NCJ Number
75949
Journal
International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice Volume: 4 Issue: 2 Dated: (Winter 1980) Pages: 165-178
Date Published
1980
Length
14 pages
Annotation
This paper seeks to explain increases in robbery rates in both the United States and Uganda in the 1960's by postulating common social forces that operate independently of cultural setting during liberation movements and afterwards.
Abstract
Although timed somewhat differently, the change in robbery rates for both countries followed a similar pattern - moderate increases for several years and then a significant jump. In the United States, the proportional increase in rates was most dramatic between 1967 and 1968 (27.2 and 28.2 percent) but for large cities the change began around 1965. Robbery rates then escalated rapidly and appeared to level off in the early 1970's. Uganda experienced a moderate increase in robbery rates in the 10-year period from 1955 to 1964 (an average change of 8.6 percent per year); then the rate of change jumped to an average of 15.3 percent per year from 1964 to 1968. The increase in Uganda came 1 to 2 years following its formal independence from Great Britain, while the American rise came 1 to 2 years after the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In both cases, the offenders were poor, young, black males. A major 1972 analysis of the phenomenon in the United States suggests relative economic deprivation as the principal explanatory factor. However, this explanation did not account adequately for the similar trend in Uganda. The data showed that the movements somewhat mitigated the alienation experienced by the urban poor and helped to account for the lack of change in robbery during the struggles. Their termination in symbolic success left a vacuum devoid of purpose, especially for unskilled, poor blacks and generated new heights of anger and alienation which led to resurgence in such rebellious behavior as armed robbery. An immediate imperative for the leaders of such successful movements would be to control and channel the energy of their youth. In addition, the criminal justice system should direct a greater portion of its resources to the handling and treatment of juveniles. Tabular data and about 20 references are included. Author abstract modified.