Professional Documents
Culture Documents
LaineHarper more
Contact Author
According to Jennifer Truman of the U.S. Department of Justice, "During 2010, U.S. residents age 12 and older experienced an estimated 18.7 million
violent and property crime victimizations (2011). While this rate is down from previous years, this number is disturbing.
The noun "victimization" in this report has two meanings, "an act that exploits or victimizes someone" and "adversity resulting from being made a victim"
(Victimization, N.d). Despite these two descriptions of the same word, both illustrate the problem of victimization, especially in number as high as the U.S
experiences each year. As a method of countering the problem of crime, and of dealing with the numerous victims left in their wake, criminologists turn to
the study of victims and their relationship to the criminal act. While caring and understanding the pain and anguish of the victim and their circle of social
influence is of essential, as is providing treatment and counseling; criminologists now view the role of the victim in the criminal process as imperative to
understanding the crime itself. Studying and researching victimology helps in gaining a better understanding of both the victim, as well as the criminal, and
how the crime may have been precipitated.
For the purpose of understanding and researching victimology, four theories have been developed: victim precipitation theory, the lifestyle theory, deviant
place theory, and the routine activities theory.
Statistics from Truman, P.h. D (2011), and represent data from the U.S. Department of Justice: National Crime Victimization Survey
Essentially, the victim precipitation theory focuses on the idea that passive precipitation of violence is a result of a power struggle. A politician may feel
threatened by an activist group leader because his action draws attention to negative aspects of his personality and actions that will, or may cause, a loss
of power in society. This sort of passive precipitation may also be present when the victim is not even aware of the existence of the attacker.
In this instance a new employee may push up the corporate ranks quickly, threatening long-time employees; or a transexual may be the victim of crime due
to their existence "threatening" the beliefs and/or ideas of another individual or group of individuals. The latter is a good example of a hate crime, in which
victims are often unaware of the individuals that perpetrate the crime, yet their actions and/or characteristics trigger the crime.
Active precipitation, on the other hand, is the opposite of the afore-described. Victimization under this theory occurs through the threatening or provocative
actions of the victim. One of the most controversial points of this theory is the idea that women who are raped actively contributed in some way, either
through provocative dress, a relationship, or suggested consent of intimacy (Siegel, 2006). Because of this viewpoint, it is hard to convict an accused rapist
who has had some form of relationship with the accused, or one that was behaving provocatively or suggestively. When dealing with this theory we must
ask ourselves whether or not it is really okay to blame the occurrence of a crime on the victim. This is especially true in cases of rape when flirtation may
be present, yet there is no consent to sexual intercourse.
In addition to theorizing that victimization is not random, but rather a part of the lifestyle the victims pursues, the lifestyle theory cites research that victims
"share personality traits also commonly found in law violators, namely impulsivity and low self control" (Siegel, 2006). This previous statement was
discussed in a psychology journal by Jared Dempsey, Gary Fireman, and Eugene Wang, in which they note the correlation between victims and the
perpetrators of crimes, both exhibiting impulsive and antisocial-like behaviors (2006). These behaviors may contribute to their victimization since they
cause the individual to put themselves at higher risk for victimization than their more conservative lifestyle counterparts.
No
Empirical evidence for this theory is seen in the work of Cohen and Felson, who noted that the crimes rates from 1960 to 1980 increased due to a
decreased presence in the home (i.e less guardianship) (Seigel, 2006). We can also look at practical, everyday examples, such as those of affluent
neighborhoods. These neighborhoods have low crime rates, despite the availability of goods. This may be attributed to the high guardianship in the form of
security systems, and a lack of motivated offenders.
While each of these theories has different positives and negatives, controversies and points of contention, as well as points of accord, each also explains
in various situations why a certain individual may be the victim of theft, violence, or abuse. Furthermore, with an understanding of the patterns of
victimization through the lens of one or more of these theories, the criminal justice system, as well as the general public, may better be equipped to prevent
crime and treat the many victims.
References
Dempsey, J., Fireman, G., Wang, E. (2006). "Transitioning Out of Peer Victimization in School Children: Gender and Behavioral Characteristics." Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 28: 271 - 280.
Seigel, L., J. (2006). Criminology, 10th Edition. University of Massachusetts, Lowell. Thomson Wadsworth.
Truman, J. Ph. D. (2011). Criminal Victimization 2010. U.S. Department of Justice: National Crime Victimization Survey.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf