Quantitative Research: The Uniform Crime Reproting

A stronger focus on gun control in the United States involving restriction or even an outright ban of guns could serve to help the problem greatly. In 2015, 13,286 people were killed by firearms in the United States, with 26,819 suffering from non-lethal injuries (qtd. in “Guns in the US”). Taking away guns, the means that many urban criminals have to commit their crimes, would be very beneficial to cities. Recent studies found that the most effective way of reducing gun crime is to lower the amount of guns available in circulation. In the US specifically, studies show that the stricter gun laws are in a state, the lower the amount of deaths related to guns occur (Graham). While many believe that further restrictions on guns would not be feasible, both Australia and the United Kingdom managed to highly restrict or ban guns from their nations in order to reduce gun-related deaths and crime (Graham). Australia was able to rid the country of around 650,000 guns and their rate of robberies per 100,000 people sank from about 100 to 60 (cite later 1). This program of complete gun confiscation costed Australia $230 million. If a program of the same relative scale were to be done in the States, it would cost the government around $4 billion (Rieck). The alternative to a complete gun ban would be simply to restrict gun laws to make it much more difficult for a dangerous individual to purchase a gun. Background checks for all purchases of guns would become a requirement and

‘’Guns are responsible for over thirty-three thousand deaths in the United States annually, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).. In 2014, the CDC reported that 11,008 of the 15,872 homicides committed in the United States that year involved a firearm. Of the 42,826 suicides reported that year, 21,386 involved a firearm. These statistics have inspired efforts at the federal and state levels to enact gun control legislation to reduce crime and violence’’(‘’Gun Control’’). According to the statistic guns are held for over 33,000 deaths in the United States. CDC also reports that 11,008 homicides involve a gun. Over half of the suicides cases in America involved a some kind of a gun. Although Americans have the Right To Bear Arms there should be more restrictions on guns because guns are responsible for a lot of deaths across America.

Society as a whole has become less and less violent. Since 1991, reported crimes committed has dropped by almost double (Statista.com). Many people blame the AR-15 for most of the mass murders in America, and ask for the “assault” weapon to be banned. However, many details of the gun are skewed. In an article written by Margot Sanger-Katz of The New York Times, she stated that of all the gun deaths in America, 60% were suicides; and even more contrary to belief, nearly double of the mass killings (4 or more deaths) were with handguns instead of rifles (statista.com). Banning the AR-15 will not have an impact on violence whatsoever.

In 1939, Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945, six million Jews and seven million others unable to defend themselves had their lives taken away. [1] Could this outcome have changed if the Jews were armed with guns? Could thirteen million innocent lives have been saved? Does taking away firearms help someone in a situation like this? Many pro gun-control citizens believe that banning firearms will make them safer and some even protest. For reasons of self-defense, to assist the police, and because violence will always be present, the United States’ law regarding the legality of firearms should stay in place.

Gun control has been a controversial issue for many years. Many citizens believe that if gun control is strictly enforced it would reduce the threat of crime. People have the right to bear arms for protection, or even just the pleasure of hunting and recreational activity. With the recent events involving firearms and mass shootings, people are skeptical whether to increase or decrease gun laws. Americans have a constitutional right to own handguns and stricter laws and licensing will not effectively save lives.

Many people hear or watch debates over any topic and one of the most common topics are over gun safety or gun control. Many people have over-heard or heard about state legislators and of lawmakers come up with this new law. The debate is over whether or not to allow an open-carry or have a carry-conceal permit if in the range of the age limit or over a certain age point to get that permit and to be allowed to carry a type of weapon. So if something does occur at that point there will be that privilege of being safe around strangers, and others that many are unaware about. Now that the debate is over men and women, should have the right to bear arms.

The Uniform Crime Report Program is a national program set to voluntarily report a crime to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The FBI recognized a need for national crime statistics to do its job more effectively (“About the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program,” n.d.). According to James Inciardi, it was recognized that the UCR had problems in 1978 as they were “incomplete and structurally biased” which made crimes into myths instead of reality (Inciardi, 1978, pg. 3). The statistics are submitted by cities, counties, and states nationwide. The redesign effort to the UCR in the 1980s brought about a whole new way of thinking and reporting.

