Law

Issue

Under the United States Constitution, five main businesses can be legally registered and allowed to operate in the country. The five businesses are sole proprietorship, limited liability company, cooperative, corporation, and partnership (American Bar Association of Corporate Laws 2008). Indeed, each of these businesses has its merits and demerits. Choice of the best form of business is entirely dependent on the intentions of the investor. As the primary investor, two goals should be a top priority return on investment and satisfaction of quality products offered. The suggested business, the manufacturing and sale of new computer software that will revolutionize the way people work are arguably, very profitable in the current economy. Technology has been embraced in all aspects of life. However, just because the product is a technological innovation does not guarantee its success. Therefore, the very first step to ensuring that return on investment and high-quality product manufactured is achieved is to form the best type of business. The paper will serve as a letter to Mr. Lithgow advising him on his best option regarding the type of business.

Rule

As mentioned, there are five business types that Mr. Lithgow can try out. Out of the five, the sole proprietorship is not advised as the client already has two business partners. Sole proprietorships involve only one investor. The other four options, limited liability company, cooperative, corporation, and partnership are all viable options. This section will evaluate the pros and cons of the four options.

Limited Liability CompanyAccording to Artz, Gramlich, and Porter (2012), in a limited liability company, shareholders possess no other liability apart from the price of their current shares and the remaining owing. In simpler terms, if the company gets into debt, each shareholder will bear the amount of debt equal to the number of shares the individual has, and if there is any balance left of the debt, it is divided equally among all shareholders (Slorach 2014). Mr. Lithgow has the option of opting for a single limited liability company. Since he is the sole cash investor, it would make sense for him to be entirely responsible for the company. In such a case, the losses or profits are not taxed through the company but through Mr. Lithgow’s personal tax return (Kirkus Reviews 2017).

There are several advantages of a single limited liability company. First, the sole shareholder earns more, especially if the company is making profits. The sole “owner” will, therefore, receive a salary based on the position held in the enterprise and also earn dividends through the shares held (100%). The shareholder will also have the option of opening up shares to be bought by other investors and also determine the amount each share will cost.

The second aspect of this option is the Partnership Limited Liability Partnership (PLLP). PLLP revolves around the different shares that the various partners hold (Leuciuc 2016). Each partner will be liable for debt equal to his/her shares. In the presented case, the other two partners are investing their time and effort into the start-up. An agreement can be reached on how many shares the two will hold. The advantage of this is that no one person will bear the full losses of the company.

Despite the many benefits of a Limited Liability Company, either sole or partner, some disadvantages can be identified. The main problem is that the shareholder who invests the most in the start-up bears the largest losses (Belyakov 2014). As the sole financier, therefore, the client will take a big chunk of the financial losses that will be experienced.

Cooperatives

According to Battilani and Schröter (2012), cooperatives require at least five members. In the given case, therefore, the three partners will have to identify and recruit two other members to be able to form the partnership. Topinka (2014) clarifies that a cooperative gives all members equal powers regarding decision-making. In such a business, the size of the investment is not considered. There are several advantages and disadvantages of such an agreement.

One advantage is that responsibility is equally shared among the partners (Reynolds & Curtin 2009). Since all partners are equal, they are all invested in making the company successful. It has been proven that majority shareholders tend to make decisions based on their status and not on their level of expertise. Cooperatives reject the premise by allowing each partner to have equal weight in decision-making. Due to its nature, cooperatives also force all partners to be active in their roles within the start-up. Therefore, it becomes easier for best practices and ideas to be shared. Also, the cooperatives pull in the different talents that the partners present onto one platform.

Despite the mentioned advantages, cooperatives, just like Limited Liability Companies, have several disadvantages. The first disadvantage is that cooperatives are not associated with profits. Johnson (2015) explains that cooperatives are often meant to offer services to the members who form it, and not necessarily, to act as a kind of business. Also, cooperatives give one vote to all members, including those who invested more in the company (Arnold 2009).

Corporations

Corporations are usually set apart from their owners. The premise means that shareholders are not liable for any loss made by the corporation as the corporation is viewed, by law, as an individual. Defined as a “legal person,” corporations that are in debt have to pay the debt through future profits or declare bankruptcy. However, to form a corporation, members have to also seek an insurance against bankruptcy so as to be able to pay debts when the need arises. Just like the two discussed types of businesses, corporations have their advantages and disadvantages.

The first advantage of corporations is that no shareholder is liable for the losses the company makes. Therefore, if the corporation does not perform as expected, the shareholders only lose their initial investment into the enterprise. Any debt that has accrued in the line of the corporation’s work will be written off as a bad debt. Also, Wilks (2013) confirms that the corporation, and its assets, can be sold to pay off debt. Any balance left after clearing of debt is equally divided among members, regardless of the amount of money that the individual investors put in at inception.

Another key advantage of corporations is that they can raise money through the sale of shares to the public (Tricker 2011). Getting a corporation listed in the stock market is easier than doing the same for the other companies. Also, the public has shown a keen interest in corporations than in the other companies regarding purchasing shares. The shareholders have the ability to also determine the price per share, making it a lucrative opportunity to earn extra income.

One disadvantage of corporations is that it takes some time to form (Slorach & Ellis 2016). The legal requirements needed are more compared to the requirements required to create the other companies. Also, corporations are taxed more heavily than other businesses. Becsky-Nagy and Noyák (2015) explain that this is so because the government taxes the corporation as a “legal person” and also taxes the individual shareholders through their personal tax returns.

Partnerships

The last viable form of business is partnerships. The Uniform Partnership Act of the USA defines a partnership “as an association of two or more persons to carry on as co-owners a business for profit” (Henning 2012). Important to note, the partnership adheres to the rules that are agreed upon by the shareholders. Therefore, the shareholders also have to agree on the sharing of profits and losses. There are several advantages of partnerships.

The first advantage is that it allows for the agreement of power. All shareholders will be involved in the process of understanding. The shareholder who invests the most (financially) is often given priority regarding chairing the partnership. Additionally, all involved have to agree to the set terms, draft the agreement, sign it, and have it notarized for the partnership to be legal. The ease of understanding also allows for changes and decisions to be made effectively (Cadena-Roa, Luna & Puga 2012). All the partnership needs to function is consensus and agreement. Joyce and Paquin (2016) also add that partnerships are quickly created compared to the other companies.

Morse (2004) adds that partnerships also enjoy unlimited liability. Thus, each can use other personal assets to pay off the debt accrued by the company. The individuals can also use their private assets to boost the company if they so desire. Again, such an action has to be agreed upon by all interested shareholders. Additionally, share distribution has to be approved by all and not left to one person.

Partnerships, however, also have some disadvantages. The biggest problem with partnerships is that they tend to be temporary. Amat and Perramon (2012) explain that such firms have shorter life periods compared to other companies. In many instances, partnerships dissolve, and one individual takes up the cause, changing the company into a sole or a limited liability company. Also, partnerships are often associated with friendships and go mainly by the trust. Due to this, making tough business decisions can be challenging as some partners might make decisions against them on a personal level.

