm to others).
Criminalization may provide future harm-reduction even after the committing of a crime,
assuming those incarcerated or otherwise restrained for committing crimes may otherwise
cause harm in the future.[clarification needed]
Some commentators[who?] may[original research?] see criminalization as a way to make potential
criminals pay for their crimes. In this case, criminalization becomes a way to set the price that
one must pay (to society) for certain actions considered detrimental to society as a whole. An
extreme view in this sense might see criminalization as nothing more than State-sanctioned
revenge.
States control the process of criminalization because:
• Even if victims recognize their own role as victims, they may not have the resources
to investigate and seek legal redress for the injuries suffered: the enforcers formally
appointed by the State often have better access to expertise and resources.
• The victims may only want compensation for the injuries suffered, while remaining
indifferent to a possible desire for deterrence.[2]
• Fear of retaliation may deter victims or witnesses of crimes from taking any action.
Even in policed societies, fear may inhibit reporting or co-operation in a trial.
• Victims, on their own, may lack the economies of scale which might allow them to
administer a penal system, let alone to collect any fines levied by a court (see
Polinsky (1980) on the enforcement of fines). Garoupa & Klerman (2002) warn that a
rent-seeking government has as its primary motivation to maximize revenue and so,
if offenders have sufficient wealth, a rent-seeking government will act more
aggressively than a social-welfare-maximizing government in enforcing laws against
minor crimes (usually with a fixed penalty such as parking and routine traffic
violations), but more laxly in enforcing laws against major crimes.
• As a result of the crime, victims may die or become incapacitated.

[edit] History
The idea of crime has a long history. Some religious communities regard sin as a crime; some
may even highlight the crime of sin very early in legendary or mythological accounts of
origins — note the tale of Adam and Eve and the theory of original sin. What one group
considers a crime may cause or ignite war or conflict. However, the earliest known
civilizations had codes of law, containing both civil and penal rules mixed together, though
not always in recorded form.
The Sumerians produced the earliest surviving written codes.[3] Urukagina had an early code
that does not survive; a later king, Ur-Nammu, left the earliest extant written law-system, the
Code of Ur-Nammu, which prescribed a formal system of penalties for specific cases in 57
articles. The Sumerians later issued other codes, including the "code of Lipit-Ishtar". This
code, from the 20th century BCE, contains some fifty articles, and scholars have
reconstructed it by comparing several sources.
The Sumerian was deeply conscious of his personal rights and resented any encroachment on them,
whether by his King, his superior, or his equal. No wonder that the Sumerians were the first to
compile laws and law codes.
— Kramer[4]

Successive legal codes in Babylon, including the code of Hammurabi, reflected

Mesopotamian society's belief that law derived from the will of the gods (see Babylonian
law).[5] Many states at this time functioned as theocracies, with codes of conduct largely
religious in origin or reference.
Sir Henry Maine (1861) studied the ancient codes available in his day, and failed to find any
criminal law in the "modern" sense of the word. While modern systems distinguish between
offences against the "State" or "Community", and offences against the "Individual", the so-
called penal law of ancient communities did not deal with "crimes" (Latin: crimina), but with
"wrongs" (Latin: delicta). Thus the Hellenic laws[6] treated all forms of theft, assault, rape, and
murder as private wrongs, and left action for enforcement up to the victims or their survivors.
The earliest systems seem to have lacked formal courts.
The Romans systematized law and applied their system across the Roman Empire. Again,
the initial rules of Roman Law regarded assaults as a matter of private compensation. The
most significant Roman Law concept involved dominion.[7] The pater familias owned all the
family and its property (including slaves); the pater enforced matters involving interference
with any property. The Commentaries of Gaius on the Twelve Tables treated furtum (in
modern parlance: "theft") as a tort.
Similarly, assault and violent robbery involved trespass as to the pater's property (so, for
example, the rape of a slave could become the subject of compensation to the pater as
having trespassed on his "property"), and breach of such laws created a vinculum juris (an
obligation of law) that only the payment of monetary compensation (modern "damages")
could discharge. Similarly, the consolidated Teutonic laws of the Germanic tribes,[8] included
a complex system of monetary compensations for what courts would now consider the
complete[citation needed] range of criminal offences against the person, from murder down.
Even though Rome abandoned its Britannic provinces around 400 AD, the Germanic
mercenaries – who had largely become instrumental in enforcing Roman rule in Britannia –
acquired ownership of land there and continued to use a mixture of Roman and Teutonic
Law, with much written down under the early Anglo-Saxon Kings.[9] But only when a more
centralized English monarchy emerged following the Norman invasion, and when the kings
of England attempted to assert power over the land and its peoples, did the modern concept
emerge, namely of a crime not only as an offence against the "individual", but also as a
wrong against the "State".[10]
This idea came from common law, and the earliest conception of a criminal act involved
events of such major significance that the "State" had to usurp the usual functions of the civil
tribunals, and direct a special law or privilegium against the perpetrator. All the earliest
English criminal trials involved wholly extraordinary and arbitrary courts without any settled
law to apply, whereas the civil (delictual) law operated in a highly developed and consistent
manner (except where a King wanted to raise money by selling a new form of writ). The
development of the idea that the "State" dispenses justice in a court only emerges in parallel
with or after the emergence of the concept of sovereignty.
In continental Europe, Roman law persisted, but with a stronger influence from the Church.[11]
Coupled with the more diffuse political structure based on smaller feudal units, various
different legal traditions emerged, remaining more strongly rooted in Roman jurisprudence,
but modified to meet the prevailing political climate.
In Scandinavia the effect of Roman law did not become apparent until the 17th century, and
the courts grew out of the things — the assemblies of the people. The people decided the
cases (usually with largest freeholders dominating). This system later gradually developed
into a system with a royal judge nominating a number of the most esteemed men of the parish
as his board, fulfilling the function of "the people" of yore.
From the Hellenic system onwards, the policy rationale for requiring the payment of
monetary compensation for wrongs committed has involved the avoidance of feuding
between clans and families.[12] If compensation could mollify families' feelings, this would
help to keep the peace. On the other hand, the institution of oaths also played down the threat
of feudal warfare. Both in archaic Greece and in medieval Scandinavia, the accused was
released if he could get a sufficient number of male relatives to swear him unguilty. This may
be compared with the United Nations Security Council where the veto power of the
permanent members ensures that the organization is not drawn into crises where it could not
enforce its decisions.
These means of restraining private feuds did not always work, and sometimes prevented the
fulfillment of justice. But in the earliest times the "state" did not always provide an
independent policing force. Thus criminal law grew out of present-day tort; and, in real terms,
many acts and omissions classified as crimes actually overlap with civil-law concepts.
The development of sociological thought from the 19th century onwards prompted some
fresh views on crime and criminality, and fostered the beginnings of criminology as a study
of crime in society. Nietzsche noted a link between crime and creativity – in The Birth of
Tragedy he asserted: "The best and brightest that man can acquire he must obtain by crime".
In the 20th century Michel Foucault in Discipline and Punish made a study of criminalization
as a coercive method of state control.
[edit] Natural-law theory
Justifying the State's use of force to coerce compliance with its laws has proven a consistent
theoretical problem. One of the earliest justifications involved the theory of natural law. This
posits that the nature of the world or of human beings underlies the standards of morality or
constructs them. Thomas Aquinas said: "the rule and measure of human acts is the reason,
which is the first principle of human acts" (Aquinas, ST I-II, Q.90, A.I). He meant that since
people are by nature rational beings, it becomes morally appropriate that they should behave
in a way that conforms to their rational nature. Thus, to be valid, any law must conform to
natural law and coercing people to conform to that law is morally acceptable. William
Blackstone (1979: 41) describes the thesis:
"This law of nature, being co-eval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of
course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all
countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and
 such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or
immediately, from this original."

