Tackle knife crime's underlying causes, says King's College report

Caroline Lovell
Wednesday 19 December 2007 12:37

Knife crime will not be tackled unless the government addresses the underlying causes of violence and fear, according to a report from the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King’s College London, published today.

The report, Knife Crime, states that “inequality, poverty and social disaffection” are key structural causes of knife-related offences.

It argues that the government must address the underlying causes of “violence, fear and insecurity” to tackle knife crime, instead of strengthening enforcement or punishments, such as giving out harsher sentences.

Researchers from the report described knife crime as a expression of “interpersonal violence”.

The report reviews current evidence and policy, building upon the first edition of the report, published in August 2006.

It identifies a link between carrying a knife and being a victim of a crime or feeling unsafe within a community. Also, children and young people from poor areas and from black and ethnic minorities are more likely to be victims of knife crimes.

Roger Grimshaw, research director at the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, said: “Because knives are a part of everyone’s lifestyle, their role in offending tells us something about the tensions and fears in society. 

“The available evidence about knife use in offending shows it to be a stubborn problem that requires more attention to the causes of conflict, instead of frantic law-making.”

More information

Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King’s College London

Related items

South Central Youth: gang members to youth workers

Sports stars line up behind NCH youth crime consultation

Young offenders: Coldingley prison's crime diversion scheme


 

What do you think? Have your say on CareSpace.

Keep up to date with the latest developments in social care by signing up to our daily and weekly newsletters.

Social care link
paperwork

Liberating adult social work

How do you free practitioners from bureaucracy, rationing and risk aversion, asks Mithran Samuel