HOT SPOTS OF PREDATORY CRIME - ROUTINE ACTIVITIES AND THE CRIMINOLOGY OF PLACE
HOT SPOTS OF PREDATORY CRIME - ROUTINE ACTIVITIES AND THE CRIMINOLOGY OF PLACE
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb00862.x
复制
发表时间：
1989-02-01
期刊：
影响因子：
5.8
通讯作者：
BUERGER, ME
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
SHERMAN, LW;GARTIN, PR;BUERGER, ME
一个主要的犯罪社会学理论是“日常活动”方法（Cohen和Felson，1979年）。这一生态理论的前提是，犯罪事件是由可能的罪犯、合适的目标以及缺乏有能力的犯罪监护人在时间和空间上非随机聚集而造成的。然而，先前的研究无法使用空间数据，而是依赖于个人和家庭层面的数据来测试这一基本前提。这项分析支持的前提与空间数据323,979呼吁警方在所有115,000地址和交叉口在明尼阿波利斯超过1年。相对较少的“热点”产生最多的报警电话（3%的地方有50%的电话）和报告掠夺性犯罪的电话（2.2%的地方发生了所有抢劫，1.2%的地方发生了所有强奸，2.7%的地方发生了所有汽车盗窃），因为犯罪率都很低。（只有3.6%的城市可能发生过没有重复地址的抢劫案）和集中，尽管集中程度因犯罪类型而异。这些分布都显着偏离简单的泊松机会模型，并且幅度很大，这引发了有关地方犯罪本质的基本问题，与社区或集体不同。
A leading sociological theory of crime is the “routine activities” approach (Cohen and Felson, 1979). The premise of this ecological theory is that criminal events result from likely offenders, suitable targets, and the absence of capable guardians against crime converging nonrandomly in time and space. Yet prior research has been unable to employ spatial data, relying instead on individual‐ and household‐level data, to test that basic premise. This analysis supports the premise with spatial data on 323,979 calls to police over all 115,000 addresses and intersections in Minneapolis over 1 year. Relatively few “hot spots” produce most calls to Police (50% of calls in 3% of places) and calls reporting predatory crimes (all robberies at 2.2% of places, all rapes at 1.2% of places, and all auto thefts at 2.7% of places), because crime is both rare (only 3.6% of the city could have had a robbery with no repeat addresses) and concentrated, although the magnitude of concentration varies by offense type. These distributions all deviate significantly, and with ample magnitude, from the simple Poisson model of chance, which raises basic questions about the criminogenic nature of places, as distinct from neighborhoods or collectivities.