Women and crime

1. wherefore do you count populate judge effeminate addicts more harshly than male addicts, especially female alley addicts such as the women described in Article #5 in Renzetti?

Studies of execration show that serious social problems atomic number 18 problems which be directly associated with a males behavior and are non considered to be expected to be a females behavior. The reality is that women make and fully participate in terrible crimes and drug acts scarce as much as men do. But the situation that women depict judges harshly is because they arent expected to be committing these crimes as men are.

2. At this point what types of theories do you think are most important for understanding and solving crimes, those about people or those about places. What informs your decision?

I feel that one hypothesis cannot be absolute without the other, therefore the study of places cannot have accu count information without the study of people in that certain environs or the other way around.

3.Since 1993 the crime rate has by and large declined. Can routine activites theory explain this? How do you think routine Activities theory explains the violent crime rate in Philadelphia?

The routine theory could support the fact that crime rate has generally declines.



As one factor of a town, government, or organization is changed or removed the whole picture id automatically changed.

4. Is it possible for crime to increase even when the number of would be criminals remains constant?

If the prevention or rehabilitation or elimination are not factors in those committing a crime the rates of crime to those will rise because they will act to do bigger and worse crimes if not stopped, caught or helped.

5. Do you think it is possible to predict violent behavior? Why or why not?

I dont think it...

If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com



If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper