For a long time the law enforcement companies have been criticised for using inadequate methods when working with badly behaved children. These criticisms have led the Tony Blair government to have an action on the problem, and consequently the Anti-Social Behaviour Orders were launched. The Anti-Social Behaviour Orders were originally launched by the Offense and Disorders Function in 1998( Walklate 2007). Down the road the Anti-Social Behaviour Orders were supported even more by the Anti-Social Behavior Act which was passed in 2003 (Knepper, Doak. , Shapland 2009). Anti-Social Behaviour Purchases can be explained as a concurrence between the police force and the young one who have devoted an offence which may be classified as anti-social behaviour. Any behaviour that triggers a nuisance or disturbance to the people residing in and around a encompassing area can be classified as anti-social behavior. Specific examples of anti-social behavior include offences such as; graffiti, vandalism and leading to excessive sound(McEvoy, Newburn2003).
The Anti-Social Behaviour Purchases punish the average person who have behaved anti-socially by restricting their behavior in a single form or another. For instance an Anti-Social Behaviour Order can prohibit someone who has behaved anti-socially from returning to a certain area or shop. So that it can be mentioned that these requests are issued wishing that it'll prohibit the individual in receipt of the Anti-Social Behaviour Order from committing further anti-social behavior offences by restricting their behaviours. Anti-Social Behaviour Orders are released by the magistrates court. ( ) The burden of proof for an Anti-Social Behaviour Order to be granted should be beyond acceptable doubt. This means that the claimant must verify that the defendant who may have been arrested had been behaving anti-socially.
One limitation of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders is that they are seen as a solution after an individual commits an take action of anti-social behaviour. Therefore Anti-Social Behaviour Purchases are designed to punish rather than to avoid anti-social behaviour to begin with. For example statistics show that small children aged between six and nine years old figure out how to behave anti-socially through imitating teenagers' behaviours in their community who acts anti-socially. As this is obviously stated in the figures, rather than looking forward to this age group to be inspired by their elders and get granted an ASBO things like after school night clubs can be prompted to prevent those children from behaving anti-socially.
On the other hand in the reports obtained it is mentioned that anti-social behavior orders are a successful solution in the sense that a teen with an ASBO remains out of trouble which reduces the children offense rate. (Millie2009) This view in addition has been stated by the citizen in areas afflicted by what is viewed as yobbish and anti-social behavior. They have reported advancements in their neighbourhood when Anti-Social Behaviour Orders have been granted to teenagers who have dedicated acts of anti-social behavior.
However issuing an Anti-Social Behaviour Order to a teenager who behaves anti-socially leads those to be labelled in their community as a 'trouble maker'. In a few sense this avoids the given individual to engage in with their lifestyle (OFFICE AT HOME 2008). In very few situations the individual who've been given an Anti-Social Behaviour Order wants to improve their standard of life. Generally in most situations the ASBO appears to have a large and long term impact on the young individuals' lives. For instance based on the survey of young ones offending clubs issuing an Anti-Social Behaviour Order to the young individual who behaves anti-socially leads these to have mental disorder problems such as despair, suicidal problems and personality disorder. The individual who may have given an Anti-Social Behavior Order switches into depression because they can not keep on living as they used. Alternatively other some young those who react anti-socially see getting an ASBO as an honour badge. So a young person who comes with an ASBO is pursued as having an increased rank in their what is so called 'gang' by their friends.
When discussing today's society media plays a major role, and like almost all of the issues that concern public, media highly impacts people's views regarding young adults who are behaving anti-socially( Clarke 2003). This can be linked with the theory of labelling and stereotyping. The news headlines regarding anti-social behaviour is pursued by the press subjectively rather than objectively. These subjective views are then exceeded onto the public through media organs such information. Including the media puts over the view that most youngsters who react anti-socially are children who've a working school record. When this view is stated in the press it contributes to stereotyping of all working class young people. Pursuing this specific group as 'trouble makers' leads them never to being given equivalent chances in life in comparison to youngsters who are not one of them stereotyping. That's where the strain theory comes in (Treadwell 2006). Any risk of strain theory suggests that the crime is the result of individuals being obstructed in terms of mainstream culture from achieving certain goals and under the consequent strain they seek deviant or unlawful ways to reach those goals. In a way it would fair to state that, these stereotyping views of the culture leads young individuals to commit serves of anti-social behaviour.
Another criticism of the Anti-social Behavior Order is that these orders have presented many new legal offences. More legal offences mean that young individuals are more likely to commit legal offences (Squires 2008). Nonetheless it is mentioned in the drafting of the Anti-social Behavior Order Monthly bill that getting only 1 ASBO released for an individual does not indicate they get a criminal record. This can be scored as a good point for the Anti-social behaviour Order program, as criminalising teenagers just for a offence means, they have a bad criminal history almost all their lives. However if the terms of the Anti-Social Behaviour Order is damaged then the person faces a criminal conviction which can lead to with an up to five years of imprisonment.
One of the few positive perceptions on the Anti-social Behaviour Purchases is that they do not cost the federal government too much. For example if a person who had dedicated an function of anti-social behaviour was to be tried out and convicted by the courts instead of taking proceedings to concern an Anti-Social Behaviour Order this would cause the federal government to waste materials more of their budget on young people who are behaving anti-socially. (Knepper 2007) For example after the young person was sentenced and delivered into the prison, there would be additional costs to keep them in the prison such as to provide food on their behalf.
Another strength of the Anti-social Behaviour Purchases is that many people see them as a fast and productive system to solve anti-social behaviour locally. On the other hand others believe Anti-social Behaviour Purchases independently is not enough to prevent a youngster from re-offending. A more effective move towards anti-social behavior can be taken through multi-agency strategy. For instance once an individual is given an Anti-social Behaviour Order they also needs to be sent to rehabilitation programmes to make certain that they do not re-offend. Along with of this they must be delivered to do community work to boost these young people' perceptions and just how they see the world. Mailing these young offenders to do community work will also enhance their associations with other individuals from the community and this might be a more long lasting solution than simply issuing an Anti-social Behaviour Order.
Although there are a few positive attributes to the Anti-social Behaviour Purchases, it can be concluded there are more negative edges to it. So that it would be right to conclude that the plan of Anti-social Behaviour Orders needs a serious reform, in order to resolve the problem of highly increasing anti-social behaviour rate.
Home Office (2008) Anti-Social Behaviour [online] available from http://www. asb. homeoffice. gov. uk/uploadedFiles/Members_site/Documents_and_images/About_ASB_general/EconSocialCostASB_0142. pdf [10 July2010]
Clarke. D (2003) Pro-social and anti-social behavior. Routledge
Squires P. (2008) ASBO nation: the criminalisation of nuisance The Policy Press. London
Knepper. P (2007) Criminology and interpersonal plan Sage London
Millie. A (2009) Anti-Social Behaviour. McGraw-Hill
McEvoy. K, Newburn. T (2003) Criminology, conflict quality and restorative justice. Palgrave Macmillan
Walklate. S (2007) Understanding criminology: current theoretical debates. McGraw-Hill International
Knepper. P, Doak. J, Shapland. J(2009) Urban crime prevention, monitoring, and restorative justice: ramifications of social technologies Crc Press London
Treadwell. J (2006) Criminology, Sage London
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay