Menu

Discusssion 7

0 Comment

Teacher Response I It is obvious that the security set up in place is not working to prevent nor deter the burglars from breaking into the swimming club. They are also increasingly become more emboldened as they are now taking the time to drill safes knowing that there are no security measures in place. If this lack of security measure will continue, it will not be long that offenders will begin to steal other things in the club. I do not agree with the idea that “Without publicity the effects are simply to contain the problem” (Tilley &amp. Webb, 1994, p. 26) because publicity will not contain nor stop the problem. Instead, I suggest that a roving security guard will be hired to deter offenders.
Reference
Tilley, N., &amp. Webb, J. (1994, February 1). BURGLARY REDUCTION: FINDINGS FROM SAFER CITIES SCHEMES. . Retrieved June 18, 2014, from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Photocopy/149304NCJRS.pdf
Response II
I agree that for offenders to be deterred stealing from the swimming club, security measures such as hardening of the target must be instituted. For certain, the absence of security measures in the swimming club must have encouraged offenders to break into the club. t will not be long that this simple burglary will escalate and in addition to cash, other important equipment in the club may be stolen. I also agree with findings of Bruce that apprehension almost do not work (2005 pg. 74). Most of the time, burglars will already be gone before apprehending officers can catch them. So the question now would be what is the most effective way of hardening the target given the situation? By now, the burglars are already emboldened from stealing the club. The best suggestion is to have a combination of security measures that would deter the offenders.
Reference
Bruce, C. (2008). Police Strategies and Tactics. International Association of Crime Analysts , 74