But John Austin (1790-1859), an early positivist, applied utilitarianism in accepting the
calculating nature of human beings and the existence of an objective morality, but denied that
the legal validity of a norm depends on whether its content conforms to morality. Thus in
Austinian terms a moral code can objectively determine what people ought to do, the law can
embody whatever norms the legislature decrees to achieve social utility, but every individual
remains free to choose what he or she will do. Similarly, Hart (1961) saw the law as an aspect
of sovereignty, with lawmakers able to adopt any law as a means to a moral end.
Thus the necessary and sufficient conditions for the truth of a proposition of law simply
involved internal logic and consistency, and that the state's agents used state power with
responsibility. Ronald Dworkin (2005) rejects Hart's theory and proposes that all individuals
should expect the equal respect and concern of those who govern them as a fundamental
political right. He offers a theory of compliance overlaid by a theory of deference (the
citizen's duty to obey the law) and a theory of enforcement, which identifies the legitimate
goals of enforcement and punishment. Legislation must conform to a theory of legitimacy,
which describes the circumstances under which a particular person or group is entitled to
make law, and a theory of legislative justice, which describes the law they are entitled or
obliged to make.
Indeed, despite everything, the majority of natural-law theorists have accepted the idea of
enforcing the prevailing morality as a primary function of the law. This view entails the
problem that it makes any moral criticism of the law impossible: if conformity with natural
law forms a necessary condition for legal validity, all valid law must, by definition, count as
morally just. Thus, on this line of reasoning, the legal validity of a norm necessarily entails its
moral justice.
One can solve this problem by granting some degree of moral relativism and accepting that
norms may evolve over time and, therefore, one can criticize the continued enforcement of
old laws in the light of the current norms. People may find such law acceptable, but the use of
State power to coerce citizens to comply with that law lacks moral justification. More recent
conceptions of the theory characterise crime as the violation of individual rights.
Since society considers so many rights as natural (hence the term "right") rather than man-
made, what constitutes a crime also counts as natural, in contrast to laws (seen as man-made).
Adam Smith illustrates this view, saying that a smuggler would be an excellent citizen, "...had
not the laws of his country made that a crime which nature never meant to be so."
Natural-law theory therefore distinguishes between "criminality" (which derives from human
nature) and "illegality" (which originates with the interests of those in power). Lawyers
sometimes express the two concepts with the phrases malum in se and malum prohibitum
respectively. They regard a "crime malum in se" as inherently criminal; whereas a "crime
malum prohibitum" (the argument goes) counts as criminal only because the law has decreed
it so.
This view leads to a seeming paradox: one can perform an illegal act without committing a
crime, while a criminal act could be perfectly legal. Many Enlightenment thinkers (such as
Adam Smith and the American Founding Fathers) subscribed to this view to some extent, and
it remains influential among so-called classical liberals[citation needed] and libertarians[citation needed].
[edit] Distinctions
Distinctions

Religious sentiment often becomes a contributory factor of crime. Rioters set fire to many of
Ahmedabad's buildings during the 2002 Gujarat violence.

Governments criminalise antisocial behaviour — and treat it within a system of offences

against society — in order to justify the imposition of punishment. Authorities make a series
of distinctions depending on the passive subject of the crime (the victim), or on the offended
interest(s), in crimes against:
• honour
• the administration of justice
• law and order
• patrimony
• the person
• personality of the State
• personality rights
• public administration
• public economy, industry, and commerce
• public morality
• religious sentiment and faith
• rights of the citizen
Or one can categorise crimes depending on the related punishment, with sentencing tariffs
prescribed in line with the perceived seriousness of the offence. Thus fines and noncustodial
sentences may address the crimes seen as least serious, with lengthy imprisonment or (in
some States) capital punishment reserved for the most serious.
[edit] Types
Researchers and commentators may classify crime into categories, including:
• property crime
 • public order crime
• violent crime
Analysts can also group crimes by severity, some common category-terms including:
• felonies (US and previously UK)
• indictable offences (UK)
• infractions
• misdemeanors (US and previously UK)
• summary offences (UK)