Application

After a review of the five viable options, it is highly recommended that a partnership be formed. There are several reasons why this is suggested. The first reason being that the three partners will always have to agree on a cause of action before one is taken. Being the chief financer allows for some form of power in the partnership, albeit not an extra vote. Thus, the position of “chairperson” can be easily acquired. The position chair allows for overseeing activities and calling out of factors that might not be beneficial to the partnership.

Another factor that makes partnership the best option is the fact that decisions are based on agreements (Weintraub 2013). It is important to note, people who invest largely in a start-up often feel the need to control everything. In many instances, such actions do not help the company and can lead to its failure. A partnership does not allow for such and demands that decisions be made fairly, without bias from any one individual. Therefore, it can be argued that for start-ups, where each decision is crucial in the survival of the company and the product, partnerships are best.

Also, the fact that partnerships are easier to form allows for the involved to fully weigh each other and the contributions they each bring into the partnership without the pressure of time (Autry & Hall 2009). Technological software is time-sensitive as software changes often. The ease of registering the partnership and starting work allows for such a dire product to still be relevant by the time of release. Unlike corporations, partnerships are not taxed twice. Therefore, more money is saved and acquired. Before forming the partnership, however, some advice should be considered. To avert the challenges and limitations of partnerships, a written agreement detailing the nature of the partnership and the roles of all involved shareholders should be drafted and notarized.

Conclusion

There are four types of businesses that are viable for the venture. The four types are limited liability company, cooperative, corporation, and partnerships. Out of the four, partnerships are best suited for the enterprise at hand. One of the factors that make partnerships best suited is their flexibility. Decision-making is fully based on an agreement between the involved parties.

Also, roles held by the shareholders are deliberated and agreed upon based on merit. One of the disadvantages of partnerships is that they are associated with friendships and trust, such that touch decision-making can be perceived as malicious. To solve the challenges, it is important to agree from the word go that the business comes before the friendship and also to set disciplinary actions against shareholders who do not perform as expected.

Reference List

Autry, TC & Hall, FR 2009, The law of cooperatives, American Bar Association Business Law Section, New York.

American Bar Association of Corporate Laws 2008, ‘Model Business Corporation Act Annotated: Model business corporation act with official comment and reporter’s annotations, Volume 4’, American Bar Association, Washington, DC.

Arnold, AJ 2009, Arnold’s guide for business corporations in the state of New York: Containing the business corporation, BiblioBazaar, Mason, OH.

Artz, N, Gramlich, J & Porter, T 2012, ‘Low-profit Limited Liability Companies (L3Cs)’, Journal of Public Affairs, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 230-238.

Amat, O & Perramon, J 2012, ‘High-growth cooperatives: financial profile and key factors for competitiveness’, CIRIEC, no. 73, pp. 81-98.

Belyakov, VG 2014, ‘Corporate control of the company parties limited liability: Economic and legal approach’, Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta, Seriia 7: Geologia, Geografia, no. 1, pp. 57-79.

Battani, P & Schröter, GH 2012, The cooperative business movement, 1950 to the present, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Becky-Nagy, P & Noyák, Z 2015, ‘Formalization of the informal venture capital market’, Budapest Management Review, vol. 46, no. 11, pp. 39-49.

Cadena-Roa, J, Luna, M & Puga, C 2012, ‘Associational Performance: The influence of cohesion, decision-making, and the environment’, International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 993-1013.

Henning, JJ 2012, ‘Partnerships: Limited partnerships and limited liability limited partnerships,’ Amicus Curiae, vol. 2000, pp. 31.

Kirkus Reviews, 2017, ‘How to use limited liability companies & limited partnerships’, Kirkus Reviews, vol. 85, no. 4, p. 1.

Johnson, R 2015, ‘Cooperatives: Not only a guiding principle but also our North Star’, Rural Cooperatives, vol. 82, no. 5, pp. 2-45.

Joyce, A & Paquin, RL 2016, ‘The triple layered business model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business models’, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 135, pp. 1474-1486.

Lucius, E 2016, ‘The immunity from personal liability provided to the shareholders of the limited liability company by the Romanian Law’, Knowledge Horizons, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 84-86.

Slorach, JS & Ellis, J 2016, ‘Limited companies’, Business Law 2016-2017, vol. 7, pp. 39 – 44.

Reynolds, DP & Curtin, TR 2009, New firm creation in the United States: Initial explorations with the PSED, Springer Science & Business Media, New York.

Slorach, E 2014, ‘Limited liability partnerships,’ Business Law 2014-2015, vol. 29, pp. 288 – 296.

Tricker, B 2011, ‘Re-inventing the limited liability company,’ Corporate Governance: An International Review, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 384 – 393.

Topinka, J 2014, IT business partnerships: A field guide: Paving the way for business and technology convergence, CIO Mentor, New York.

Wilks, S 2013, The political power of the business corporation, Edward Elgar Publishing, New York.

Weintraub, J 2013, How to build successful business partnerships, AudioLink, New Jersey.

Victorian Court Hierarchy

High Court of Australia

The High Court’s duties involve conducting the interpretation and the enforcement of the Australian law, resolving cases of specific federal impact, such as concerns about the statutory competence of laws, and hearing appeals through special leaves from Federal, Regional, and Territory courts.

Supreme Court

A jury or a judge hears cases in this Court. Both the trial Division and the Appeal court are the two divisions of the Court. The Trial Division deals with criminal proceedings, such as murder and significant financial and business disputes. It also handles cases from ruling reached by both the County as well as the Supreme Court trial division (Law Foundation, 2021).

County Court

The County Court conducts cases that involve more severe offenses and lawsuits exceeding a hundred thousand dollars. The judge and the jury can try these cases in the County Court.

Magistrates’ Court

Many legitimate disagreements in Victoria are conducted by the Magistrates’ Court. Traffic violations, insignificant assaults, property damage, and destructive conduct are examples of “summary issues” tried under the Court’s criminal authority, which are lesser in seriousness tried and decided by the judge compared to burglary and theft, to name a few.

Juvenile Court

 Juvenile Court is similar to that one of the Magistrate, but it only deals with children’s issues. Except for the charges involving suicide or attempted homicide, which should be held in the adult courtroom, all allegations are heard in the Criminal Division of the Chamber. This division also handles applications for domestic abuse and personal protection intervention orders.

Coroners Court

When a death occurs spontaneously, once the cause of death is unknown or a corpse cannot be found, the Coroners’ Court investigates. The prosecutor will investigate the cause of death. The coroner may issue accounts with suggestions to attempt to avert related deaths from occurring in the future (Allan & Aroney, 2008).

Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal

This Court deals with a variety of less formal cases. Market issues, retail tenancy disagreements, owners company disputes, land selling and possession, and the use or flow of water between premises are covered here.

Courts in Victoria have different hierarchies; one is to have specialization courts are divided into levels based on the kinds of cases they hear, the rules that apply to such claims, and the protocols that must be followed. The other reason is to allow doctrine precedence. The Doctrine of Precedent cannot work efficiently without a court hierarchy. Under this doctrine, superior court rulings on new matters bind all lower courts in the order (Derwing et al., 2000). This implies that the law is applied consistently. The other explanation is that appeals are allowed. Successful appeals require a judicial hierarchy.

