October 2002

The Memphis Shelby Crime Commission
119 South Main Street, Suite 450, Pembroke Square
Memphis, Tennessee 38103 (901) 527-2600

Abstract

Burglary is one of the most prevalent crimes in the City of Memphis and in the country. Rates of burglary are disproportionately high in cities with large minority populations, high population mobility and high-income inequality. Burglary occurs excessively in neighborhoods inhabited primarily by the young, minorities and renters. Males, juveniles and others who are unskilled offenders in or close to their neighborhoods commit burglary disproportionately. A small group of burglars ranges over a large region, often searching out suitable targets. Although the majority of victims do not suffer large economic losses, burglary produces serious psychological impact on some. Prevention programs that target burglary have had mixed reviews. Evidence from neighborhood watch programs and target-hardening tactics reveal the importance of better-focused situational crime prevention strategies.¹

This report was prepared by the Memphis Shelby Crime Commission at the request of Ira Lipman, President and Founder of Guardsmark, Inc., to assess the challenges of the crime of burglary in the City of Memphis. The report is divided into four subtopics – A National Perspective, The Local Burglary Problem, National Burglary Prevention Measures and Local Burglary Prevention Measures.

The research contained in this report is primarily derived from a search of national literature, a scan of Best Practices, interviews with Memphis Police officers, information on crime and burglary prevention published by the Memphis Police Department, sources published by various other Police Departments, and articles written by both practitioners and academics.

Acknowledgements

This report would not have been completed without generous contributions of time, information, and energy from a variety of sources and resources:

Responses to requests for information were received from the Police Departments of Columbus, OH; Kansas City, MO; Las Vegas, NV; Miami, FL; Miami-Dade County, FL; Minneapolis, MN; Phoenix, AZ; San Antonio, TX; Seattle, WA; Little Rock, Arkansas; and Ft. Worth, Texas.

The members of the Memphis Police Department responded kindly and promptly to requests for information and data. Special thanks are due to Major Mark Collins, Lt. Roderic Cunningham, Lt. Jim Nichols, Neighborhood Watch Coordinator Mary Pollard, Major Jim Tusant, Sgt. Larry Williamson and Sgt. Martin Bolton.

Table of Contents

Topic II: The Local Burglary Problem

TIBRS
Graph – Age of Burglary Arrestees
Graph – Income of Burglary Victims

Topic III: National Burglary Prevention Measure

Traditional Approaches
Innovative Approaches

Topic IV: Local Burglary Preventive Measures

Gap Analysis

Recommendations

Conclusion

Data Sources

Notes

Topic I: A National Perspective

Burglary accounted for 17.7 percent of all crimes reported in the United States in 2000. According to the Crime in the United States crime clock, a burglary occurs on the average of once every 15.4 seconds somewhere in the United States.² The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program defines burglary as the unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or theft. The use of force to gain entry is not required to classify an offense as a burglary. Burglary is categorized into three sub classifications: forcible entry, unlawful entry where no force is used, and attempted forcible entry.

For the ninth straight year, the estimated number of burglary offenses declined in the United States according to the Crime in the United States Report by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, 2000.³ Compared to the 1999 national volume, burglary declined 2.4 percent in 2000.

National offense rates for burglary in 2000—728.4 offenses per 100,000 inhabitants—were the lowest in more than three decades. Among the Nation’s four regions, the Southern States, the Nation’s most populous region, experienced the highest burglary rate, 903 offenses per 100,000. At 44.2 percent of all the burglaries committed in the United States, the Southern States recorded the highest burglary volume, twice the amount of any other region. By community type, suburban counties experienced the greatest decline in burglary, 4.6 percent. Monthly figures for 2000 revealed that the greatest number of burglaries occurred in July and August, and the lowest volume was recorded in February.

Forced entry was involved in 63.7 percent of all burglaries in 2000, unlawful entry made up 29.5 percent and the remaining 6.8 percent were forced entry attempts. In 2000, two out of every three burglaries were committed at a residence, and the majority of burglaries occurred during the daytime (54.5 percent), as opposed to nighttime (45.5 percent). Victims experienced an estimated loss of nearly $3 billion in 2000. The average dollar loss per burglary was $1,462.

Over 13 percent of reported burglaries were solved or ‘cleared’ by police nationally in 2000. The Southern States’ average was slightly higher at 13.7 percent. Law Enforcement agencies in rural counties cleared 17 percent of the burglaries reported in their jurisdictions and suburban county law enforcement agencies cleared 14 percent. Cities with population of less than 10,000 cleared the greatest percentage of burglaries among city types. Those cities with population of over 250,000 had the lowest burglary clearance rates.