[edit] U.S. classification

In the United States since 1930, the FBI has tabulated Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)
annually from crime data submitted by law enforcement agencies across the United States.[13]
Officials compile this data at the city, county, and state levels into the Uniform crime reports
(UCR). They classify violations of laws which derive from common law as Part I (index)
crimes in UCR data, further categorised as violent or property crimes. Part I violent crimes
include murder and criminal homicide (voluntary manslaughter), forcible rape, aggravated
assault, and robbery; while Part I property crimes include burglary, arson, larceny/theft, and
motor-vehicle theft. All other crimes count as Part II crimes.
For convenience, such lists usually include infractions although, in the U.S., they may come
into the sphere not of the criminal law, but rather of the civil law. Compare tortfeasance.
Booking arrests requires detention for a time-frame ranging 1 to 24 hours.
[edit] Crimes in international law
Crimes defined by treaty as crimes against international law include:
• crimes against peace
• crimes of apartheid
• genocide
• piracy
• the slave trade
• waging a war of aggression
• war crimes
From the point of view of State-centric law, extraordinary procedures (usually international
courts) may prosecute such crimes. Note the role of the International Criminal Court at The
Hague in the Netherlands.
Popular opinion often[when?] associates international law with the concept of opposing
terrorism[citation needed] — seen as a crime as distinct from warfare.
[edit] Religion and crime
Different religious traditions may promote distinct norms of behaviour, and these in turn may
clash or harmonise with the perceived interests of a state. Socially accepted or imposed
religious morality has influenced secular jurisdictions on issues that may otherwise concern
only an individual's conscience. Activities sometimes criminalized on religious grounds
include (for example) alcohol-consumption (prohibition), abortion and stem-cell research. In
various historical and present-day societies institutionalized religions have established
systems of earthly justice which punish crimes against the divine will and against specific
devotional, organizational and other rules under specific codes, such as Islamic sharia or
Roman Catholic canon law.
[edit] Military jurisdictions and states of emergency
In the military sphere, authorities can prosecute both regular crimes and specific acts (such as
mutiny or desertion) under martial-law codes that either supplant or extend civil codes in
times of war.
Many constitutions contain provisions to curtail freedoms and criminalize otherwise tolerated
behaviors under a state of emergency in the event of war, natural disaster or civil unrest. Such
undesired activities may include assembly in the streets, violation of curfew, or possession of
firearms.
[edit] Employee crime
Two common types of employee crime exist: embezzlement and sabotage.[citation needed]
The complexity and anonymity of computers may help criminal employees camouflage their
operations. The victims of the most costly scams include banks, brokerage houses, insurance
companies, and other large financial institutions.[14]
Most people guilty of embezzlement do not have criminal histories.[citation needed] Embezzlers
tend to have a gripe against their employer, have financial problems, or simply an inability to
resist the temptation of a loophole they have found.[citation needed] Screening and background
checks on perspective employees can help in prevention; however, many laws make some
types of screening difficult or even illegal. Fired or disgruntled employees sometimes
sabotage their company's computer system as a form of "[[revenge|pay back".[14] This
sabotage may take the form of a logic bomb, a computer virus, or creating general havoc.
Some places of employment have developed measures in an attempt to combat and prevent
employee crime. Places of employment sometimes implement security measures such as
cameras, fingerprint records of employees, and background checks.[citation needed] Although
privacy-advocates have questioned such methods, they appear to serve the interests of the
organisations using them. Not only do these methods help prevent employee crime, but they
protect the company from punishment and/or lawsuits for negligent hiring.[15][verification needed]
[edit] See also
• Actus reus • Fear of crime
• Bob Crow • Gang
• Case law • Insanity defense
• Civil law • Juvenile delinquency
• Corrections • Law and order
• Crime importation • Neighborhood watch
• Crime in Brazil • Offense
 • Crime in Mexico • Outlaw
• Crime in the United States • Penal colony
• Criminal justice • Sharia
• Criminal law • Status crime
• Crime mapping • Timeline of organized crime from 1870
• Criminal record • Victimless crime (political philosophy)
• Crime Library • Victimology

[edit] Statistics
• Crime rate
• List of countries by murder rate
• Murder statistics
• Rape statistics
• United States cities by crime rate

[edit] Crime by classification

• Organized Crime
• Serial crime
• Signal crime
• Verbal offence

[edit] Notes
1. ^ Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, 1989; retrieved 2009-03-25
2. ^ See Polinsky & Shavell (1997) on the fundamental divergence between the private
and the social motivation for using the legal system.
3. ^ Oppenheim (1964)
4. ^ Kramer (1971: 4)
5. ^ Driver and Mills (1952-55) and Skaist (1994)
6. ^ Gagarin: 1986; and Garner: 1987
7. ^ Daube: 1969
8. ^ Guterman: 1990
9. ^ Attenborough: 1963
10. ^ Kern: 1948; Blythe: 1992; and Pennington: 1993
11. ^ Vinogradoff (1909); Tierney: 1964, 1979
12. ^ The concept of the pater familias acted as a unifying factor in extended kin-groups,
and the later practice of wergild functioned in this context.
13. ^ FBI: Uniform Crime Reports
14. ^ a b Sara Baase, "A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computing and
The Internet. Third Ed. 'Employee Crime'" (2008)
15. ^ Therolf, Garrett; Jack Leonard (2008-07-15). "L.A. County failed to act on
employee crime checks at King-Harbor: Inaction on medical workers with past
 offenses could result in discipline". Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles).
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/15/local/me-employees15. Retrieved on 2008-08-
09.
This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (September 2007)

