Crime Statistics In Australia
Some people believe that Australia should have strict laws against specific crimes. Australia should adopt an “tough on crimes” stance to combat serious crimes such as terrorism or organized crime. The general public has the impression that crime in Australia is on the rise. The media’s real-time reporting of crimes and the sensationalisation and exploitation of facts and stories is partly responsible for this attitude. This causes people to believe that crime rates are higher than in previous years.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics collected statistics that indicate the number of offenders who were reported to police by Australia in 2016-17 was down for the 1st time since 2011-12. It is also down 1% over 2015-16 from 418.352 to 413.894. Australian crime rates also dropped during this time, going from 2,005 to just 1,949 criminals per 100,000. The statistics show a decrease in crime, even though the media is constantly reporting on incidents, leading the public to believe that crimes are increasing. This was also the lowest number since 2010. Between 2016 and 2017, there was a decrease in the number of unlawful entries with intent. This was seen across several jurisdictions. Victoria had a decline of 16%, or 8,266 cases, South Australia, likewise, was down by 14%, or 1,923 cases, Western Australia, meanwhile, was down by 9%, or 3,385 crimes, and New South Wales, a reduction of 7%, or 2,983 crimes. Additionally, police records show that burglaries have decreased over time. Outlaw Motor Cycle Gangs have been active in all Australian state and territories for many years. More recently, the international connections of these groups have grown. Australian OMCGs appear to be expanding abroad and collaborating and working with other organised crime groups, both in Australia and overseas. In Australia, the latest assessment found 40 active OMCGs with approximately 460 chapter and 4600 patched members. Queensland recently passed tougher laws to target organised crime, specifically motorcycle gangs and child exploitation. Criminals are now prohibited from forming associations with known criminals. Queensland government believes this law will allow for better management of organized crime. These laws demonstrate the “tough against crime” attitude in Australia. These new laws allow police to concentrate their resources on the most dangerous criminals, like outlaw motorcycle gangs or any organized crime groups that are involved in fraud and/or child abuse networks. New restrictions on premises and orders allow the police to shut down or close outlawed motorcycle clubs, and search other suspected criminal premises. Queensland, home to an estimated 40 motorcycle clubs in Australia and the world, has decided to take a tough stance on organised crime by passing new laws that are aimed at OMCGs. In Australia, the issue of large corporations and companies not adhering to protocol in relation to environmental laws is becoming more concerning. Often, businesses choose to face fines when they violate environmental laws instead of changing their behavior. Queensland’s government has again introduced tougher laws, which it believes will discourage businesses from committing environmental offenses. Queensland government claims that new laws provide a greater deterrent to companies than just fining them. The Queensland Government’s most important change is that it allows officers of Department of Environment and Resource Management, (DERM), to enter business premises without consent. This new provision allows an authorised person enter land when there is a reasonable belief that there has been unlawful environmental damage caused by a release of contaminants. The majority of Australians agree that environmental awareness is important in the modern society because global warming and climate change are global issues. Queensland may consider it appropriate to introduce new “tough-on-crime” laws in order to make it difficult for corporations to put our environment under threat. Many new laws have been passed to give DERM the power to fight these clever crimes. Australia has also introduced tougher laws in the area of terrorism. Australian governments want to be perceived as tougher on terrorists than they do about the causes of homegrown terrorism. Australia’s sentencing common law has a long and successful history. It served many Australians well. The government wants to appear tough against terrorism, so the sentencing of terrorists is now a political imperative. In response the Australian Government has proposed new legislation that reduces and removes tradition common law privileges, while allowing for lower levels of criminality in order to establish guilty. The new “tough-on-crime” approach was justified by the fact that it is necessary to combat terrorists who do not respect traditional values and rights. The new law was passed on the 20th of September 2018. Under the new laws, those who tampering with food may spend up 15 years behind prison bars. The harsher penalty for food contamination follows the same guidelines as those for possessing or financing child pornography, and is also in line with other severe penalties such as for terrorism funding. Many good arguments exist to support Australia’s “tough on crimes” policy in order to reduce crime in national interests areas such as organised crime and child exploitation. This stance should not be applied to all areas. Northern Territory’s “tough on crimes” approach to youth detention centres had negative consequences for youth. The “Tough on Crime” stance, as outlined in a “Four Corners”, was found to be unnecessarily harsh by a Royal Commission. John Elferink’s personal beliefs about “tough love”, which he advocated for youth detention centre principles were applied. He introduced bootcamps, enlisted US Marines as helpers and expanded restraints. After a number of serious incidents and an increased escape rate, the former Minister continued, stating that “we’re going to have a stronger regime.”
Royal Commission reports that children who leave these facilities worse off than when they arrived. Northern Territory officials chose to ignore reports that children were being abused in detention and strip-searched. The Northern Territory government distorted the truth when six detainees spent weeks in windowless solitary before they were tear-gassed. The abuse was made public in October 2015 when it was reported that Dylan Voller had been hooded, strapped and confined to a chair in solitary confinement for two hours. In October 2015, the Northern Territory’s government passed a law to make it legal. The youth in detention centres for young people are still vulnerable and young. The Northern Territory has a large population of indigenous people in its detention centres. Leaders in the Northern Territory would have done well to consider that youth criminality is caused by a complex set of socio-economic issues, and can’t be fixed with unimaginative retribution. Dylan Voller’s faceless image became the symbol for all other youths who have been victimized by this rhetoric of tough-on-crime. There are sinister crimes that deserve tough laws and punishments to match them, but it is important to discuss whether the examples of youth detention centres are the best way to implement a tough-on-crime stance. Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows that youth crime rates declined for a seventh consecutive year between 2016-17. The rate dropped from 3,339 offenders to 2,330 per 100,000 people aged 10-17 between 2009-10 to 2016-17. Most of these youths have experienced a difficult upbringing, and many other challenges that led them to commit crimes and be detained in detention centres. Many arguments are in favor of rehabilitating these youths into society to make them better equipped for the future. In general, there are certain areas in Australia where a “tough-on-crime” approach is appropriate. Australia’s need to implement “tough on crimes” laws is backed by compelling and valid reasons. Queensland is one of the strongest examples of a state that has introduced stricter environmental laws and laws that target organised motorcycle gangs. The harsh stance taken against crime has often had tragic consequences. For example, the youth centre in Northern Territory. A tough stance is not necessary in all circumstances. Crime statistics indicate that Australia’s crime rate has decreased overall. Criminal activity that is dangerous and threats to the national security are examples of situations where a tough stance on crime should be implemented. It is still important to be cautious and have a thoughtful discussion when it comes to introducing legislation for a “tougher on crime” approach.
