Why might figures for recorded crime underestimate the actual amount of crime that takes place? (Open Uni; Youth Scheme, 30 credit points)

However, is all this information completely reliable?  It does not take into account the changes in belief of what is and what is not considered a crime over time and how matters were dealt with.  Certain crimes would have gone unreported many years ago.  Child abuse and domestic violence just weren’t talked about in a tight knit community.  Where men dominated the household, women did not speak up against them, and so these crimes went unreported, and so are not included in official records.    This shows that we underestimate the levels of crime in earlier eras.  

Similarly, today, records also do not take into account unreported crime.  Victim surveys suggest that official records greatly underestimate crime rates.  In 1998, it was officially documented that 4,595,300 crimes took place.  However, the British Crime Survey estimated that a total of 16,437,000 crimes occurred.  This is a huge underestimation of crime.  Whilst 97% of motor vehicle theft and 85% of burglaries were reported, only 26% of car vandalism was (Mirrles-Black et. Al 1998).  This also shows that records are not reliable and greatly underestimate certain areas of crime.

The same survey discovered reasons for why many crimes weren’t reported: 44% did not report a crime as they thought it was not serious enough;  33% did not report as they claimed that there was little the police could do about it;  22% believed the police would not be interested in their report;  11% thought they could deal with the matter better than the police could;  4% found it inconvenient to tell the police;  and another 4% were also fearful of reprisals.  This also shows that many offences go unreported, thus resulting in an underestimation of crime.  

There is also evidence to suggest that people themselves underestimate the likelihood of crimes occurring against them.  People most at risk of street crime believed themselves not to be at risk.  Only 1% of men between 16 and 30 felt unsafe on the streets.  The actual percentage of street crime against this group was 7.7% (Muncie and McLaughlin, 1996, Table 1.5).  This group were almost the most at risk from street crime out of any group and they also estimated themselves at extremely unlikely to be at risk.  This shows that many people underestimate crime that could happen to them.

In conclusion, there are two main reasons why figures for recorded crime may underestimate the actual amount of crime.  Firstly, in the past many crimes went unreported due to the traditional roles of people.  And secondly, people may find reasons for not reporting crime nowadays, such as inconvenience and lack of faith in the police.  So, overall we can say that figures do regularly underestimate rates of crime.    

Word Count: 754

References

• Muncie and McLaughlin
• Mirreles –Black et. Al 1998
• Maguire, 1997, p158; Social Trends, 2002
• Social Trends
• Mooney, G.Kelly, B., Goldblatt, D. And Hughes (2004) DD121 Introductory Chapter – Tales of fear and fascination: the crime problem in the contemporary UK, Milton Keynes, The Open University
• The Open University (2004) DD121 An Introduction to the Social Sciences: Understanding Social Change, Introductory Block Introductory Workbook, Milton Keynes, The Open University

Which skills and materials do I feel I have got to grips with best?  I feel I have come to terms well with note taking from the books enclosed with the course.  I feel I understand the text reasonably well.

Which skills or subjects do I most need help with?  I am not 100% confident with my essay writing skills on this subject.  I am unsure whether a two sided answer is needed (e.g. Yes, records underestimate.  No, they overestimate rather than underestimate).