[edit] References
• Aquinas, Thomas. (1988). On Law, Morality and Politics. 2nd edition. Indianapolis:
Hackett Publishing Co. ISBN 0-87220-663-7
• Attenborough, F. L. (ed. and trans.) (1922). The Laws of the Earliest English Kings.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reprint March 2006. The Lawbook
Exchange, Ltd. ISBN 1-58477-583-1
• Blackstone, William. (1765-1769). Commentaries on the Law of England: A Facsimile
of the First Edition of 1765-1769, Vol. 1. (1979). Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press. ISBN 0-226-05538-8
• Blythe, James M. (1992). Ideal Government and the Mixed Constitution in the Middle
Ages. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-03167-3
• Cohen, Stanley (1985). Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment, and
Classification. Polity Press. ISBN 0745600212
• Daube, David. (1969). Roman Law: Linguistic, Social and Philosophical Aspects.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 0-85224-051-1
• Driver, G. R. & Mills, John C. (1952-55). The Babylonian Laws. 2 Vols. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-825110-6
• Dworkin, Ronald. (2005). Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-
674-86711-4
• Foucault, Michel (1975). Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison, New York:
Random House.
• Gagarin, Michael (1989) [1986] Early Greek Law (Reprint ed.)Berkeley: University of
California PressISBN 0-520-06602-2
• Garner, Richard. (1987). Law and Society in Classical Athens. London: Palgrave
Macmillan. ISBN 0-312-00856-2
• Garoupa, Nuno & Klerman, Daniel. (2002). "Optimal Law Enforcement with a Rent-
Seeking Government". American Law and Economics Review Vol. 4, No. 1. pp116–
140.
• Guterman, Simeon L. (1990). The Principle of the Personality of Law in the Germanic
Kingdoms of Western Europe from the Fifth to the Eleventh Century. New York: P.
Lang. ISBN 0-8204-0731-3
• Hart, H.L.A. (1961). The Concept of Law. 2nd revised edition (1997). Oxford: Oxford
University Press. ISBN 0-19-876123-6
• Hart, H.L.A. (1972). Law, Liberty and Morality. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
ISBN 0-8047-0154-7
 • Kern, Fritz. (1948). Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages. Reprint edition (1985),
Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
• Kramer, Samuel Noah. (1971). The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character.
Chicago: University of Chicago. ISBN 0-226-45238-7
• Maine, Henry Sumner. (1861). Ancient Law: Its Connection with the Early History of
Society, and Its Relation to Modern Ideas. Reprint edition (1986). Tucson: University
of Arizona Press. ISBN 0-8165-1006-7
• Oppenheim, A. Leo (and Reiner, Erica as editor). (1964). Ancient Mesopotamia:
Portrait of a Dead Civilization. Revised edition (September 15, 1977). Chicago:
University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-63187-7
• Pennington, Kenneth. (1993). The Prince and the Law, 1200–1600: Sovereignty and
Rights in the Western Legal Tradition. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN
0520079957
• Polinsky, A. Mitchell. (1980). "Private versus Public Enforcement of Fines". The
Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. IX, No. 1, (January), pp105–127.
• Polinsky, A. Mitchell & Shavell, Steven. (1997). On the Disutility and Discounting of
Imprisonment and the Theory of Deterrence, NBER Working Papers 6259, National
Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
• Skaist, Aaron Jacob. (1994). The Old Babylonian Loan Contract: Its History and
Geography. Ramat Gan, Israel: Bar-Ilan University Press. ISBN 965-226-161-0
• Tierney, Brian. (1979). Church Law and Constitutional Thought in the Middle Ages.
London: Variorum Reprints. ISBN 0-86078-036-8
• Tierney, Brian. (1964). The Crisis of Church and State, 1050–1300. Reprint edition
(1988). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0-8020-6701-8
• Vinogradoff, Paul. (1909). Roman Law in Medieval Europe. Reprint edition (2004).
Kessinger Publishing Co. ISBN 1-4179-4909-0

[edit] External links

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Crime

Look up crime in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• [1] Crimestoppers - The independent crime-fighting charity - Pass on information

about crime anonymously
• Criminal Law Resources Criminal Law, Law Teacher
• Internet Crime Archive
• Crime at the Open Directory Project

Mapping crime hotspots in PJ

2009/02/24
Sheila Sri Priya
 Petaling Jaya mayor Datuk Mohamad Roslan Sakiman
presenting a document on the geographical information
system to Selangor CID deputy chief Assistant
Commissioner Khaw Kok Chin. With them are Petaling Jaya
deputy OCPD Superintendent Abd Razak Elias and Kampung
Tunku assemblyman Lau Weng San.
PETALING JAYA: Crime hotspots here will be mapped as part of efforts to make the city safer.

Yesterday, the Petaling Jaya City Council presented the police with an Australian-based geographic
information system (GIS).

The system will be used to map crime hotspots in Petaling Jaya by analysing data from recent police
records.

The outcome from the mapping exercise will then be used to identify areas which would need better
policing.
This would include placing more closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, setting up police beat base
and increasing patrols.

The use of GIS to map crime hotspots is among the 23 steps listed under the Petaling Jaya Safe City
programme which was implemented in 2004.

Selangor Crime Investigation Department deputy chief Assistant Commissioner Khaw Kok Chin said
between Jan 1 and Feb 15, last year, about 1,307 cases were recorded on the crime index for Petaling
Jaya.

However, there had been a slight reduction during the same period this year which saw only 1,167
cases.

"There's a slight decrease in the crime index but we want to reduce the numbers further and with the
mapping system, we are a step closer to achieving this," he said.

Khaw also said that theft, car theft and house break-ins were the three most common crime in
residential areas.

Among the areas with a high theft rate are Section 5, Taman Medan, Desa Mentari, SS3 and Sea Park.

Petaling Jaya mayor Datuk Mohamad Roslan Sakiman said RM43,500 had been allocated in this year's
budget.

He also said 22 CCTV cameras had been fixed around the city and 30 more were expected to be installed
this year.
Apart from mapping of crime hotspots and the installation of CCTV cameras, the Petaling Jaya Safe City
programme also includes cleaning and tidying up concealed and unkempt areas, sharing of information
between local authorities and the police and lighting up of potential crime areas.

"A team has also been formed to look into crime-related matters in Petaling Jaya.

"It is led by Kampung Tunku state assemblyman Lau Weng San," added Roslan.