Adult offenders were involved in the highest percentages of burglary clearances at 80.8 percent. Males comprised the greatest number of arrestees for burglary, at 86.7% of the total. In terms of race, whites accounted for almost 69.4 percent of all persons arrested for burglary, blacks for over 28.4 percent and other races for the remainder.⁴

Burglary is an organized activity; normally committed by two or more persons acting in concert (Pope 1977c; Eskridge 1983). Co-offending is attractive to many because it can bolster courage or indifference to risk. And it is reassuring for some offenders to know that if they are arrested, they will not be alone.

Targets

Poorly protected structures provide the best opportunity for burglaries. This is validated by the fact that unforced entries make up nearly 25 percent of home burglaries.⁵

Overall, the level of threat burglaries pose is not comparable to the dangers involved with crimes directed against persons. However, the frequency of burglary clearly warrants increased attention to identifying more effective means to decrease the rate of occurrence of this offense. Burglary is a quality-of-life-crime that not only results in tangible losses, but also diminishes citizens’ sense of security, personal contentment and satisfaction within the community. Through its negative impact on the city’s overall crime statistics, it also harms the image of cities in the competition for new business development and job creation.

Categories of Burglaries

According to Maguire (1980), there are three categories of burglars differentiated by their degree of success: low-level, middle-range and high level.

The ranks of the low-level burglars are primarily filled with juveniles, a smaller number of young adults and a handful of adults. Low-level burglars often begin with spontaneous occurrences committed with friends for the expressed motive of fun, excitement or to gain small monetary rewards. Low-level burglars will prey on targets that are close at hand, usually in their own neighborhood. Their attempts are often defeated by locked entry points and secured accesses. These types of burglars realize little profit for their efforts, primarily because they prey on victims who have little. Their involvement with theft rarely lasts beyond their juvenile years fearing more severe adult sanctions (Glassner et al. 1983).

Middle-range burglars may begin their criminal participation as juveniles and rotate in and out of crime circles during their young adult years. On the average, they are older and more mobile than low-level burglars. Faced with daily dependency on drugs or alcohol, they are driven to commit crimes that net results capable of sustaining their habits. Middle-range burglars will seek out targets over a broader area, often traveling to suburban areas to commit crimes that will have larger rewards for their efforts. Middle-range burglars are more mindful of security measures and are a more determined adversary to the homeowner. Most middle-range burglars make their target selections from unoccupied dwellings and choose locations that have obstructed views from would-be witnesses. The middle-range burglar will usually accumulate one or more jail or prison terms before changing his or her behavior or developing more criminally successful burglary practices.

High-level burglars are usually connected with reliable inside sources of information about potential targets. They may travel great distances to work and realize a much higher payoff than do less sophisticated thieves. Some reference to military precision has been made to the high-level burglar (McIntosh 1975; Shover 1983b). Theft operations committed by the high-level burglar are often conducted with organized and structured exactitude. Careful attention is paid to the disposal of stolen merchandise. While the exact differentiation of burglar suspects is not known, it is commonly accepted that the majority of burglaries are committed by low-level and middle range burglars.

Topic II: The Local Burglary Problem

Memphis is the 18th largest city in the United States; the Memphis Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau⁶ is the 44th most populous in the country. While the region and the City of Memphis have enjoyed population growth over the past decade, crime remains a persistent concern of the resident population. According to the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) 2001 (partial release), Memphis reported 15,867 burglaries (an average of one burglary every 33 minutes) up from the 2000 total of 14,936.⁷ Shelby County has one of the highest burglary rates in the country when compared to the 89 other largest U.S. counties. This is noteworthy in view of the fact that residential burglary rates in the United States are actually on the decline.⁸ The number of burglaries reported for 2001 is higher and includes both residential and commercial burglaries.

A partial explanation for this elevation in reported burglaries may be the involvement of the Memphis Police Department in the Tennessee Incident Based Reporting System (TIBRS). This is a new system that counts all crimes committed rather than only the most serious crime committed, as in the UCR system.

