In my opinion, I would support the social responsibility approach because it ensures that both social and economic benefits are adequately derived from any problem. Global approach to the problem is necessary because it gives a wider view of the problem. It helps in full understanding of the context and facts of the problem from a broader perspective.
Crime and technology have both direct and indirect relationships. Through technology, criminals can today perform more complicated and complex crimes such as hacking the banking system of commercial banks and transfer money through electronic means from the clients’ accounts to other anonymous accounts. Most crimes are nowadays done electronically (Grabosky 86). From the offender’s perspective, advancements in technology have eased criminal activities. For example, through use of advanced information and communication technologies, criminals can alter their identities as well as manipulate crucial information that are stored in organizational systems for their evil motives and benefits.
-
0
Preparing Orders
-
0
Active Writers
-
0%
Positive Feedback
-
0
Support Agents
Technology has complicated the ability of laws enforcement officers to combat crime. Most criminals use high-tech technologies such as computers to perform crimes (Leman-Langlois 118). However, I would suggest that organizations may as well adopt more security measures to control high-tech crimes. For example, organizations may install closed circuit television (CCTV) systems, build more secure websites as well as employ surveillance officers to ensure that premises are protected. Furthermore, organizations should adopt state-of-the-art equipments that help it in preventing, controlling, regulation and monitoring criminal activities within its premises. The State may also adopt technologically advanced equipment to enhance crime detection and administration of justice within the society.
The integrated theory of criminology postulates that criminal activities have three major dimensions namely legal, social and psychological aspects. Wilson and Herrnstein thus propose that all these aspects of crime should be considered when treating offenders. In my opinion, applying Wilson and Herrnstein’s ideas may have positive impacts on society’s social systems. Offenders will be treated accordingly without bias or discrimination.
I would suggest that drug offenders who commit crimes in order to support their addictions should be treated in a more cruelly manner so that they get discouraged from repeating similar crimes in future. Cruel and pitiless treatments will keep them off from doing more crimes since they would not like to receive similar callous treatments again.
In my opinion, policies for punishing sex offenders should not be altered due to drug addictions. This is because adjusting or lessening the extent of punishments for sex offenders would encourage more people to indulge into practicing the vice. Individuals usually refrain from doing offences because they fear being punished or ill-treated by law enforcement authorities or the society. If such punishments or treatments become less harming, then people would not be thwarted, discouraged or precluded from getting involved in such evil acts. Additionally, altering policies for sex offenders based on addictions would imply imbalanced and unfair treatment of offenders. All individual who commit a crime should be treated equally based on the facts about the crime itself and not unrelated facts or other facts that are not within the context of the crime in concern. Altered policies would imply increased frequency of offences.
According to past research studies, it was found that there is strong relationship between crime and drugs. Most forms of crimes especially burglary, sexual assaults such as rape, robbery and car hijacks have strong correlation to drug use or abuse. Most people who commit such crimes are either under the influence of drugs during the time of the crime or perform such crimes so that they may get money to buy drugs. For example, a research by the Center for Substance Abuse Research on crimes amongst high school and college students aged between fourteen and nineteen years revealed that most of the offenders were either drunk or were looking for money to purchase more drugs after addictions (Goldstein 156). These types of crimes performed due to drug addictions are called addict-crimes.
Drugs use and distribution encourages involvement in other forms of crimes through alteration or impairment of the judgmental capacity of an individual. Most people who are under the influence of drugs often make poor decisions as a result of poor and uncritical reasoning, and thus frequently engage themselves in criminal activities. Kelley argues that the more frequent a person uses drugs, the more the chances of getting involved in criminal activities (37). For example, it was revealed that more than sixty percent of teenagers who use marijuana and heavily drink alcohol were frequently involved in shoplifting, rape offences and violent robberies as compared to teenagers of the same age group who rarely use drugs or drink alcohol. The non-users of drugs recorded a fifteen percent involve in shoplifting and eight percent involvement in rape and violent robbery offences (Kelly 44-45).
Save up to
25%!
We offer 10% more words per page than other websites, so actually you got 1 FREE page with every 10 ordered pages.
Together with 15% first order discount you get 25% OFF!
In conclusion, although drugs use has been directly linked to increase in criminal activities, it does not guarantee possibility of involvement in crimes. A large number of criminal offenders have been found to be addicted drug users. However, drug use does not necessarily imply involvement in criminal activities.