Crime statistics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Crime rate)

Jump to: navigation, search

Crime statistics attempt to provide statistical measures of the crime in societies. Given that
crime is illegal, measurements of it are likely to be inaccurate.
Several methods for measuring crime exist, including household surveys, hospital or
insurance records, and compilations by police and similar law enforcement agencies.
Typically official crime statistics are the latter, but some offences are likely to go unreported
to the police. Public surveys are sometimes conducted to estimate the amount of crime not
reported to police. Such surveys are usually more reliable for assessing trends. Public surveys
rarely encompass all crime, rarely procure statistics useful for local crime prevention, often
ignore offences against children, and do not count offenders brought before the criminal
justice system.
Crime statistics are gathered and reported by many countries and are of interest to several
international organizations, including Interpol and the United Nations. Law enforcement
agencies in some countries, such as the FBI in the United States and the Home Office in
England & Wales, publish crime indices, which are compilations of statistics for various
types of crime.

Contents
[hide]
• 1 Data collection and organization
• 2 Recording practices
• 3 Crime rate
• 4 Counting rules
• 5 Surveys
• 6 Classification
• 7 Measures
• 8 See also
• 9 External links
• 10 Notes
• 11 Further reading
[edit] Data collection and organization
Statistics are usually collected on:
• Offences - Breaches of the law
• Offenders - Those who commit offences
• Victims - Those who are offended against
Two major methods for collecting crime data are law enforcement reports, which only reflect
reported crimes and victimization statistical surveys, which rely on individual honesty. For
less frequent crimes such as intentional homicide and armed robbery, reported incidences are
generally more reliable. Because laws vary between jurisdictions, comparing crime statistics
between and even within countries can be difficult.
The U.S. has two major data collection programs, the Uniform Crime Reports from the FBI
and the National Crime Victimization Survey from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. However,
the U.S. has no comprehensive infrastructure to monitor crime trends and report the
information to related parties such as law enforcement.[1]
Research using a series of victim surveys in 18 countries of the European Union funded by
the European Commission has reported (2005) that the level of crime in Europe has fallen
back to the levels of 1990, and notes that levels of common crime have shown declining
trends in the U.S., Canada, Australia and other industrialized countries as well. The European
researchers say a general consensus identifies demographic change as the leading cause for
this international trend. Although homicide and robbery rates rose in the U.S. in the 1980s, by
the end of the century they had declined by 40%.[1]
However they suggest that "increased use of crime prevention measures may indeed be the
common factor behind the near universal decrease in overall levels of crime in the Western
world", since decreases have been most pronounced in property crime and less so, if at all, in
contact crimes. [2][3][4]
[edit] Recording practices
The crime statistics recording practices vary, not only between countries and jurisdictions but
sometimes within jurisdictions and even between two individual law enforcement officers
encountering the same situation. Because many law enforcement officers have powers of
discretion, they have the ability to affect how much crime is recorded based on how they
record their activities.
Even though a member of the public may report a crime to a law enforcement officer, it will
not be counted unless that crime is then recorded in a way that allows it to be incorporated
into the crime statistics. As a consequence, offending, particularly minor offending, may be
significantly undercounted in situations where law enforcement officers are overloaded with
work or do not perceive the offending as worth recording.
Similarly certain high profile categories of crime may be well reported when there is an
incentive (such as a financial or performance incentive) for the law enforcement officer to do
so.
For example: Almost all recorded traffic offending is reported either by law enforcement
officers or by automatic road safety cameras because there is normally a fine and (profitable)
revenue collection process to go through. Yet it is likely that very little traffic offending
reported by the public will make its way into official statistics because of the difficulty in
following up these stories.
[edit] Crime rate

This graph shows the rate of non-fatal firearm-related crime in the United States from 1993
to 2003.