How Courts Make Law in Australia

 In the policy of pattern is a required constriction on legal decision-making in Australia. The principle of the pattern is based on the belief that when making judgments, judges must give due deference to previous judicial decisions (Legal Aid, 2020b). Common law, also known as case law, is based on lengthy reports of similar patients and regulations because there is no correct legal code that would apply to a specific case.

Statutory laws refer to laws created by parliament in the form of legislation. The common and statutory laws share a symbiotic type of relationship, and they interact directly and indirectly. For instance, in terms of the constitution, statutory law prevails over the common law.

Differences between Criminal and Civil Law

At the resident, state, and national levels, criminal laws describe criminal acts and institute civil penalties for those accused of arson, physical attack, and robbery. In the criminal justice system, only criminal law cases are heard. Moreover, civil law is concerned with the public’s right to privacy. Civil laws are used whenever a person’s rights have been violated or whenever citizens engage in disputes among themselves or other groups (Legal Aid, 2020a).

 Regarding criminal and civil courts, they use different standards to prove their cases. In criminal cases, the state or federal government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender committed the criminality. On the contrary, in civil cases, the plaintiff has the presumption of proof and should demonstrate that the respondent is more than expected to be blamed for the matter.

The outcome of criminal cases when one is proven guilty the punishment and conviction are in the form of fines, community service, and custodial punishment, while for civil cases when a party is found liable, it is expected to award compensation.

The Magistrates Courtroom Floor Plan and their Functions and Duties

A magistrate is a civilian officer who administers the law. The duties of the Magistrate are laid at the district levels. They handle tasks for both criminal and civil cases. Furthermore, they hold dispositive motions, schedule conferences, conduct settlements and arraignments.

A bench clerk is a person who observes proceedings taking place in Court. The bench clerk tells people where and how to stand, reads charges to the criminal, and oaths witnesses.

A lawyer is a person whose profession is to advise on legal rights and conducting lawsuits for their clients. Lawyers’ responsibilities include representing and advising clients in Court, researching legal issues, and interpreting laws, rules, and rulings.

A defendant is someone accused or sued for committing a crime. A defender responds to the claims of the claimant. However, he doesn’t prove the case; it’s the work of the plaintiff. The plaintiff brings the topic to the Court, provides evidence for the chance to be heard, and allows the case to proceed.

A witness is a person with relevant information about a crime. They clarify what happened in the scene to the judge or jury, and the information provided by them becomes evidence of the case.

Main Types of Cases in the Magistrate Court

All criminal cases start at the magistrate court, and at an average of 95%, the cases are completed here. The more severe cases are passed to higher courts if the defendant is found guilty and has been sentenced or for full trial with the judge and jury. Magistrates deal with three cases: summary offenses-these are less severe cases such as minor assaults and monitoring offenses where the defendant is not entitled to be tried by the jury. Either way, offenses-these cases can be dealt with by judges, jury, or the Magistrate.

This can lead to the defendant if found guilty, been imposed tougher sentences. Indictable-these are offenses such as rape, robbery, and manslaughter that are only heard in high courts. If the case is indictable, the magistrate court decides if they consider legal issues such as restrictions to the defendant or granting bail and then pass the chance to the high Court. In magistrate courts, there are various forms of hearings (Handayani, 2017). The first trial in a criminal case is called a mention hearing. The case can be heard and be determined if the defendant pleads guilty. The Magistrate will decide whether the matter can be settled during this hearing. Parties are asked to estimate the time to resolve the case and the number of witnesses to be called. If the issue can be fixed, a contested hearing takes place. Contest hearing-at this stage, the lawyer and the prosecutor present their case to the Court. Witnesses are crossed examined, and they give their evidence on the matter (Sang-Hie, 2017). The judicial officer hears evidence from both sides and is left to decide on the final judgment.

Etiquette and Protocols at the Melbourne Magistrate Court

Courtrooms are formal places with standards and rules to help matters proceed smoothly. When in courts, all people present are supposed to respect the court system and magistrates. If etiquette does not adhere, one may be forced out of the courtroom. One should arrive early at the Court to familiarize with the place and be prepared for proceedings. The dress code of the Court requires one to dress neatly and smartly. A person should behave respectfully in the courtroom; one should: maintain silence unless when called upon to speak by the Magistrate, mobile phones should be silent, refrain from eating and drinking, and no recording of proceeding should take place.

There are strict codes on how to behave around the Magistrate, which include: address Magistrate as your honor, nodding the head at the Magistrate when one enters or leaves the courtroom, standing noiselessly when the judge enters or exist, standing when the Magistrate is speaking to you and following and listening to the directions given by Magistrate. When a person is leaving the courtroom, one should bow the head in the order of a judicial officer.

References    

Allan, J., & Aroney, N. (2008). An uncommon court: How the High Court of Australia has undermined Australian federalism. Sydney Law Review, 30, 245.

Aroney, N. (2018). 2. The High Court of Australia: Textual Unitarism vs. Structural Federalism (pp. 29-68). University of Toronto Press.

Environ Tippers Victoria PTY LTD v Patrick Blandthorn [2020] VMC 7.

Handayani, D. (2017). Legal principles of evidence on civil cases in public judiciary. Hang Tuah Law Journal, 1(1), 111.

Law Foundation. (2021). Victoria Law Foundation.

Legal Aid, V. (2020a). Going to court | Victoria Legal Aid. Legalaid.vic.gov.au.

Legal Aid, V (2020b). Your day in court | Victoria Legal Aid. Legalaid.vic.gov.au.

Police v Vella (2019). Victoria Magistrate Court 1.

Sang-Hie, H. (2017). Candlelight rallies and accountability of the judiciary. Democratic Legal Studies, Null (64), 7-52.

Introduction

The adultification of juveniles is something that has taken centre stage in the criminal justice system. Many countries and states have implemented new laws aimed at sentencing more children in adult courts (Norozi & Moen 2016). The essay will present four unique stages. The first stage gives an analysis of the socially constructed concept of childhood. The essay will go further to analyse the issue of identification of young offenders. The next part of the paper will examine how the identification of juvenile offenders has impacted the punishment of young people. The final stage of the essay will offer evidence-based resolutions that can be used to transform the situation. The conclusion of the paper will restate and summarise the major points discussed in the essay. The main thesis or argument presented in the essay is that the current juvenile justice system should be changed “to include appropriate supervision plans that do not jeopardise public safety” (Bolin 2014, p. 161).

Identification of Juvenile Offenders and the Punishment of Young People

The issue of juvenile justice cannot be clearly understood without having a proper definition of childhood. The term “childhood” is a concept that derives its meaning from society. This kind of social construction explains why different societies will have their unique definitions of childhood. The meaning has changed significantly within the past centuries. Norozi and Moen (2016) indicate that a person cannot experience childhood. This means that childhood is an unnatural concept that is defined by man. Biological immaturity is experienced differently in human beings. Before the 20^th century, people were observed to take huge responsibilities at an early age. When it comes to the issue of sexual behaviour, the concept of childhood is treated differently.

