fallingblock
Member
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,12275515-2,00.html
Violent crime blights Australia
By Tuck Thompson
February 17, 2005
WHILE the US is the murder capital of the world, Australia still has
the worst prevalence of crime among 17 industrialised countries, according
to a UN-sponsored survey.
Federal Government statistics show increases in crimes against people,
rather than property.
"That's the basic picture in Australia at the moment we're getting
more violent," said Dr Tim Prenzler, head of the School of Criminology and
Criminal Justice at Griffith University. "It's not a pretty picture."
He said that, within Australia, Queensland was better than the Northern
Territory but worse than Victoria.
The 2000 International Crime Victims Survey used a telephone survey to
assess the prevalence and incidence of crime in industrialised
countries.
About 30 per cent of Australians told researchers they had been
victimised one or more times in 1999, compared with 26 per cent in
England and Wales, 21 per cent in the US and 15 per cent in Japan.
England and Wales had the highest incidence of crime, the survey
showed.
Property crimes such as breaking and entering and vehicle theft
traditionally accounted for much of Australian crime, but that is
changing.
There were 145,420 violent crimes in 1996. By 2002, the figure had
grown to 198,722 and 80 per cent were assaults.
Youth unemployment, alcohol and the active, mobile Australian lifestyle
could be contributing factors to the violence, according to
criminologists.
University of Queensland criminologist Christine Bond said one problem
was that growth in southeast Queensland had changed the structure of
neighbourhoods.
"Where there is high turnover, you wouldn't have people to go to for
help," Dr Bond said. "You don't have the community ties that help
reduce
crime."
Recent crime research has tended to focus on property crime, which has
decreased because of more sophisticated alarm and surveillance systems.
Researchers have no way of telling whether the recent spate of violent
crime in Brisbane is a trend or a spike, because good data takes time
to collect and study.
"We might need another year or two to see if it's a trend," Dr Bond
said. "That's the problem with all this trend analysis you need time,
and that's no good for policy-making."
She said violent crime needed closer study, especially to examine types
of victims, circumstances and locations.
In 2002, 38 per cent of violent crimes occurred in private dwellings
and 23 per cent happened on the street or footpath, government figures
show.
Crime also centres on drinking, holiday and recreation spots and has
its impact on younger people.
Surveys are considered a better way to gauge crime victimisation
because many victims do not make reports to police, and the statistics of those who do, vary, because jurisdictions apply different rules and
definitions.
The ICVS is conducted by Leiden University in Holland.
*********************************************************
Say! You don't suppose the sharply (since 1996) reduced presence of firearms in homes and the prohibition on firearms ownership for 'self-defence' has any bearing on this phenomenon, do you?
Violent crime blights Australia
By Tuck Thompson
February 17, 2005
WHILE the US is the murder capital of the world, Australia still has
the worst prevalence of crime among 17 industrialised countries, according
to a UN-sponsored survey.
Federal Government statistics show increases in crimes against people,
rather than property.
"That's the basic picture in Australia at the moment we're getting
more violent," said Dr Tim Prenzler, head of the School of Criminology and
Criminal Justice at Griffith University. "It's not a pretty picture."
He said that, within Australia, Queensland was better than the Northern
Territory but worse than Victoria.
The 2000 International Crime Victims Survey used a telephone survey to
assess the prevalence and incidence of crime in industrialised
countries.
About 30 per cent of Australians told researchers they had been
victimised one or more times in 1999, compared with 26 per cent in
England and Wales, 21 per cent in the US and 15 per cent in Japan.
England and Wales had the highest incidence of crime, the survey
showed.
Property crimes such as breaking and entering and vehicle theft
traditionally accounted for much of Australian crime, but that is
changing.
There were 145,420 violent crimes in 1996. By 2002, the figure had
grown to 198,722 and 80 per cent were assaults.
Youth unemployment, alcohol and the active, mobile Australian lifestyle
could be contributing factors to the violence, according to
criminologists.
University of Queensland criminologist Christine Bond said one problem
was that growth in southeast Queensland had changed the structure of
neighbourhoods.
"Where there is high turnover, you wouldn't have people to go to for
help," Dr Bond said. "You don't have the community ties that help
reduce
crime."
Recent crime research has tended to focus on property crime, which has
decreased because of more sophisticated alarm and surveillance systems.
Researchers have no way of telling whether the recent spate of violent
crime in Brisbane is a trend or a spike, because good data takes time
to collect and study.
"We might need another year or two to see if it's a trend," Dr Bond
said. "That's the problem with all this trend analysis you need time,
and that's no good for policy-making."
She said violent crime needed closer study, especially to examine types
of victims, circumstances and locations.
In 2002, 38 per cent of violent crimes occurred in private dwellings
and 23 per cent happened on the street or footpath, government figures
show.
Crime also centres on drinking, holiday and recreation spots and has
its impact on younger people.
Surveys are considered a better way to gauge crime victimisation
because many victims do not make reports to police, and the statistics of those who do, vary, because jurisdictions apply different rules and
definitions.
The ICVS is conducted by Leiden University in Holland.
*********************************************************
Say! You don't suppose the sharply (since 1996) reduced presence of firearms in homes and the prohibition on firearms ownership for 'self-defence' has any bearing on this phenomenon, do you?