Crime rate is a measure of the rate of occurrence of crimes committed in a given area and
time. Most commonly, crime rate is given as the number of crimes committed among a given
number of persons.Often, the type of crime is exactly specified. Thus, a crime rate might be
given as the number of murders (or rapes, thefts, etc.) per 100,000 persons per year within a
city.
Crime rate is a useful statistic for many purposes, such as evaluating the effectiveness of
crime prevention measures or the relative safety of a particular city or neighborhood. Crime
rate statistics are commonly used by politicians to advocate for or against a policy designed
to deal with crime.
The calculation of crime rates uses data that is obtained either from criminal justice systems
or from public surveys. Comparisons between the two types of data are problematic, and so
are comparisons using the same type of data between different jurisdictions.
The United Nations publishes international reports of both Crime Trends and Operations of
Criminal Justice [5] A European initiative has resulted in the European sourcebook [4], an
utmost attempt is made to harmonise the criminal justice data for the purpose of international
(European) comparison.
[edit] Counting rules
Counting rules vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Relatively few standards exist and none
that permit international comparability beyond a very limited range of offences. However,
many jurisdictions accept the following:
• There must be a prima facie case that an offence has been committed before it is
recorded. That is either police find evidence of an offence or receive a believable
allegation of an offense being committed. Some jurisdictions count offending only
 when certain processes happen, such as an arrest is made, ticket issued, charges
laid in Court or only upon securing a conviction.
• Multiple reports of the same offence usually count as one offence. Some jurisdictions
count each report separately, others count each victim of offending separately.
• Where several offences are committed at the same time, in one act of offending, only
the most serious offense is counted. Some jurisdictions record and count each and
every offense separately, others count cases, or offenders, that can be prosecuted.
• Where multiple offenders are involved in the same act of offending only one act is
counted when counting offenses but each offender is counted when apprehended.
• Offending is counted at the time it comes to the attention of a law enforcement
officer. Some jurisdictions record and count offending at the time it occurs.
Offending that is a breach of the law but for which no punishment exists is often not counted.
For example: Suicide, which is technically illegal in most countries, may not be counted as a
crime, although attempted suicide and assisting suicide are.
Also traffic offending and other minor offending that might be dealt with by using fines,
rather than imprisonment, is often not counted as crime. However separate statistics may be
kept for this sort of offending.
[edit] Surveys
Because of the difficulties in quantifying how much crime actually occurs, researchers
generally take two approaches to gathering statistics about crime.
Statistics from law enforcement organisations are often used. These statistics are normally
readily available and are generally reliable in terms of identifying what crime is being dealt
with by law enforcement organisations, as they are gathered by law enforcement officers in
the course of their duties and are often extracted directly from law enforcement computer
systems.
However, these statistics often tend to reflect the productivity and law enforcement activities
of the officers concerned and may bear little relationship to the actual amount of crime, as
officers can only record crime that comes to their attention and might not record a matter as a
crime if the matter is considered minor and is not perceived as a crime by the officer
concerned. The statistics may also be biased because of routine actions and pragmatic
decisions that law enforcement officers make in the field.
For example, when faced with a domestic violence dispute between a couple, a law
enforcement officer may decide it is far less trouble to arrest the male party to the dispute,
because the female may have children to care for, despite both parties being equally culpable
for the dispute. This sort of pragmatic decisionmaking would mean the statistics had a gender
bias because of what officers did to resolve such disputes.
Researchers also conduct population surveys in order to identify victims of crime and their
experiences. These surveys are often known as victimisation surveys as they seek to identify
the victims of crime, especially for crime that is not reported to a law enforcement officer.
Victimisation surveys also suffer from problems as they are perception surveys. In these
surveys people are being asked if they are victims of crime, without needing to provide any
supporting evidence. In these surveys it is the participant's perception, or opinion, that a
crime occurred, or even their understanding about what constitutes a crime that is being
measured.
As a consequence victimisation surveys can also exhibit a subjective bias. Also, differing
methodologies may make comparisons with other surveys difficult.
One way in which victimisation surveys are useful is that they show some types of crime are
well reported to law enforcement officials, while other types of crime are under reported.
These surveys also give insights as to why crime is reported, or not. The surveys show that
the need to make an insurance claim, seek medical assistance, and the seriousness of an
offence tend to increase the level of reporting, while the inconvenience of reporting, the
involvement of intimate parters and the nature of the offending tend to decrease reporting.
This allows degrees of confidence to be assigned to various crime statistics. For example:
Motor vehicle thefts are generally well reported because the victim may need to make the
report for an insurance claim, while domestic violence, domestic child abuse and sexual
offences are frequently significantly under-reported because of the intimate relationships
involved, embarrassment and other factors that make it difficult for the victim to make a
report.
Attempts to use victimisation surveys from different countries for international comparison
had failed in the past. A standardised survey project called the International Crime Victims
Survey[6] has been set up to specifically to ínsure international comparison. The project started
in 1989 and preparations for its 6th round of surveys in the spring of 2009 are taken. Results
from this project have been breefly discussed earlier in this article.
[edit] Classification
In order to measure crime in a consistent manner, different sorts of crime need to be classified
and separated into groups of similar or comparable offences. While most jurisdictions could
probably agree about what constitutes a murder, what constitutes a homicide may be more
problematic, while a crime against the person could vary widely. Legislation differences often
means the ingredients of offences vary between jurisdictions.
The penalty for an offence may also vary, with fines being imposed in one jurisdiction, while
imprisonment occurs in another. The level of penalty may determine what does and does not
constitute a crime. Some jurisdictions may even have offences that do not exist in others.
Classification systems attempt to overcome these problems, although different jurisdictions
perform this classification in different ways. Some classification systems concentrate on
specific indicator crimes, such as murder, robbery, burglary and vehicle thefts. Other systems,
such as the Australian Standard Offence Classification(ASOC) [5] attempt to be more
comprehensive.
The International Crime victims Survey has been done in over 70 countries to date and has
become the 'de facto' standard for defining common crimes. Complete list of countries [6]
participating and the 11 defined crimes [7] can be found at the project web site [8].
[edit] Measures
Measures of crime include simple counts of offences, victimsisations or apprehensions, as
well as population based crime rates. Counts are normally made over a year long reporting
period.
More complex measures involve measuring the numbers of discrete victims and offenders as
well as repeat victimisation rates and recidivism. Repeat victimisation involves measuring
how often the same victim is subjected to a repeat occurrence of an offence, often by the
same offender. Repetition rate measures are often used to assess the effectiveness of
interventions.
Because crime is a social issue, comparisons of crime between places or years are normally
performed on some sort of population basis.
[edit] See also
• Crime science
• Criminology
• Dark figure of crime
• Demography
• Questionnaire
• Self report study
• Victim study
• Victimology
• The International Crime Victims Survey
• List of countries by murder rate
• United States cities by crime rate

[edit] External links

• A Continent of Broken Windows – Alexander, Gerard The Weekly Standard (Volume
11, Issue 10, 11/21/2005)
• United States: Uniform Crime Report -- State Statistics from 1960 - 2005
• World Crime Rates
• Experience and Communication as explanations for Criminal Risk Perception

[edit] Notes
1. ^ a b Committee on Understanding Crime Trends, U.S. National Research Council.
(2008). Understanding Crime Trends: Workshop Report. National Academies Press.
Free full-text.
2. ^ Van Dijk, J.J.M., van Kesteren, J.N. & Smit, P. (2008). Criminal bumb boys in
International Perspective, Key findings from the 2004-2005 ICVS and EU ICS The
Hague, Boom Legal Publishers, accessed at [1] May 6, 2008 - pp.99-104
3. ^ Van Dijk, J.J.M., Manchin, R., Van Kesteren, J., Nevala, S., Hideg, G. (2005). The
Burden of Crime in the EU. Research Report: A Comparative Analysis of the
European Crime and Safety Survey (EU ICS) 2005 accessed at [2] May 5, 2008 -
pp.21-23
4. ^ Kesteren, J.n. van, Mayhew, P., Nieuwbeerta, P. (2000). Criminal victimization in
seventeen industrialized countries: key findings from the 2000 International Crime
Victims Survey accessed at [3] April 12, 2007 - pp.98-99
 5. ^ Crime Surveys, UN Office on Drugs and Crime
6. ^ The 5th round of International Crime Victims Surveys