Child-centeredness is, therefore, a modern idea that emerged towards the end of the 19^th century. This analysis shows conclusively that each society has a clear understanding of what childhood entails. The outstanding fact is that every society or community appears to have a common idea of childhood. This is the case because many global communities view individuals below the age of 18 as children (Norozi & Moen 2016). Many laws and policies have therefore been designed in such a way that they treat individuals below the age of 18 differently (Pitts 2015). Unfortunately, young people have been observed to commit heinous crimes. The situation has led to numerous issues revolving around the treatment of adults and children in the criminal justice system. It should, therefore, be agreed that childhood is a socially constructed concept.

The social definition of childhood is something that has influenced the criminal justice system. Throughout the 18^th and 19^th centuries, many nations acknowledged the fact that juveniles required special treatment and attention. Norozi and Moen (2016) argue that they were different from adults in terms of decision-making, sexual behaviour, and interpretation of the law. From 1945, many states in the United began to develop new justice systems aimed at addressing the legal needs of juveniles. However, the recent past has been characterised by the continued adultification of juveniles. Consequently, the criminal justice system has been changing significantly to address the problem of juvenile delinquency.

Pitts (2015) believes strongly that many societies are no longer upholding the traditional definition of childhood, especially in their criminal justice systems. With many juveniles committing heinous crimes in different societies, policymakers have been implementing new laws to ensure such offenders are sentenced in adult courts. This development is what has led to the adultification of young offenders. Juvenile officers in such legal systems have been “focusing on the welfare and treatment of young criminals” (Bolin 2014, p. 94). With many young people lacking adequate representation, the adultification process has transformed the nature of punishment available to them.

Studies have revealed that over 100,000 young people are prosecuted in the United Kingdom every single year (Pitts 2015). The most astounding fact is that majority of such offenders entering different adults courts are not imprisoned for serious crimes. On the contrary, such offenders are usually prosecuted for minor offences. A small percentage of such culprits are usually arrested for serious criminal offences such as murder or robbery. Consequently, many young offenders have continued to receive harsh punishments that are designed for adults.

After convictions, the offenders are usually charged as adults and eventually incarcerated (Goldson 2013). Some states have strict laws that ensure the convicted youths serve their terms in jails designed for adults. Since the year 1990, the number of juveniles being sentenced as adults has increased by over 208 per cent (Pitts 2015). Experts believe strongly that more youths will find themselves in adult courts and jails in the future. These facts show conclusively that more youths incarcerated in adult jails are usually exposed to numerous risks such as sexual abuse and assault.

Juvenile court judges possess the best skills to handle the legal needs of juvenile offenders. Unfortunately, the judgments are usually made by judges in adult courts. This practice explains why more juveniles have not been able to receive appropriate sentencing or punishment for their offences. This has been the case despite the fact that juvenile court judges can offer appropriate judgments after investigating the issues surrounding the presented case. The other important issue to consider is that many young offenders do not have access to competent juvenile lawyers to offer the required legal counsel (Crofts 2016). This gap explains why many youth offenders end up being sentenced and prosecuted as adults in different communities across the world.

The issue of race has faced the global criminal justice system for decades. Many adults of colour have been affected disproportionately by the criminal justice policies in different parts of the world. In America, for example, statistics have indicated that African Americans and Latinos had higher chances of being imprisoned after committing minor offences (Crofts 2016). The same problem has continued to affect more juveniles who find themselves in the criminal justice system. This problem has mainly been caused by the adultification of young people. A study conducted by Goldson (2013) indicated that most of the young offenders in the nation’s adult system are immigrants or from minority racial groups.

It is therefore agreeable that young offenders or suspects who are tried as mature people face harsh punishments usually designed for adults (Crofts 2016). Such juveniles are usually placed in different adult jails or prisons. The sentencing of youth offenders follows similar guidelines designed for adults. That being the case, such youths may get life sentences without any possibility of parole. Pitts (2015) indicates that the only sentence that has been omitted for youths is that of death.

After completing their sentences, imprisoned youths become disoriented because of stigmatisation and guilt (Bolin 2014). This kind of stigma explains why such ex-conflicts find it hard to get good jobs. The consequences associated with an adult conviction can be far-reaching for youth people. This is the case because they find it hard to cope with the abuse and stigma associated with the conviction. Additionally, adjudicating youths within the adult criminal system usually results in negative impacts. This is a clear indication that the current adultification of young people fails to promote the safety of the public.

The current evidence, therefore, supports the importance of a policy change. The current statutes have transformed the kind of punishment available to young offenders. More often than not, youths are forced to serve life sentences despite the fact that they are treated like children by their respective societies. The issue of adultification has continued to affect the welfare of many young people negatively. The malpractice also disorients more youths who have the potential to transform their communities. This problem can, therefore, be addressed by returning every child to the juvenile criminal justice system (Goldson 2013). Additionally, communities should identify and avail new services to youths in order to reduce the number of juvenile offenders.

Conclusion

This essay has shown conclusively that the term childhood is socially constructed and is defined differently in many societies. A common consensus regarding the definition of childhood will address the problem of adultification. The increasing number of youth offenders sentenced in adult courts is something that has transformed the nature of punishment available to juveniles (Goldson 2013). The malpractice has made it impossible for many youths to achieve their goals in life. New policies aimed at placing youth offenders in juvenile courts have the potential to deal with this problem. Provision of evidence-based human services will ensure more youths do not commit various offences. Such measures will improve the situation and promote social welfare.

Reference List

Bolin, R 2014, ‘Adultification in juvenile corrections: A comparison of juvenile and adult officers’, Scholar Commons, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-241.

Crofts, T 2016, ‘Reforming the age of criminal responsibility’, South African Journal of Psychology, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 436-448.

Goldson, B 2013, ‘Unsafe, unjust and harmful to wider society: grounds for raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales’, Youth Justice, vol. 13, no. 2, pp.111-130.

Norozi, S & Moen, T 2016, ‘Childhood as a social construction’, Journal of Educational and Social Research, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 75-80.

Pitts, J 2015, ‘Youth crime and youth justice 2015-2020’, Youth & Policy, vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 31-42.

Criminological theories as a separate area of ​​this science differ in many criteria, and one of them is the hereditary nature of delinquency. In this regard, a biological concept has emerged, which, as Cullen, Agnew, and Wilcox (2017) note, represents the idea that deviant behavior and criminal tendency are innate features that develop in the course of human life. This hypothesis is confirmed in practice since there are many examples of how the inherent genetic properties of a character affect a person.

According to Ling, Umbach, and Raine (2019), “biological correlates of antisocial and criminal behavior are inextricably linked” (p. 14). At the same time, this concept is not the only one where a character and a particular environment determine inclinations to delinquency. There is a strain crime theory implying that certain social principles encourage or, on the contrary, impede the manifestations of deviant behavior. In order to compare the similarity of these two concepts, the examples of their interpretation may be given.

