Difference between revisions of "Security issue: Vandalism"
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
* young people |
* young people |
||
| + | Viewing vandalism causation asessentially an in-the-person phenomenon, Cohen (1971) offers acquisitive, tactical, ideological, vindictive, play, and malicious subtypes. In full contrast, holding that vandalism "resides" not in persons but in the nature of buildings, |
||
| + | school or park equipment, or other public facilities, Weinmayer (1969) |
||
| + | categorizes the following vandalism subtypes: overuse, conflict, curiosity, leverage, deleterious, irresistible temptation, and "no-other-way-to-do-it" vandalism. |
||
== Attributing circumstances == |
== Attributing circumstances == |
||
| Line 18: | Line 21: | ||
* As is true for all forms of aggression,the single best predictor of future vandalistic behavior is similar past behavior |
* As is true for all forms of aggression,the single best predictor of future vandalistic behavior is similar past behavior |
||
(Tygert, 1988). |
(Tygert, 1988). |
||
| + | * School, bus stops, ...(?) |
||
| Line 38: | Line 42: | ||
* furnished a less obstructed view of school property to surrounding residents; and |
* furnished a less obstructed view of school property to surrounding residents; and |
||
* were located in better-illuminated neighborhood areas. |
* were located in better-illuminated neighborhood areas. |
||
| + | * prison - approach (such as target hardening, access controlling, offender deflecting, entry-exit screening, surveillance increasing, inducement removing) (! consequences !)<ref>Furthermore, the very scope of their implementation—in their most extreme form, the "Bastille response" (Ward, 1973) or the "crimeproof fortress" (Zweig &c Ducey, 1978)—has in some settings had a very negative impact on the very mission for which the setting was created in the first place. For example, "More and more high schools are becoming mechanical systems ruled by constraints on timing, location, and behavior. The similarity between schools and jails is becoming ever more pronounced" (Csikszentmihalyi & Larsen, 1978, p. 25).</ref><ref>Weinmayer's (1969) assertion that "ninety percent of what is labeled vandalism can be prevented through design" (p. 286)</ref> |
||
Revision as of 14:07, 16 August 2012
Contents
Security issue: Vandalism
Vandalism is the act of willful or malicious destruction, injury, disfigurement, or defacement of property without the consent of the owner or person having custody or control. By this definition, this category includes defacement, such as grafitti. However, in order to keep this security issue limited and surveyable, this act is defined as a seperate security issue. Also, wilful destruction performed by an organised group for a shared reason is excluded from this security issue. This is dealt with in the security issue 'destruction by riots'.In the sense we use the term here, it will therefore only include physical damages and not defacement done without rational reasons.
Description
- loners or groups
- footbal hooligans / groups of uitgaanspubliek
- bored individuals
- young people
Viewing vandalism causation asessentially an in-the-person phenomenon, Cohen (1971) offers acquisitive, tactical, ideological, vindictive, play, and malicious subtypes. In full contrast, holding that vandalism "resides" not in persons but in the nature of buildings, school or park equipment, or other public facilities, Weinmayer (1969) categorizes the following vandalism subtypes: overuse, conflict, curiosity, leverage, deleterious, irresistible temptation, and "no-other-way-to-do-it" vandalism.
Attributing circumstances
- alcohol
- exitement
- sense of 'owning'
- social circumstances
- As is true for all forms of aggression,the single best predictor of future vandalistic behavior is similar past behavior
(Tygert, 1988).
- School, bus stops, ...(?)
Impacts
- Social
- Perceived security
- Economic / financial
Measures
- Change views of youngsters (In their view, public property in a real sense belongs to no one.In contrast, for youngsters less prone to vandalism, such property belongs to everyone; this view reflects their greater sense of themselves as part of a larger community ("Vandals," 1978))
- characterized by better aesthetic quality and maintenanceof school property;[1]
- located in more densely populated areas with higher activity levels;
- furnished a less obstructed view of school property to surrounding residents; and
- were located in better-illuminated neighborhood areas.
- prison - approach (such as target hardening, access controlling, offender deflecting, entry-exit screening, surveillance increasing, inducement removing) (! consequences !)[2][3]
Footnotes and references
- ↑ (School-related vandalism) Reprinted with permission of The Guilford Press CHAPTER 14 Controlling Vandalism: The Person-Environment Duet ARNOLD P. GOLDSTEIN
- ↑ Furthermore, the very scope of their implementation—in their most extreme form, the "Bastille response" (Ward, 1973) or the "crimeproof fortress" (Zweig &c Ducey, 1978)—has in some settings had a very negative impact on the very mission for which the setting was created in the first place. For example, "More and more high schools are becoming mechanical systems ruled by constraints on timing, location, and behavior. The similarity between schools and jails is becoming ever more pronounced" (Csikszentmihalyi & Larsen, 1978, p. 25).
- ↑ Weinmayer's (1969) assertion that "ninety percent of what is labeled vandalism can be prevented through design" (p. 286)
MAP
<websiteFrame> website=http://securipedia.eu/cool/index.php?concept=Risk width=100% border=0 scroll=auto align=middle </websiteFrame>
<headertabs/>
