Sample Essay on Rank of Security Projects

Rank 1: Storefront Police Officers

I ranked this program first since I believe it is the best towards discouraging crime in the community. Primarily this program increases the risks of committing a crime since it establishes police centers in neighborhoods. It is relatively low cost since it involves community policing with only a few policemen manning them. It discourages gangs and ensures the community coexists on a mutual basis. In the long run, I feel that such a program would ensure that a community is crime free.

Rank 2: Neighborhood Watch

I ranked this program second because it is relatively cheap and highly effective in discouraging crimes in the community. Neighborhood watch is a series of programs by locals who share a common goal of crime prevention within the home and the local community. The programs are highly effective since the community undertakes to be on the watch out for any potential danger. They should never take action but report them to police. The community often devotes entirely to it contributing any funds that might be needed thus cheap and efficient.

Rank 3: D.A.R.E

I ranked this program third since I believe it is a program that is very efficient in stopping crime in the community. The initials above stand for Drug Abuse Resistance Education. The program targets youth who have to pledge not to get involved in drugs and violence. They regularly interact with police officers who teach them on the dangers of such activities. It has been effective having benefitted 144 million in the U.S[1]. The program has continuously improved social interaction between the police and citizens thereby establishing law and order in the society.

Rank 4: Gun Buyback

I ranked this program fourth because I believe it can only be effective when the community corporates with authorities and if the program is mandatory. Gun buyback is a security program that purchases privately owned firearms from the community. Its aim is often to reduce the number of firearms belonging to civilians and to provide an avenue of sale to the government. The programs have been successful in Australia where gun homicides rate fell by 59% after the implementation[2]. It is a relatively costly program that would need community awareness and acceptance before implementation.

Rank 5: Intensive Supervision on Parole or Probation (ISP)

I ranked this program fifth since mostly it covers individual offenders and might not be exhaustive enough to reduce crime in the whole community. This program entails probation officers supervising previous offenders under conditions stipulated. The supervision might be minimum, regular, or intense depending on the progress made by the offender. It increases the risks of committing a crime and is fundamentally practical in discouraging it. It might be costly when there are many people to be monitored in the community.

 

 

Rank 6: Home Detention with Electronic Monitoring

I ranked the program sixth since it is somewhat expensive as compared to other programs. It involves configuring an individual to a residence so as to reduce provocations of committing a crime. There is a strict guideline that have to be followed and movement is curtailed thoroughly until the individual is deemed fit to interact freely in the society. It in effect deters repeat offense. It is relatively expensive with costs of running it stated at $58 per day and $10,486 per six months[3].

Rank 7: Scared Straight

I ranked this program seventh since I felt that is not effective in reducing crimes in the community. This program entails sessions where juvenile interact with convicts who scare them into not repeating those crimes. Despite not being costly, research has shown that such an experience has a negative impact on these children[4]. It is harmful to their growth, and it has proven unsuccessful since juveniles in the program have repeated offenses.

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Ministry of Justice . 2014. “Operation of the sentence of home detention.” Justice.govtz Website. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://www.justice.govt.nz/publications/global-publications/h/home-detention-a-review-of-the-home-detention-sentence-2007-2011/operation-of-the-sentence-of-home-detention.

Petrosino A, Turpin-Petrosino C, Buehler J. 2013. “Scared Straight and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency.” Onlinelibrary.wiley Website. April 30. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD002796.pub2/abstract.

ProCon.Org Community. 2014. “Is the D.A.R.E. Program Good for America’s Kids (K-12)?” ProCon.org Website. April 2. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://dare.procon.org/.

Star-Ledger Editorial Board . 2014. “What N.J. really needs is mandatory gun buybacks: Editorial.” Nj.com Website. September 19. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/09/nj_gun_buyback_programs.html.

 

 

 

 

 

[1] ProCon.Org Community. 2014. “Is the D.A.R.E. Program Good for America’s Kids (K-12)?” ProCon.org Website. April 2. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://dare.procon.org/.

[2] Star-Ledger Editorial Board. 2014. “What N.J. really needs is mandatory gun buybacks: Editorial.” Nj.com Website. September 19. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/09/nj_gun_buyback_programs.html.

[3] Ministry of Justice. 2014. “Operation of the sentence of home detention.” Justice.govtz Website. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://www.justice.govt.nz/publications/global-publications/h/home-detention-a-review-of-the-home-detention-sentence-2007-2011/operation-of-the-sentence-of-home-detention.

[4] Petrosino A, Turpin-Petrosino C, Buehler J. 2013. “Scared Straight and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency.” Onlinelibrary.wiley Website. April 30. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD002796.pub2/abstract.