Since the biological theory is based on the principle of adopting certain inclinations, the environment and social circle are, as a rule, additional reinforcing factors. Broidy and Santoro (2018) remark that if a person is raised in the conditions of “racial discrimination and frustration,” there is a high probability that he or she will continue following these ideas in the future (p. 163). This imitation is similar to the signs of innateness when a person adopts criminal tendencies transferred from parents. According to Thaxton and Agnew (2018), individuals are able to influence a large number of people through authority and social recognition. Therefore, the two considered criminological theories are similar due to their natural origin.

References

Broidy, L., & Santoro, W. A. (2018). General strain theory and racial insurgency: Assessing the role of legitimate coping. Justice Quarterly, 35(1), 162-189. Web.

Cullen, F. T., Agnew, R., & Wilcox, P. (2017). Criminological theory: Past to present: Essential readings (6th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ling, S., Umbach, R., & Raine, A. (2019). Biological explanations of criminal behavior. Psychology, Crime & Law, 1-15. Web.

Thaxton, S., & Agnew, R. (2018). When criminal coping is likely: An examination of conditioning effects in general strain theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 34(4), 887-920. Web.

Criminal Justice Article Review

The current paper dwells on the implications inherent in the existing criminal justice system and public opinion regarding numerous categories of convictions. Moreover, the paper aims to identify the core reasons for wrongful convictions and their effect on the community and criminal justice. The current wrongful conviction policy is analyzed and critiqued in line with the literature review conducted within the framework of this paper.

In their article, Kent and Carmichael (2015) discussed the problem of an increased number of wrongful convictions. They also found that throughout the last decade, the number of resultant exonerations also underwent a substantial increase. Kent and Carmichael (2015) identified that public confidence in the existing criminal justice and its authoritative power directly depended on the number of convictions (regardless of whether they were rightful or wrongful). According to the authors of the article, the core problem of the current criminal justice system consists of the fact that there are states that choose not to adopt the laws that accept the due process clause.

In perspective, this limits the level of protection against an increased number of wrongful convictions. Kent and Carmichael (2015) successfully identified that the due process clause was commonly disregarded in the Republican-based states while the so-called “innocence movement” was adopted by Democratic-based states. It is safe to say that the authors of the article thoroughly discussed how the policy affects the criminal justice system, its structure, and its organization. It is reflected by the problems that interfere with the implementation of a crime prevention strategy intended to reduce the number of wrongful convictions within both social and political contexts.

Garoupa and Rizzolli (2012) conducted another research in which they analyzed the impact of wrongful convictions on crime deterrence. Not surprisingly, it was found that the enforcement of this policy led to increased deterrence rates. The authors of the article mentioned that this supposition is widely criticized regardless of the practical evidence. According to Garoupa and Rizzolli (2012), wrongful convictions may have a negative influence on the criminal justice system in case if they adversely affect the balance between the innocent and the guilty. Overall, deterrence is moderately influenced by wrongful convictions because the latter exposes the public to the jeopardies of committing crimes. There are numerous circumstances that should be taken into consideration when discussing deterrence and its influence on different social layers.

The relationship between the stakeholders (local, state, and federal) can be explained by the breakdown of the data obtained by Kent and Carmichael (2015). They claimed that this relationship is highly contingent on public opinion and there are critical implications that should be taken into account. Throughout the process of investigating the relationships between the three key stakeholders, it was found that there are variables inherent in these relationships that contributed to an increase in the number of wrongful convictions (Mallicoat, 2016). This supposition is supported by the extensive evidence presented by the authors of the reviewed articles. According to Garoupa and Rizzolli (2012), the relationships between the stakeholders contain several predictors of wrongful convictions and are positively associated with the social context.

One of the constitutional issues that should be addressed by the US policymakers is poor implementation of the due process clause. Therefore, the existing criminal justice system is contingent on the need to reduce the number of wrongful convictions by means of transformation of the fundamental principles of the US criminal justice (Marion & Oliver, 2015). An in-depth review of this constitutional issue showed that there is a need to apply the due process clause more often. Nonetheless, it is not necessary to oppose any of the political parties or other governmental structures to increase the flexibility of the current approach to the wrongful conviction policy.

The criminal justice policy regarding wrongful convictions should be revised to correlate with the findings of the reviewed articles and minimize the occurrence of wrongful convictions (Miles & Raynor, 2014). One of the most significant criminal justice issues is the distinction of the existing policy. It is also important to mention that the changes in the wrongful conviction policy may have a huge impact on the internal criminal justice operations. It is important to address the issue of indefinite and ineffective local measures against wrongful convictions.

Moreover, the majority of the measures that are currently taking place are not even aimed at reducing the number of wrongful convictions at all. The effect of the revised policy on social justice can be presented as a unified approach to the problem of wrongful convictions. This point is of pivotal importance to the existing criminal justice system because the contemporary legislation presupposes that each state in the US applies its own approach to dealing with wrongful convictions (Siegel, 2015). On a bigger scale, the current policy should be revised to get in line with the evidence presented in this paper. The current US criminal justice system lacks flexibility, so it is crucial to address the issue of wrongful convictions to restore the balance of justice between the innocent and the guilty and increase the occurrence of use of the due process clause in every state.

References

Garoupa, N., & Rizzolli, M. (2012). Wrongful convictions do lower deterrence. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 168(2), 224-231. Web.

Kent, S., & Carmichael, J. (2015). Legislative responses to wrongful conviction: Do partisan principals and advocacy efforts influence state-level criminal justice policy? Social Science Research, 52(2), 147-160. Web.

Mallicoat, S. (2016). Crime and criminal justice: Concepts and controversies. New York, NY: SAGE.

Marion, N. E., & Oliver, W. (2015). Public policy of crime and criminal justice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Miles, H., & Raynor, P. (2014). Reintegrative justice in practice: The informal management of crime in an island community. Farnham, UK: Ashgate.

Siegel, L. J. (2015). Criminology: The core (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Introduction

Drug use among parolees and probationers is still very likely to happen although hundreds of programs of drug control exist throughout the United States. Nevertheless, many probationers experience drug abuse even when they are aware of the consequences of it. The drug war in Montgomery, AL has continued for several decades, yet, not everyone is happy with its outcomes. It still demands extra spending and costs a lot for the government (Rubin, 2013).

The current discourse suggests that drug use needs to be treated (such opinions were provided by some members of the City Council in Montgomery), but there are alternatives that can be implemented too. Moreover, Virginia Estates is a poor neighborhood in Montgomery that cannot afford expensive treatments of drug abusers and parolees who prefer to find drugs as soon as they are out of the prison.

Continued drug abuse can affect the probation’s outcomes and essentially result in crime recidivism. Yet, random drug testing is believed to be one of the most successful tools in preventing drug abuse (Walters, 2014). The main aim of this program is to introduce a strategy that would help prevent drug abuse in probationers. The following plan is based on the Hawaii’s Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) program.

Executive Summary

It focuses on the results of the HOPE program that had been implemented from the years 2004 to 2009; frequent random drug tests were used to control the probationers’ drug use. If probationers failed the drug test, they were arrested and sentenced to a short prison stay. Other reintegration means for probationers such as mentoring and education can be used in addition to random drug tests to ensure that participants are not motivated only by the possible sanctions and penalties.