Tennessee Incident Based Reporting System, TIBRS

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) (www.tbi.org) began implementation of the TIBRS in 1995. Incident based reporting views a crime and all its components as an "incident." In order to obtain important data, facts recorded and preserved about the incident are organized into specific categories or segments. The vehicle used for recoding these facts is a "data element." Data elements provide information about crime and its involvement with victims. TIBRS is an incident based reporting system designed to collect data on every single crime occurrence and on each incident and arrest within the occurrence. The most significant difference between TIBRS and the traditional UCR system is the degree of detail in reporting. Unlike the UCR summary process that collects only eight Part 1 ⁹ crimes, TIBRS collects 22 crime categories made up of 47 specific crimes called Group A offenses. Additionally, arrests are reported for 11 Group B offense categories. Under the old summary UCR program, only the most serious offense was reported. In TIBRS up to ten offenses can be reported in an incident, providing a more accurate picture of crime.

Because of the differences between the UCR summary data and TIBRS data, any cross-comparisons would provide inaccurate results in trend analyses.

A study commissioned by Memphis Police Director Walter Crews and completed by the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Memphis in May, 2001, provided a detailed examination of residential burglaries in Memphis, "Residential Burglary in Memphis, Tennessee." A database on the key variables associated with burglary was created. This knowledge is vital in understanding the causes, circumstances, and consequences surrounding burglary in Memphis. This section will contain material almost exclusively from this study. It is this knowledge that affords the opportunity to address the causal factors underlying the burglary problem in Memphis.

As stated in the report, residential burglary incidents affect individuals, neighborhoods and communities. The causes of residential burglary vary in each community. Burglary is a relatively risk-free criminal undertaking given that only 4.4 percent - 6.9 percent of burglary suspects are immediately arrested following the report of the offense.¹⁰ While arrests are often made when offenders later pawn the stolen goods, according to the data analysis done by the University of Memphis, it seems likely that fewer than 1 in 4 burglars are arrested for each reported offense.¹¹ Given that an unknown number of burglaries go unreported, it seems safe to assume that the vast majority of residential burglary offenses do not result in arrest. However, once arrested, there is a good chance that the offender will be successfully prosecuted. Of those arrested, 60 percent are convicted, the majority of which (85 percent) receive prison terms and one half of these are sentenced to more than a year. The majority of offenders (71%) were in jail up until the time they were sentenced. The data does not allow for an exact determination of how many offenders were arrested; however, the number of cases that are cleared locally is approximately 25 percent.

Contrary to the common perception, burglaries are usually not committed under cover of darkness. Instead, the majority of burglaries are carried out during daylight, the hours from 8:00 am to 12:00 pm during the weekdays, being the primetime. Only 15.2 percent of burglaries in Memphis actually occur between midnight and 6:00 am. Approximately 78.5 percent of all burglaries are committed during weekdays, with only 21.4 percent occurring over the weekend. More burglaries were reported on Mondays (16.6 percent) and fewer reported on Sundays (10.7 percent). As for seasonal variations, although the national data indicate that burglaries peak in July and August, the University of Memphis study revealed that in the City of Memphis there is no marked seasonal variance.

The majority of residential burglaries in Memphis involves forced entry into the premises and only rarely is more sophisticated means used to gain entry (e. g. picking locks). Houses account for 52% of the total number of reported residential burglary incidents followed by apartments/condos at 42%. The most common point of entry for homes was a rear door or window, while entry for apartments/condos was more commonly made through the front of the residence. Once entry has been gained into the home, living rooms and bedrooms are the most common rooms targeted by offenders.

Another myth is that the average burglar is a master thief, who plans his operations well in advance and who uses elaborate techniques to gain access to his target. As defined by Maguire (1982) burglars are classified into three categories: low-level, middle range and high level. Low-level or amateur burglars are normally part-time burglars who engage in burglaries as "only a small, episodic part of crime in general" (Walsh, 1986:22). These burglars enter a structure when they are short of money and "feel the need." Their entry into a location is very unsophisticated in that they may use primitive tools or brute force to gain access. The amateur burglar plans very little and is far more interested in the volume of burglaries to sustain their everyday needs. Opportunistic burglaries are committed by amateur burglars that discover a vulnerable target while involved in other activities (lawful or unlawful), and immediately engage in the burglary.¹²

Lastly, a detail that points at the amateurishness of many burglars is that a majority of all offenders live within a mile from the burglary site. Thirty percent reside within a one to five mile radius, and only 20 percent travel more than five miles to commit their crimes. The younger the culprits, the less they travel (50 percent of all minors, for example, live within a third of a mile of their target). Also, offenders who burglarize homes in the inner city, tend to cover a shorter distance than those whose target is located in the outskirts of the city.