[edit] Further reading

• Van Dijk, J.J.M. (2008). The World of crime; breaking the silence on problems of
crime, justice and development. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Catalano, S. M. (2006). The measurement of crime: victim reporting and police
recording. New York, LFB Scholarly Pub. ISBN 1593321554
• Jupp, V. (1989). Methods of criminological research. Contemporary social research
series. London, Unwin Hyman. ISBN 0044450664
• Van der Westhuizen, J. (1981). Measurement of crime. Pretoria, University of South
Africa. ISBN 0869811975
• Van Dijk, J.J.M., van Kesteren, J.N. & Smit, P. (2008). Criminal Victimisation in
International Perspective, Key findings from the 2004-2005 ICVS and EU ICS. The
Hague, Boom Legal Publishers. http://rechten.uvt.nl/icvs/pdffiles/ICVS2004_05.pdf
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_statistics"

Malaysia: Crime Statistic 2000-2006 (I)

May 30, 2007 at 4:06 am (Malaysia, Social, Statistic)
Tags: crime, homicide, Malaysia, Polis Diraja Malaysia, robbery
From Polis Diraja Malaysia (Royal Malaysian Police) website, the statistic for crime reported
like homicides, attemp murder, rape, assault, theft and etc are listed. The data/statistic from
the website will be discussed in the following descriptions: 1) the absolute number of
incidents occured (period 2000-2006), 2) the normalised crime rate, or the number of cases
per 100 000/10 000 population per year, 3) the efficiency of police officer solving the cases.
Point #2 and #3 will be discussed in the subsequent post in the following day. Today, let’s
look at the absolute number of crime stats reported:
a) Homicides/murder, attempt murder, robbery (group, firearmed), and robbery (single,
firearmed):

For the group robbery which involving firearms, the cases reported each year varied between
40 to 100. On the other hand, the robbery done by single person and involving firearm
steadily declines from 722 in year 2000 to 247 cases in year 2006.
Attempt for murder cases increases at rate of 43 cases in year 2000 to 94 cases in 2005,
almost double the number. As for murder/homicide, the number of incidents has been
fluctuating between 500 to 600 cases per year, while year 2006 recorded the highest number:
604 cases.
b) Robbery (group, unarmed), robbery (single, unarmed), rape and assault.

Next, rape cases are seeing a steady increment from year 2000: 1210 cases in 2000 to 2435
cases in year 2006, double the cases in 6 years period. Similar trend is also seen in group and
unarmed robbery. The robbery done by single and unarmed person is seeing a drastic
increase: a jump of around 12 000 cases in year 2000 to about 18 000 cases in year 2006! The
number of cases of assault were seeing a steady decrease from year 2000 (5104 cases) to
2005 (4246 cases), but spike high (5716 cases) again in year 2006.
c) Various theft action: Theft (van/lorry), theft (motocar), theft (motorbike), snatch theft, and
others.

Lastly, the crime against property is discussed here. Both theft cases on van/lorry and
motorcar are seeing a steady increase over the year of 2000 to 2006. The number of
motorcars stolen reports increased from 7278 cases in 2000 to 11101 cases in 2006. On the
other hand, the much high profile snatch-theft cases were seeing a drop since year 2003, from
15798 cases to 9551 cases in 2006, or equivalent to a drop of 39.5% (that is a surprise to me).
Finally, the theft of motorcycle is seeing a skyhigh increase, especially the spike between
year 2005/06. In year 2000, 45903 cases of stolen motorbike were reported. But at the end of
year 2006, 64858 cases were reported!
Apa Itu RAKANCOP

RAKAN COP (Community Oriented Policing) adalah bererti rakan Polis. Ia merupakan wadah bagi merealisasikan
hasrat untuk menjalinkan hubungan yang kukuh antara Polis dan masyarakat bagi mewujudkan Bandar Selamat
dengan slogan "Bersama Memerangi Jenayah". Maklumat boleh disalurkan kepada Pusat Kawalan Polis (CCC) yang
beroperasi 24 jam melalui perkhidmatan telefon (hotline, SMS, MMS) dan komputer (e-mail dan website).
Sehubungan itu, maklumat mengenai kemalangan jalan raya, kesalahan lalulintas atau kesesakan lalulintas juga
boleh disalurkan kepada Pusat Kawalan

CARA PENDAFTARAN RAKANCOP

PENDAFTARAN INDIVIDU:
RC[negeri]DAFTAR [nama pengenalan] hantar ke DAPAT|32728

PENDAFTARAN UNIT:
RC UNIT WUJUD [nama unit] hantar ke DAPAT|32728

MENYERTAI UNIT:
RC UNIT SERTAI [nama unit] hantar ke DAPAT|32728

MENYEMAK PENDAFTARAN:
RC SEMAK hantar ke DAPAT|32728

BERCHAT DENGAN RAKANCOP LAIN :

RC CHAT [nama/nombor ahli][mesej] hantar ke DAPAT|32728

UBAH NAMA:
RC UBAH [nama pengenalan baru] hantar ke DAPAT|32728

TUKAR TELEFON:
RC TUKAR [no tel lama] [no tel baru] [no keahlian RAKANCOP] hantar DAPAT|32728

RELA Corps
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

"RELA" is the acronym of Ikatan Relawan Rakyat Malaysia (in English: Volunteers of
Malaysian People). Rela Corps is a paramilitary civil volunteer corps formed by the
Malaysian government. Their main duty is to check the traveling documents and immigration
permits of foreigners in Malaysian cities, including tourists, visitors and migrants to reduce
the increasing rate of illegal immigrants in Malaysia. RELA has the authority to deal with
situations like policemen, such as raiding suspected streets or places such as factories,
restaurants and even hotels. They are also fully authorized to conduct the interrogation and
even detaining people who forgot to bring their traveling documents, like passports and/or
working permits. Besides that they are also tasked with security works at times. During times
of war, they are absorbed into the Malaysian Army as support groups despite their law
enforcing duties. They are laso tasked to do SAR works if needed.
Given only basic training, this civil corps is sometimes equipped with firearms, making many
cases of power abuse by this civil corps such as killing people in the street and beheading
foreigners. Many cases in Malaysia the RELA volunteers, abused their power, which created
trauma for foreign visitors in Malaysia, have caused RELA Corps to be listed in the Human
Rights Watch.
Penjara ppi.............yayasan pencegahan jenayah.... kertas kerja.