The program can influence work efficiency of parole officers, judges, and defense lawyers. Its financing is an important task for a local government as it guarantees the improvement of the situation (Cheng, 2008). Moreover, it will also influence the crime rates in the community and reduce crimes connected to drugs if probationers follow the prescriptions and demands of the program correctly.

The drug use rates were stated to be extremely high in Montgomery, AL; Virginia Estates, as it is a poor neighborhood that has to face poverty, is also struggling with the problem of drug abuse. Crime rates are fueled by the poverty and drug use, so Montgomery police department and Montgomery City Council need to suggest new ideas and solutions to prevent the spreading of drugs.

Statement of Need

Bureau of Justice Statistics had conducted a long-term research that investigated the number of crimes committed by the offenders before or during the period when they were supervised by the community. The range of discussed crimes is wide, but it also includes drug use and similar crimes as drug possession, drug trafficking, unauthorized drug prescriptions, and others (Markman, Durose, Rantala, & Tiedt, 2016). According to the research, 0,31% of crimes, committed during the first five years after the release, involved a certain type of drug abuse: 0.16% were arrested for drug possession, 0.23% for drug trafficking, and 0.17% for other types of drug-related crimes (Markman et al., 2016).

Two in five of all sexual assaults towards college students were committed by an offender who was supposedly on drugs (Bureau of Justice Statistics, n.d.). In Montgomery situation is similar and a great number of crimes are committed by people who are affected by drugs. The national survey conducted in 1994 states that fourteen percent of probationers used drugs when they committed their first crime after the release (Bureau of Justice Statistics, n.d.). Thus, although drug treatment and drug control are implemented in different programs in all states, it is still a significant problem to prevent drug abuse in probationers. As to Montgomery, AL, ‘Operation Pilluted’ was implemented in 2012; it covered other states, too, but had an impact on Montgomery neighborhoods where crime rates were noticed to decrease.

Zero Addiction campaign was also implemented to address the problem of drug abuse in Alabama, especially pain relievers since the sale rates of those are extremely high. In April 2015, Montgomery Director of Public Safety discussed the problems connected to the widespread drug ‘Spice.’ The HOPE program focuses on reducing drug use; moreover, only those probationers who were confirmed to use drugs are mandated to drug treatment. This information can be provided both by the Montgomery police department and Council On Substance Abuse-NCADD. To reduce drug use in probationers and probability of a new crime, the approach to drug testing needs to be changed.

Resolution Methodology

The program tries to reduce drug use in probationers, or at least prevent the drug abuse during the probation. As the authors state, only persistent sanctions for every drug use and positive results from drug tests are able to reduce drug abuse in probationers because each time the violation is noticed, probationers are sentenced for short prison stays (Hawken & Kleiman, 2009). However, if the amount of drug use increases and several drug tests in a row prove that the probationer was under the influence of drugs during that period, the stays in jail become longer with every detected violation. Moreover, no regular meetings with the judge are required, so the program also allows decreasing the costs, but it remains effective nevertheless.

Mentoring of the probationers’ successes, engagement in community and program will also help understand the reasons behind recidivism, as well as indicate what other issues need to be addressed.

Stakeholder Identification

The program can be considered as valuable for probation officers and community workers who have to face drug use from probationers and other violations quite frequently. Montgomery Municipal Court can also take part in the program, and, if it is implemented successfully, evaluate the outcomes; however, court employees might perceive the new program negatively because they will have to complete additional tasks and commissions that might show insignificant results (Hawken & Kleiman, 2009).

The probationers themselves might also be interested in the new program, although its methods can also be perceived as too severe; however, if they are indeed aspiring to become non-marginalized members of society, this program can lead them to better reintegration if all rules are followed precisely.

Montgomery police department, as well as parole and probation officers, will also have an opportunity to assess the program; in case of correct implementation of the program, the crime levels in the neighborhood will decrease, and police workers will be able to focus on other cases, not on the probation workers. Thus, the program will supposedly reduce crime rates in the community and allow probationers avoid recidivism.

Supporting Documentation/Credentials

The HOPE probation program was used as a basis for the suggested program, so it is necessary to evaluate its success. The authors have provided the survey results that indicate which stakeholders perceived the program positively and which stakeholders stressed the program was not proven to be successful. This data can serve as supporting documentation for implementation of the program. The surveys’ results can be found in the document submitted by Angela Hawken and Mark Kleiman.

Timeline

To gain valid results that will be suitable for a thorough analysis, the program should function for at least three or six months; moreover, prior to the implementation of the program, several months will be needed to find qualified employees and calculate overheads.

Conclusion

The proposed program can significantly increase the crime rate and drug abuse in Virginia Estates, Montgomery, AL; moreover, it will help the probationers avoid recidivism and focus on reintegration in society. Probation officers will receive an opportunity to control drug use in probationers more efficiently and award penalties if needed.

References

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (n.d.). Drugs and crime facts. Web.

Cheng, G. (2008). Budget tools: financial methods in the public sector. New York: CQ Press.

Hawken, A., & Kleiman, M. (2009). Managing drug involved probationers with swift and certain sanctions: Evaluating Hawaii’s HOPE: Executive summary. Web.

Markman, J., Durose, M., Rantala, R., & Tiedt, A. (2016). Recidivism of offenders placed on federal community supervision in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010. Web.

Rubin, I. (2013). The politics of public budgeting: getting and spending, borrowing and balancing. New York: CQ Press.

Walters, G. D. (2014). Drugs, crime, and their relationships. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Abstract

Gun control is among the most debated and divisive issues in the modern society. It refers to the activities that are aimed at controlling the number of guns owned by individuals. Some people have argued that increased gun control can effectively address the issue of increased violent crimes and related deaths in the modern society, while others have argued to the contrary. This paper will outline a research that shows the relationship between gun control and crime rates. The paper will be essential in understanding the role of gun control policies and debate in the law enforcement and crime control. The paper concludes that gun control can not singly result into reduced rate of crime in the modern society.

Introduction

Gun control is the implementation of laws and policies which limit the number of guns held by the citizens in a given country or state. The laws also limit the number of guns being produced, imported or sold. Gun control is an activity that is aimed at controlling the number of guns owned by individuals. Gun control laws supposedly reduce the rate of crimes. The laws are laid down to control the types of guns that are held by people, the qualifications of people who are supposed to own a gun, as well as to control the number of guns owned by citizens. Safe storage of guns has to be restricted.

According to Moorhouse & Wanner (2006), fewer guns will mean that there will be fewer crimes. The linkage between gun control and the crime rates is in two steps: how gun control affects accessibility of lethal weapons and its effects on crime rates. The issue of gun control can be viewed from two perspectives. First, when gun laws are less tight, more people are likely to posses guns. Consequently, the number of crimes such as homicides will increase (Lytle, 2008).

Cases of violent crimes and killings are likely to increase since guns will fall in the wrong hands of people who will execute such crimes. On the other hand, gun control rules can be made less strict if the crime rates are high. People will be allowed to own guns as a self defence tools. This will be viewed as a way of reducing the crime rates. In fact, if the crime rates are high, this is likely to generate political debates on gun regulations. The relationship that exists between gun control and the rate of crimes can be determined in econometric sense (Lytle, 2008). This paper will outline a research that shows the relationship between gun control and crime rates.

Literature review

Various countries, states and municipalities have adapted varying gun control laws in order to regulate the rates of crime. States can be placed into two categories depending on their gun control regulations. There are those states which do not have gun control rules while there are other ones which have the gun control rules. In the states where there are gun regulations, one is supposed to have a license in order to own a gun, and there is also a time one has to wait before he gets the license for carrying a the gun.

Gun control rules are usually out laid down in a bid to control crimes. However, according to Kwon, Scott, Safranski & Bae (1997), gun control rules do not have much effect when it comes to the reduction of gun related deaths. Strict rules to control gun ownership do not have much implication on the crimes which are associated with guns. Whether the rules are made strict or not, the rates of killings are the same or they vary slightly. There are numerous laws that have been put forward to control the number of guns in states and municipalities. The results of the regulations have, however, not been to expectations.

They have been unimpressive since the gun related deaths equal the number of deaths by accidents. However, according to the research by Kwon et al., (1997), there are other factors that have been identified to have a huge impact on the number of gun related crimes. The factors are the social economic ones. They include the level of poverty in society, the rate of alcoholism and unemployment among others. The higher the level of poverty is, the higher the likelihood of gun related guns (Lytle, 2008).

When more people are in possession of guns, the likelihood of gun related deaths and crimes are usually high (Wells, 2012). However, the number of guns does not increase this risk. There must be other contributing factors such as drug abuse and alcohol influence. In addition, domestic violence can contribute to the increased risk such deaths. Lack of employment especially the youths will prompt them to engage in criminal acts so as to get money.

The youths get into drugs, and they consequently get into criminal acts. The relationship between unemployment, drug abuse and engagement in criminal acts has been documented in the past. Therefore, unless these social economic factors are addressed, gun control rules will not help in reducing the rate of crimes. The availability of fire arms does not necessarily increase the probability of gun crimes and homicides (Wells, 2012).

Gun related crimes have been on the increase over the last couple of years. The crimes have been on the news headline more frequently than ever. School shootings, as well as killings of police officers and innocent citizens, have increased. This has captured the attention of leaders and politicians to enforce gun control laws. Police officers are there to protect their lives, but their job has become a risky since more of them are being killed as they protect the citizens.

There are laws enacted to reduce these incidents. However, the gun control laws have not shown any evidence to in affecting the lives of police officers. Whether the laws are made to be stricter or not, the police officers have continued to lose their lives. Among the laws that have been developed to reduce the numbers of felonious police officers are the right to carry firearms and the waiting periods. The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) argued that the enactment of laws allowing citizens to carry guns for self defence will be effective in reducing the number of crimes since this will deter the criminals from victimizing the citizens who are law abiding (Mustard, 2001).

The law was, however, not supported by many citizens and professionals. The concealed carry laws only put the risk of losing life by police through being shot by irresponsible user of the guns as well as people who want heroic defensive use of guns. It is believed that the right to carry fire arms threatens the lives of police officers. This claim has, however, not been proven right since no person with a licensed gun has been caught having shot police officers (Mustard, 2001).

Therefore, the guns used to kill the police officers are likely to be non- licensed yet the laws to control guns are being highly enforced. The right to carry guns is, however, associated with the increased cases of homicide. People who are in possession of guns are treated as criminals who acquire the guns illegally. In addition, they might have acquired the guns rightfully but they use it for unintended purposes. The indulgent in criminal acts is in most cases contributed by the social economic factors. Therefore, the increased numbers of criminals who kill the police officers have indulged into the acts due to factors relating the economy or society. These could be drug abuse, unemployment, and alcoholism among others (Mustard, 2001).

It is usually assumed that safe storage gun laws help in reducing the number of deaths that are associated with gun shots. However, the impact of the same on crime rates is usually ignored (Lott & Whitley, 2001). However, there is no empirical evidence that gun control laws reduce accidental or suicidal deaths especially among children. On the other hand, the laws are said to reduce the ability of people to use guns for the purposes of self protection. As a result, the safe storage laws are said to increase the cases of violent crimes, which are usually directed towards the law abiding citizens (Lott & Whitley, 2001).

Citizens who are in possession of guns are required to store them safely. This will help to reduce the cases of accidental shooting and suicide. It has been argued that the restrictions on safe storage of guns will also be effective in reducing the rate of crime. It will be difficult for criminals to access guns and steal them. In fact, it was suggested that the guns should either have a locked trigger or kept safe where they can not be easily accessed. Despite the fact that the action will be important and effective in reducing the incidences of accidental death, it is also said to help in reducing the crime rates but not so effectively (Lott & Whitley, 2001).

Guns are usually bought for the purpose of self defence but locking them will reduce their effectiveness because when a gun is locked, it is not readily accessible for the purposes of defending oneself. In addition, the mechanical locks of guns call for the gun to be kept unloaded (Lott & Whitley, 2001). Criminals are likely to fear attacking people since they have their self defence. However, if the guns are not locked, it will make it easier for criminals to get an access to and, in turn, the rate of crimes will rise.

It is important to note that the cost of locking a gun is very high. First, it will be costly to lock the gun in terms of monetary value (Lott & Whitley, 2001). Second, locking the guns will not enhance its convenience in defending oneself. Criminals will be likely to attack since they know that the guns are not ready for firing (Lott & Whitley, 2001).

Methodology

In testing the hypothesis of this research, variables will be used. The dependent variables will be the number of crimes that result from the irresponsible and illegal use of guns. On the other hand, the independent variables will be the rate of unemployment, level of poverty, use of drugs as well as alcoholism and the regulation of gun control rules. The dependent variables and the independent variables to be used in the research are to be based on the literature review. The study will seek to identify the relationship that exists between the independent variables and the dependent variable named above.

According to the previous studies notably the one by Kwon et al. (1997), there exists a positive relationship between the rate of employment and the number of gun related crimes and homicides. As the number of unemployed people increases, the number of gun related crimes are also said to increase. Therefore, this study will be seeking to proof this finding and, therefore, a positive relationship will be expected between unemployment and the rate of crimes.

Further, a positive relationship is also expected in the relationship between the rate of gun related crimes and the level of poverty. The same kind of relationship will be expected between the level of drug and alcohol consumption and the number of gun crimes. In addition, the overall relationship between the gun control rules and the rate of crimes will be established. This model will be seeking to identify the relationships that exist between the named variables.

The people to be included in the model are the youth between the ages of 18 years to 35 years old. The reason as to why this age group was selected is because the young people are the ones who are mostly involved in gun related crimes. Despite the fact that the rest of the population is also involved, the number is much less as compared to the youths. The hypothesis of this study, therefore, will be to test how other factors rather than gun possession contribute to increased crime rates. Tightening the gun control rules is not likely to result into reduced crime rates. There are other factors that contribute to the crimes, and they need to be addressed as a first priority.