High-level (or professional) burglars on the other hand, are specialists who employ considerable planning and skill in executing a burglary. Targets of substantial value are selected and weapons are seldom carried. (Walsh, 1977:61). High-level burglars do not execute the majority of burglaries committed in the Memphis area.

As demonstrated by the graph below, 89% of Memphis burglary arrestees are male and 86 percent are African-American. As for age, 20 percent are 17 and younger, 31 percent are between 18 and 25; that means that about half of all culprits are younger than 26.

Age of Burglary Arrestees

Virtually all (87%) of the suspects listed in burglary reports have at least one criminal arrest on their local record; 70.5 % have previously been charged with a property offense, 45.5% with a violent offense, and 56.5% have a history of drug or alcohol offenses. Also, 21 percent recidivate with a drug or alcohol related offense which suggests that substance abuse may play a significant role in the property offenses of these individuals. Approximately 51 percent were rearrested within one year, and 72 percent were taken into custody again within three years. Almost 68 percent of suspects are arrested for a new criminal charge within two years of the disposition of the instant burglary offense; 36.9 percent recidivate in two years with a property offense.

Data was not collected on arrestees’ socioeconomic backgrounds; however, the fact that a large number of offenders live near their targets, which, in turn, are located in low-income neighborhoods, is more than ample evidence to assume that they (the offenders) are from lower socioeconomic classes. Almost two thirds, that is 64 percent, had an annual household income of less than $25,000.

Annual Income of Burglary Victims

 Regarding the demographics of the victims of burglaries in Memphis, 70 percent are black, 26 percent white, and 1.4 percent are members of other races (the rest of 2.6 percent is unknown). What might come as a surprise is that the vast majority of the victims are young, namely between 21 and 40 years (55 percent). The reported burglary victim ratio is 40 percent male and 60 percent female, while the population ratio for the City of Memphis is 47.3 and 52.7 respectively.¹³ In Memphis, burglars’ and victims’ demographics are very similar, with the exception of gender.

A small but significant proportion of residential burglary incidents involve intimate partners; suspects in these cases were usually males separated from their dating partner and many of the incidents involved concurrent vandalism and assault of the victim.

Even though burglars tend to spend little time studying their targets, it should come as no surprise that they prefer the characteristics of certain residences. This preference leads to many homes becoming burglarized more than once. Almost 20% of the homes burglarized in Memphis have experienced subsequent burglaries; the risk for further victimizations increases with each new offense committed at the same location. More than one third of the repeat burglaries occurred within the first three months of the initial offense.

As far as stolen items are concerned, burglars steal from the whole spectrum of available goods. However, they do prefer certain items to others. The most commonly taken objects are televisions, which make up 26 percent of all stolen goods. Second on the preferred stolen list is jewelry (13 percent), followed by stereo systems (10 percent). Taken together, these three items comprise about 50 percent of all stolen property. The average reported value of stolen property for each burglary was $1,514, and an estimated 55 million dollars in losses were reported between 1997 and June, 2000, in Memphis.

It is noteworthy that victims frequently are not of much help for the police when it comes to recovering their property. Only seven percent of all property owners are able to report serial numbers.

Pawnshops are one of the major sources of disposing of stolen items. Almost half of all adult offenders (49 percent) used pawnshops to convert the stolen property into cash in the past two years. Younger suspects were more likely to have pawned items; the most common items pawned parallel the items most commonly reported stolen, and many of the suspects use different shops, presumably to avoid arrest.¹⁴

Summary

The University of Memphis provided an in depth review of the local burglary issue through the report that has been cited in this section. The burglary problem in Memphis is seemingly caused by a number of factors. The study suggests that the majority of burglary offenders are engaged in the use, manufacture, or sale of illegal substances. The suspects are disproportionately male and African-American. Furthermore, 20% of the suspects are juveniles and one half of the suspects were under the age of 25.¹⁵ This suggests that young people more commonly commit residential burglary, like most other crimes. The implication of these findings is that interventions attempting to prevent the onset or continuance of property offenses in Memphis need to be tailored to young, African-American males from the lower socio-economic classes.

 Topic III: National Burglary Prevention Measures

Virtually every city in the United States has anti-burglary measures in place. Many of these programs, initiatives, and strategies resemble each other and some are identical. However, some innovative measures are taking place on the national levels that are helping to reduce burglaries in the country.

Traditional Approaches

One of the most technical and valuable ways to educate members of the community is through the distribution and transfer of information by the Internet. Many departments have developed websites and links to their WebPages that provide basic crime prevention information to the community at large. The City of Los Angeles, Police Department (www.lapd.org) has an exemplary web page that covers in great detail almost everything that a citizen might look for regarding crime prevention and home safety. One of the best descriptions of every aspect of neighborhood watch programs can be found on the Dallas Police Department’s site (www.dallaspolice.net). The Omaha Police Department’s site (www.opd.ci.omaha.ne.us) explains in a very clear, concise, and easy-to-read manner what crime prevention is for, how it works, and what programs are in place. The Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department (www.kcpd.org) offers educational written information and videos on home security and burglary prevention. This site includes an exhaustive home security checklist, a detailed crime prevention brochure that is well supported with graphics, and a ready-to-use property inventory log. Another informative manual is "Residential Burglary" by the Miami Dade Police Department (www.mdpd.com). These agencies show clearly that detailed information regarding crime prevention and burglary prevention tips can be provided to the ‘connected’ community.

Although the website is an excellent tool for conveying information, many residents do not have access to the Internet. Providing information and prevention initiatives to other areas of the population needs to occur as well, particularly those of lower economic classes who are most likely to be victimized.

Many police departments participate in crime prevention and burglary awareness by disseminating current news pertaining to recently committed crimes, crime trends, and neighborhood activities to the impacted community. The San Francisco Police Department (www.ci.sf.ca.us), for example, compiles and publishes monthly Crime Statistics by district, monthly crime statistics by plot, and weekly crime statistics that lists crimes by district, date, time, location, and plot. The Minneapolis Police Department (www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us) distributes Crime Alert Bulletins to warn citizens of crime patterns, (e.g., the repeated invasion of apartment complexes in a particular neighborhood) and Attention Residents Flyers when a specific criminal act has been committed, (e.g., a residence on Main Street was burglarized); or when there is an increase in criminal activity, (e.g., a 20 percent increase in burglaries downtown). Furthermore, many departments issue a Neighborhood Watch Newsletter. The Las Vegas Police Department (www.lvmpd.com) routinely publishes crime prevention articles in its newsletter, which is edited by a Crime Prevention Specialist, on its website.

The Little Rock, Arkansas, Police Department (www.accesslittlerock.org/lrpd/) sends a letter to the surrounding residences notifying the neighborhood of recent burglary activity. Not only does this letter alert residents of criminal activity in the area, tips toward solving the crime can be solicited.

Although distributing information is a very important aspect of burglary prevention, some communities have taken involvement a step further and become actively engaged in providing a presence in their neighborhoods.

Miami-Dade County in Florida has one of the strongest locally based anti-crime organizations. The Citizens’ Crime Watch is a non-profit organization that was the result of a 1974 neighborhood meeting called as a response to the so-called "Gentle Rapist," who had assaulted several women in that area. Its members, who call themselves the "eyes and ears of the community," organize crime watch meetings, go out in the community and make presentations, set up "Citizens’ Stand Against Crime Activities" at various events, create and distribute newsletters to crime watchers, hold monthly meetings for the heads of the various neighborhood groups, recognize and honor outstanding members and police officers, regularly provide the local media with information about their activities, and maintain close relationships with the various local law enforcement agencies.

Another tool that is endorsed by law enforcement is the National Night Out. The National Organization of Town Watch (NOTW) organizes the event on the national level. All members of the participating communities are asked to turn their lights on and hold front and back porch vigils. Residents are encouraged to walk their neighborhoods, introduce themselves to their neighbors and present programs and activities on crime prevention. National Night Out offers the opportunity to educate citizens on the existence of neighborhood initiatives and anti-crime programs and has the potential to strengthen community spirit, promote a feeling of solidarity, and reinforce optimism and the belief that crime can be stopped.

In yet another opportunity to allow civilians to become active in crime deterrence, several departments have programs that allow citizens to serve as Civilian Volunteers. These programs are not to be mistaken for Police Department Reserve Officer Programs. Unlike reserve officers, who have police authority and perform law enforcement duties, volunteers do not perform police duties. Instead, they are the "extended eyes and ears of the police" within their communities. These "Citizens on Patrol" (COP- Code Blue in Fort Worth, www.fortworthpd.com) or "Volunteers in Patrol" (VIP-Dallas) monitor their neighborhoods and report suspicious behavior to the police. An excellent example of the effectiveness of this type of patrol is in the Fort Worth area where primarily retired residents patrol neighborhoods and report suspicious activity. High-risk habits such as leaving garage doors ajar are open invitations to burglars and thieves. The COP "Code Blue" program in Fort Worth notifies and educates homeowners of actions and dangers that make their property vulnerable to theft or burglary. Participants in these programs must pass a screening process and undergo training in the state penal code, observation techniques, as well as in the recognition of suspicious behavior and reporting procedures.

If other techniques are unsuccessful in preventing burglary, retrieving stolen merchandise is next to impossible without verification of ownership. A program that is employed by Police Departments all over the country is Operation Identification (Operation ID). The idea behind it is simple: In order to prove ownership and to make it more difficult for burglars to sell or pawn stolen property, owners mark their property with a number or code (usually operator’s license number or date of birth are used; social security numbers are discouraged). Some precincts lend out electric engraving pens for this purpose. Operation ID has proven to be very effective; however, residents are seemingly unaware of the program’s existence or for whatever reason choose not to participate. The fact that only seven percent of all burglary victims are able to provide the police with the serial numbers of their property is evidence that participation in this program is not taking place.

Another initiative that is found on a national scale is the Pawn Shop Program. Although it varies in different states, pawnshops are required to send information on every transaction to the local police or sheriff’s department within a specified time period (usually within 48 hours). Data submitted normally includes information on the type of item(s) pawned; the customer’s name, age, race, and gender; and his or her thumbprint, in some states.

‘Hardening the target’ remains one of the most effective ways to deter burglars and thieves. In many cities, police officers will inspect homes free of charge and alert homeowners of security breaches that could occur. In some areas, locksmiths have partnered with local police departments in conducting home security inspections. Often this action leads to identifying the obvious first line defense initiatives: appropriate locks on the doors and windows, use of lighting and landscaping, and consideration of canines or alarm devices, etc.

Lastly, Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) pronounced (\sep-ted\) has as its basic premise that the proper design and effective use of the physical environment can lead to a reduction in the incidence and fear of crime, thereby improving the quality of life. The history of CPTED stretches back to the work of Jane Jacobs and her book The Life and Death of Great American Cities (1961). Research conducted by architect Oscar Newman (Defensible Space, 1972), Richard Gardener, Professor C. Ray Jeffery (CPTED, 1971), and Schlomo Angel (1968) followed. Much of the actual programs and practices established in the CPTED movement were carried forward in the 1970s by police officers and security professionals who had been trained by some of those early pioneers. 

The conceptual force of CPTED is that the proper design and effective use of the physical environment can produce behavior effects that will reduce the incidence and fear of crime. This theory suggests that urban design, including the design of streets, parks, and super highways, could prevent crime by reducing "opportunities." This includes consideration of natural designs lighting, locks, landscaping, fencing, and other environmental designs that deter crime.

Innovative Approaches

Each of the abovementioned programs is somewhat standard and traditional in its approach for education and burglary prevention. Some police departments and communities are exploring more innovative means of alerting neighborhoods that changing their behavior may decrease their chance of burglary victimization.

Technology development has enhanced how the public can access information. In November 2001, the Arlington, Texas Police Department (www.arlingtonpd.org) introduced an innovative tool that allows members of the public to access specific crime statistics and police calls for service from their home computers. The application has features that allow users to select the name of a school, apartment complex, business or park. Users may search for crimes reported in specific locations of interest. This database is updated daily and captures data for the most recent 13-month period.

Fax or Email Alerts are becoming more popular with the ‘connected’ communities. Police Departments that participate in this program send out fax alerts to specific areas advising of criminal activity. Some police departments use email to notify neighborhood liaisons that then in turn send mass emails to neighbors on crime occurring in their area. The Clearwater Police Department (www.clearwaterpolice.org) in Florida launched a new Internet service called PolicEmail that allows citizens to sign up to receive special

e-mails alerts and crime trend information. Green Bay Wisconsin uses the CitizenObserver Program (www.citizenobserver.com) to communicate quickly and efficiently with the public. Additionally, the CitizenObserver also helps the police support local neighborhood watch programs. Each neighborhood can request its own Web page from the local law enforcement agency. There, block captains can post messages that announce neighborhood meetings functions and other events.

Many police departments have employed the use of phone notification systems (Reverse 911 is an example) where residents are telephoned in a pre-selected area and warned of crime or suspicious activity. This program is also used for notification of lost or missing children and elderly adults. Notification of natural disasters (tornado, hurricane, flash floods) or emergency management’s events (HAZMAT spill, evacuation, etc) are also used with phone notification systems.

Some businesses in the community are also looking at creative deterrence options.

Apartment complex owners and managers have explored innovative ways to deter or displace burglars and thieves by offering a free or reduced apartment to a law enforcement or security officer. