Team Work Part 1 &2

CCJ1020-12_Week 4 &5
Prof. Scott Addlesberger

Part I: The Offender
There are many differences between a chronic violent offender and a nonviolent offender. A chronic violent offender is an individual who frequently or persistently violates the law. As defined by Marvin Wolfgang, Robert Figlio, and Thorsten Sellin, their definition of a chronic violent offender is “delinquents arrested five or more times before the age of eighteen who commit a disproportionate amount of criminal offenses” (Siegel & Worrall, 2013). A nonviolent offender is a person causing a crime that does not cause damage, or hurts people. For example crimes like low level drug users, prostitution, shoplifters, burglary, and drug trafficking. Also there are many differences between types of crime committed and the type of offense they commit. These differences include age, race, gender, geographical, and socioeconomic status. There are many differences, but others believe that some nonviolent offenders pleaded out on nonviolent charges but previously did a violent crime at the time when they were arrested or in previous arrests. Nonviolent offenders today are taking up most populations in the U.S prisons.
Violent offenders are more likely to experience mental health issues, been exposed to violence or been victimized in the community and more likely to exhibit violence when incarcerated. It is important to remember that an individual in the community with mental health issues is not necessarily a violent individual. Violence may be a result of victimization and social exclusion. In the chronic violent crimes, offenders have a pathological tendency to commit and to repeat violent crimes, while in non-violent crimes, offenders don't use physical or emotional violence against victims. Nonviolent offenders are typically those convicted of property crimes. In the U.S. property crimes are often considered more serious than people.
Some people do think that just because they are called nonviolent offenders doesn’t mean that they should be. For example, It is not hard to imagine that the guy busted for drug trafficking was maybe carrying an illegal concealed weapon at the same time he was collared for slinging rock cocaine and maybe there is strong evidence that he used that gun to throw a few rounds at a rival. Facing an assault with a deadly weapon charge, our drug trafficker is advised by his public defender to cop a plea to selling rock cocaine. And there you have it, he is now a nonviolent offender. In 2004, the Bureau of Justice Statistics studied that 95% of inmates arrested were arrested prior. 33% of nonviolent offenders had history of violent crimes. 8% used a weapon during a nonviolent crime, and 70% of all nonviolent offenders are arrested within three years (Durose, M., & Mumola, C. (2004, October 1).

As I said earlier, there are many different variables of each type of offender such as race, age, gender, geographical differences, and gender. But is this really a justifiable way to predict who would become an offender by these variables alone? This is what I would consider a 50/50 percent answer because although it is not morally right to look at a person and say that they will become a criminal but at the same time the way a person carries their self or dress can be a dead giveaway to law enforcement that they are engaged in some kind of criminal activity or at the least will do so. Growing up as a child most of us were told “never to judge a book by its cover,” but how many times can you honestly say that you never did? If you were like me your answer would be more than usual. Because of the media and what it portrays it seems as though there are more African Americans that are committing crimes and being incarcerated than any other race. Minority group members are involved in a disproportionate share of criminal activity. According to Siegal and Worrall, African Americans make up about 12 percent of the general population, yet they account for about 38 percent of arrests for Part I violent crimes and for 29 percent of property crime arrests.

Part II: The Victim:
An individuals’ risk of criminal victimization depends on their exposure or proximity to offender populations, and exposure, in turn, depends on individuals’ lifestyles and routine activities. Because individuals are most