Data for the purpose of this study is to be collected from past researches, which have been carried out in the past. Data for poverty levels in the states is to be gathered as well as data recorded for the other variables (alcoholism and drug use and unemployment). In each of the selected states, the collected data are to be compared with the rate of crimes. Then, the rules put forward to control gun possession will be also addressed.

Once the data have been collected, they will be presented in a simple descriptive statistics form which one can see the mean and standard deviation. Then a t- test between both the independent variables and the dependent variables will be carried out so as to evaluate the significant differences that exist between the variables before conducting a linear regression to evaluate how effective gun control rules can be in relation to the other factors that are said to favour the increase in the number of crime rates. It is important to note that research on the relationship between gun control rules and the rate of crimes has previously been impeded by not reliable data. This study will seek to gather data that are as accurate as possible.

Results and analysis of the data

Two tables were developed for the results. The first one presented the descriptive statistics and the t- test values while the other one represented the regression results. From the results, it is clear that the average number of deaths related to gun crime was higher in states where there were no gun control rules as compared to the number of deaths in the states where there were gun control rules. The ratio was 24.4:19.6 respectively.

In addition, it was found out that the rate of unemployment in countries where there were no gun control rules was higher. Also, the level of poverty in those states was slightly higher. However, the level of alcohol consumptions was relatively the same in all the states (that is) those with gun control rules and those with no gun control rules. In the states where there were gun control rules, the youths represented the highest percentage relative to the number of youths in the states with no gun regulation rules.

It was also found out that many people in states with gun control rules resided in the urban centres. In states with no gun control rules, the number of people living in urban centres was relatively lower. The results of descriptive statistics and the t-test are represented in the table below (Kwon et al., 1997).

Descriptive Statistics and t-values

States with Laws States without Laws

(LAW=1; n=26) (LAW=0, n=24)

Variables Mean SD Mean SD t-values

DEATHS (per 100,000) 19.58 7.80 24.44 8.71 2.08b

UEMP (%) 5.07 1.13 5.66 1.02 1.95

POVERTY (%) 11.40 2.70 14.87 4.71 3.17a

Urban (%) 73.14 11.76 62.80 15.82 2.64a

ALCOHOL (Per Capita) 2.42 0.33 2.47 0.80 0.29

AGE 18-35 (1000) 692.96 40.28 344.37 404.74 2.228b.

In the representation of the linear regression calculations the overall model was n = 50, whereby for states with gun regulation rules n = 26 while for the states with no gun regulations, n = 24. For all the models, R² figure was at least 0.657. F = 6.91 (p = 0.000) for models of states with no gun control rules. The evidence shows that all the variables in the model gave the expected results and that among nations where there are gun control rules, the rate of crimes was low as compared to that of the states where there were no gun control rules. States where there were gun controls, the cases of homicide were 3 folds fewer than in the states where there were no gun control rules. The results for the linear regression models are represented in the table below (Kwon et al., 1997).

Regression Results

(Dependent Variable Number of Firearm Death per 100,000 Populations)

Overall with Laws without Laws

Regression Regression Regression

Variables coefficients t-values coefficients t-values coefficients t-values

Constant -14.599 1.503 -22.649 1.698 -1.159 0.072

LAW -2.844 1.356 NA NA NA NA

UNEMP 0.614 0.722 2.149 1.591 -0.143 0.116

POVERTY 1.347 4.340a 0.892 2.357b 1.367 2.345b

URBAN 0.071 0.880 0.240 2.408b 0.055 0.261

ALCOHOL 3.779 2.052b 2.178 1.059 -1.874 0.431

AGE1824 0.002 1.211 -0.003 1.009 0.007 2.914a

R2 0.657 0.832 0.765

F-value 8.510a 9.301a 6.914a

A p < 0.01, b p<0.05, c p<0.10

NA = Not Applicable.

Observable from the results is the fact that the social economic variables are important when considering the number of homicides and gun related crimes. Among this, the most important are the level of poverty and alcohol consumption. However, from the results, the relationship between unemployment and the number of gun crimes was found to be negative which was unexpected. The negative relationship could have resulted from the multiple collinearly that exists between poverty level and the rate of unemployment. The rest of the results were all expected. For instance, poverty is the major factor that can be attributed to the increased number of crimes as because people living in poverty might commit crimes due to their desperation or to meet their needs (Kwon et al., 1997).

Young people are the ones who are mostly involved in gun crimes. Their involvement is in large numbers for states where there are no gun control rules. The reason for their increased participation could be attributed to lack of employment and drug consumption. There are a large number of young people who live in urban centres, and they are connected with the gun crimes.

In general, it can be observed that gun control rules are effective in reducing the rate of crimes because as the results show, the states where there are gun control laws, have relatively less rate of crimes as compared to the rate of crime in states with no gun control laws. The number of deaths related to guns was higher in states where there were no gun control rules as well. However, the gun control rules were not the major factors contributing to the crimes despite the fact that they are effective. The major contributors of crimes were found to be the social economic factors. Therefore, in addressing the issue of increasing crime rates, it will be important to first consider the social economic factors.

Conclusion

The rate of gun related crimes have been on the increase causing concern to the government leaders and politicians. More deaths related to guns are reported, and more crimes are being committed. There are countries such as the United States of America where people are allowed to own guns for self defence. When people have the authority to own guns, there is a probability that criminals will have easy access to guns and, therefore, more gun crimes are likely to be reported.

On the other hand, when law abiding citizens are in possession of guns, criminals will be afraid of attacking them since they will fear being shot. Therefore, the rate of crimes will reduce. For this to be effective there should be laws which are put forward to regulate gun ownership and usage. The laws should be made strict to reduce the chances of criminals accessing them or using them to commit crimes. This will help in reducing the rates of crimes and killings by a high percentage.

In order to reduce the rate of crimes, however, gun control rules are not enough. There are other factors that contribute to crimes and need to be addressed. Among the factors that contribute to engagement in crimes are the social economic factors such as unemployment, poverty level, and alcohol and drug consumption among others. These factors together with the gun control laws enforcement will be effective in combating the high rate of crimes.

References

Kwon, I., Scott, B., Safranski, S. R. & Bae, M. (1997). The Effectiveness of Gun Control Laws: Multivariate Statistical Analysis. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 56(1). 41-50.

Lott, J. R. & Whitley, J. E., (2001). Safe-Storage Gun Laws: Accidental Deaths, Suicides, and Crime. Journal of Law and Economic, XLIV.

Lytle. M. (2008). Policing, drugs and the homicide decline in New York City in the 1990s. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 31(1), 385-414.

Moorhouse, J. C. & Wanner, B. (2006). Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or Does Crime Increase Gun Control? Cato Journal, 26(1).

Mustard, D. B. (2001). The Impact Of Gun Laws On Police Deaths; Journal of Law and Economics, XLIV.

Wells, W. (2012). The effects of gun possession arrests made by a proactive police patrol unit. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 35(2), 253 – 271.