Crime statistics compiled by the FBI in its yearly crime index show what many in the law
enforcement field consider to be an encouraging trend. From 1990 to 1995, the crime rate
declined steadily in every category: murders, rapes, assaults, robberies, burglaries, and thefts.
Sociologists and criminologists debate the explanation for this downward turn in crime rates;
improved economic conditions and tougher criminal justice measures are two of the theories
offered. Other experts, however, dispute whether the decline is significant, pointing out that
crime rates in many categories are still higher than in the mid- 1980s. These scholars also
deny that the trend of decreasing crime rates will continue.
James Alan Fox, dean of the College of Criminal Justice at Northeastern University in
Boston, is among those who believe that the recent drop in crime rates is merely the lull
before an approaching crime storm. The reason for the current decrease in crime, he
maintains, is the demographic dip in the number of teenage and young adult males (ages
fourteen to twenty-five), the part of the population most likely to commit crimes. In addition,
he points out that even as the overall rate has decreased, the crime rate among the present
population of teenaged males has grown, and many of their crimes are more violent and
vicious in nature than those committed by young males of preceding generations. As the
numbers of teenaged males increase in the near future (a demographic certainty), he predicts,
the crime rate will naturally return to previous levels and will possibly climb even higher.
Expanding upon Fox’s argument, Princeton University professor John J. Di- Iulio Jr. argues
that it is more than simply the number of boys approaching their crime-prone teen years that
portends an impending explosion in the crime rate. In his opinion, it is the moral poverty in
which the next generation of adolescents is being raised that bodes ill for the nation’s crime
rates. Moral poverty, according to DiIulio, is “the poverty of growing up surrounded by
deviant, delinquent, and criminal adults in abusive, violence-ridden, fatherless, Godless, and
jobless settings.”
According to DiIulio, research shows that a small proportion of juvenile criminals is
responsible for nearly half of all offenses committed by all teenagers. What is well
established yet little known, he asserts, is that each successive generation of this segment of
young offenders is approximately three times more violent and dangerous than the previous
one. In DiIulio’s view, this is because each generation grows up “in more extreme conditions
of moral poverty than the one before it.” The criminal behavior of the current population of
offenders brings about the social conditions to produce an even more deviant future breed of
juvenile “superpredators,” he maintains. Today’s criminals are frightening, in DiIulio’s
opinion, because they have never learned right from wrong, they have no concept of the
relationship between present actions and future consequences, and they place no value on the
lives of others. But tomorrow’s superpredators are destined to be worse, he contends, because
they are being raised in the fatherless families and drug- and violence-ridden neighborhoods
created by today’s criminals. And due to current population trends, he adds, there will be
more of these juvenile criminals in the near future.
 Many criminologists, however, disagree with the predictions of Fox and Di- Iulio. Among
them, Alfred Blumstein, a professor of urban systems at Carnegie Mellon University in
Pittsburgh, remains unconvinced that a juvenile crime wave is imminent. Blumstein contends
that crime rates do not follow demographic trends in the numbers of teenage males as closely
as proponents of the crime wave theory believe. He argues that violent crime has increased
among the current population of teenagers (even though that population is relatively small)
due to the influence of the drug trade and a lack of economic opportunity. As the economy
improves and drug battles diminish, Blumstein maintains, fewer young people will become
involved in crime. Counter to the beliefs of Fox and others, he predicts that crime rates will
continue their downward slide. Others dispute DiIulio’s theory of a coming generation of
superpredators. University of California, Berkeley professor Jerome H. Skolnick, for one,
asserts that DiIulio’s theory of moral poverty “ignores such factors as racism, joblessness,
inequality, and poverty.” Although there undoubtedly will be more teenagers in the near
future, he contends, whether they become incorrigibly violent depends on how society
addresses these root causes of crime.
Skolnick argues that poverty and unemployment within urban neighborhoods historically
have been “a recipe for the emergence of youth cultures leading to rising crime rates.” He
cites research by sociologists Kenneth Land, David Cantor, and Stephen Russell that shows a
long-term correlation between unemployment rates and property crime rates, particularly
within inner cities. In Skolnick’s opinion, this research suggests that long-term economic
deprivation is a motivation to commit crime. Isolated by declining economic conditions and
racial divisions, he contends, urban neighborhoods over the years have devel- oped patterns
of lawlessness and family instability. As further proof, Skolnick points out that the declining
crime rates of the 1990s have been accompanied by declining unemployment rates. It is by no
means certain, he concludes, that America is on the brink of a wave of juvenile crime and
violence.
Debates about future crime trends are inextricably interwoven with arguments about juvenile
crime, since many believe that today’s juvenile delinquents are destined to become
tomorrow’s adult felons. Crime: Current Controversies presents debates about crime rates,
juvenile crime, and other topics in these chapters: What Causes Crime? Is Crime Increasing?
Can Stronger Criminal Justice Measures Prevent Crime? How Can Juvenile Crime Be
Prevented? The issues surrounding crime are controversial and, as the viewpoints that follow
demonstrate, reasonable people can draw differing conclusions from the available evidence.

Navigate

1. Introduction
2. Chapter 1: What Causes Crime?
3. Chapter 2: Is Crime Increasing?
4. Chapter 3: Can Stronger Criminal Justice Measures Prevent Crime?
5. Chapter 4: How Can Juvenile Crime Be Prevented?
6. Organizations to Contact
7. Bibliography
8. Copyright
Tell a friend about Crime at eNotes.