The top two and most commonly used programs for reporting and tracking crime statistics in the United States are the Uniform Crime Reports, UCR, program and the National Incident-Based Reporting System, NIBRS, program. Each program contains data from crimes and incidents that is tracked, analyzed, and reported by different law enforcement agencies from the reported incidents. While the UCR is the most commonly used, many law enforcement agencies are working towards shifting to full participation of NIBRS. Both programs use similar methodology to create reports of their crime based statistics, but still contain varying differences. One of the differences of the two systems is the methodology. Another is the data in the report and what this data means for various law enforcement agencies across the country.

The use of and the owning of guns is a very hot and debated topic in society today. For many, this is a life and death debate due to the recent and numerous school shootings. These school shootings have caused an outcry for more gun control, specifically in relation to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Despite these calls, increased gun control is not the answer. Most gun owners’ use their guns responsibly and for good purposes. Gun control also limits our constitutionally derived right to own firearms. If gun control is enforced, law-abiding citizens will be forced to give up their guns and their right to own guns, while many criminals who own guns may illegally keep theirs. As the saying goes “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Guns are an important aspect of our society in many ways. They allow for protection, recreation, and hunting. They also do not have as many negative effects as some claim. The right to own firearms is a constitutional right that is important and needs to be upheld.

I was drawn to the practical use of research and crime samples assigned this week, especially as it relates to the criminal justice system. I believe most organizations create reports to summarize any information gathered, but the FIB’s criminal publications stood out to me. Hagan (2014) notes during the early 1990s National Incident-Based Recording Systems (NIBRS) began to play an important role in documenting research pertaining to criminology.

Everyday in the United States, ninety families are changed forever; guns claim an average of ninety lives every day in the United States, 33,000 lives in a single year. Gun control has been a debate in the United States for many years and is constantly thrusted back into the public’s attention by horrific shootings. These shootings constantly cause individuals to petition the government to place stricter and stricter regulations of guns. However, these policies cannot be the solution to this problem. To determine a solution that will be both effective and constitutional, we must look at statistics and research that has been conducted to determine the best course of action. Instead of banning or limiting guns, the evidence will show that removing the current restrictions and targeting individuals instead of guns will be a more effective process.

As I write this introduction, I am like millions of others watching the tragedy in Louisiana and Alabama caused by hurricane Katrina. A small but important part of the devastation and the challenge is the existence of individuals and groups of citizens from the area mostly impacted by the storm who used guns against their neighbours and those attempting to assist them. In any other industrialised nation, this will never happen because it will eventually cause the level of socialisation to decline due to the issue pertaining citizens getting the ready access towards guns. Most likely, gun violence is categorised as the most highly anticipated violence around the world because it is growing rapidly and causes

The other necessary use of crime data is the allocation of funds and justice assistance. The formulation of policies requires the identification of issues, measuring how important the issues are, given their impact and magnitude and finally developing strategies to address them. On the other hand, implementing the policy means deciding on the whether it is appropriate, encouraging the masses to adopt it, and finding the resources needed to further it. In view of that, crime data plays a huge role in allocation of funds and justifying policies especially in the criminal justice system. However, it is important to note that crime statistics are not the only determining factors when it comes to which policies are put in place mainly because of

The big issue of gun control in the United States, is that many people believe that it takes away the 2nd Amendment rights, which is the right to bear arms. Citizens of the United States are promised the the right to bear arms in the Constitution, and by applying gun control laws takes away that same right. Crime is high enough in cities with very few laws pertaining to gun control, but taking guns away from people who are registered with license will not solve the problem either. Placing more limitations on gun owners, particularly responsible gun owners, will not reduce gun violence. Although there are rules and regulations already in place there still is a lot of crime occurring, because laws on gun

A semi-structured interview is a qualitative research method undertaken to answer set questions while also giving the interviewer the opportunity to explore other areas of discussion (Evaluation Toolbox, 2010). Unlike questionnaires, interviews involve social interaction and require participants to essentially give data straight to the researcher of the experiment (McLeod, 2015). Structured interviews are generally formal and make the interviewer follow a strict set of questions so they do not stray into other questions that are not necessary. However, semi-structured interviews allow the interviewer to diverge into other topics when it feels appropriate to do so while also covering questions which are mandatory to bring up in the interview