Neighbourhood Watch: STN 1 South YarraRegion 1 Division 2 Stonnington, Victoria, Australia.
You are here: Home>Newsletters>February 2003
Neighbourhood Watch: STN 1 South Yarra
Region 1 Division 2
Stonnington, Victoria, Australia.
You are here: Home>Newsletters>February 2003
| Home About Us Crime Reports Newsletters Local links Contacts Help! |
Newsletter
February, 2003 Neighbours and Neighbourhood Watch: stories from the suburbs AN OBSERVANT neighbour noticed that the daily paper was still on his neighbour's lawn late in the day. The next day the Neighbourhood Watch newsletter was delivered to him and the newsletter lady observed that there were two newspapers on his neighbour 's lawn. So the pair went next door and as they knocked and called without getting a response, they saw the electricity meter whizzing around like mad, as if a heater was going. Neither knew of contacts for the neighbour, but the newsletter lady knew that she visited one particular medical clinic. A phone call to this clinic resulted in a phone call from the clinic to the neighbour's daughter, who fortunately lived reasonably close. She arrived with keys and they entered the house to find the elderly woman in the bathroom where she had fallen and hit her head. She had been too unstable to get to her feet. Fortunately the woman recovered after a spell in hospital, then respite care in a hostel. But she was very fortunate that her neighbours spotted the two newspapers on the lawn and took the time and trouble to check on her welfare. Where would we be without the awareness of neighbours? Could be you, could be me. * * * * * A DETECTIVE from Melton was checking a second hand dealer 's record books when he saw that a well known thief had sold some items to the dealer. On viewing the items, he saw that they were engraved with a "V" and a licence number, as recommended by Neighbourhood Watch's Operation Identification. The detective then checked the licence number and found that the items had been stolen from a house in Chelsea. Thanks to some very good police work and Operation Identification, the property was recovered and three offenders were charged. * * * * * IN JULY last year, Neighbourhood Watch volunteers from the Nunawading Sector handed out anti car theft brochures at five railway stations in their area. The brochures were developed as part of an initiative between police and the City of Whitehorse. As a result of reading the brochure, one recipient contacted the Nunawading C.I.U. with certain information. This crucial information led to the apprehension of an offender who was charged with 193 (yes, that is one hundred and ninety three) offenses of theft of motor vehicles, and theft from motor vehicles in and around the Nunawading area. * * * * * A WOMAN came home recently and was dismayed to discover her home had been broken into. The crooks had gained entry by forcing a back window. None of the windows were deadlocked. However, to her surprise, apart from a small amount of cash and jewellery, very little had been stolen. She did observe that all items of value, such as her mobile phone, VCR, DVD and stereo had been moved a little. All these items had been either engraved or marked with an Ultra Violet pen with "V" and her licence number, as recommended by Neighbourhood Watch's Operation Identification. We can only assume that the crooks decided the items would be too hard to sell and so departed with only that which was not readily identifiable. Operation Identification works! NHW Sentinel TV Trivia ACTOR John Wood (Blue Heelers), has a Certificate Of Appreciation from Neighbourhood Watch for his work in promoting the crime prevention program. The Certificate presented to John is clearly visible on the filing cabinet behind his desk in the Blue Heelers series. Murphy's Law of Police Work ! The speed at which an officer responds to a fight in progress is inversely proportional to his length of service. If the Firearm Team have 'cleared' all rooms and met no resistance, they have probably kicked in the door of the wrong flat. No one's idea is a good idea until it becomes another's idea - usually a Superintendent's. The current state of law and order in Australia: not as simple as it seems By Adam Graycar IN VERY few areas of public policy does everybody consider themselves an expert, yet on crime reduction policy everyone has their own expert opinion on what 'they oughta' do. In this article, for what they are worth, I offer my own views on the crime reduction issue. Every generation will tell their young that it was better in the old days. What mattered 100 years ago and what we consider unacceptable today are in some respects very different. A century ago there was great concern about drunkenness, gambling, and 'Chinese opium dens'. Yet a century ago, crimes such as superannuation fraud, Medicare fraud, electronic vandalism and varieties of computer hacking, credit card fraud, internet child pornography, electronic funds transfer crime and electronic money laundering were not even on the criminal horizon. (Nor for obvious reasons was there any motor vehicle theft!) Ideologically polarised positions offer competing explanations for increases in crime. One end of the spectrum of views blames permissiveness, bankrupt moral values, contempt for authority, inadequate penalties, while those at the other end of the spectrum blame poor social conditions, unemployment, lack of life and educational opportunity, poverty traps, deprivation, and so on. One could argue that the crime we have is the price we pay for living in a part of the world that offers high material benefits and a very mobile lifestyle. Participants in the law and order debate are at once cursed and blessed with an abundance of statistics. The figures we choose to use will make a significant difference to the sense we get of the law and order situation. It will come as no surprise to note that crime is not an equal-opportunity predator. That is; who you are, where you live, who you know, and who you hang around with all affect your chances of victimisation. What lessons are there for crime control? Occasional concerns about corruption in policing notwithstanding, Australia has been quite fortunate in this regard when compared with most other countries. Clearly, having more police won't necessarily reduce crime, but more good police can have an impact. Of course, the criminal justice system is much more than just the police. A lot depends on what happens to people who break the law, and how the general public reacts. Today there is a multiplicity of sentence types and diversion processes, which causes some people consternation; not everybody is happy with the range of options. One interesting option is the whole process of restorative justice and conferencing. Further innovations of this type are still being developed and trialled in various places. So what advice may be drawn out of all this for policy makers? First, it seems important to stick to the evidence of crime reduction. Better data are needed than those currently available. There is a substantial body of evidence about what measures have and have not proved effective. But political decisions are not made on the basis of scientific evidence alone. Having the good sense to see where science is tempered by political realities is part of the policy package in crime reduction. It is equally important to acknowledge local variations and idiosyncrasies in the crime situation. Innovations that have worked in Balmain will not necessarily work in Brisbane. Second, it must be understood that the work of the criminal justice system alone will not achieve all the results we desire. Co-operative thinking is required so as to produce policies and programs that harmonise with those in health, housing, education, employment, and so on. Those with a stake in the issue should all be involved: communities, professionals, voluntary agencies, social groups, victims, and others. An important insight to make is that criminal justice agencies are not the best or only agencies to prevent crime. Third, we need conceptual clarity on the type of crime we wish to see reduced. There are activities that offend people, and there are activities that hurt people, and then there are crimes that actually change the way people live. A bundle of different reduction strategies is available for each of these, and there are also some common crime-prevention strategies. It is the activities that offend that typically cause a lot of difficulties in respect of when and how much to intervene. The key here is having sense of when this sort of behaviour might get out of hand, and it is part of a broader challenge faced by the state to develop a public commitment to civility - and to try to make this spill over into private behaviour - while not intruding unduly into private behaviour. Crime prevention, when too zealously pursued, nudges a society towards the sort of ominous thought policing that Orwell warned us about. The safest communities are not those with the most police and prisons but those with the strongest community structures, including socialising institutions, families, and economic opportunities. Crime prevention is something that requires good conceptual thinking and a vision way beyond police, courts and prisons - a multi-faceted policy and practice approach, in which all of us have a role to play as citizens, as parents, as consumers, and as thinkers. This is an extract from an article published at onlineopinion.com.au Adam Graycar is Director of the Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra. Next Meeting
|
Last modified 19 August 2003.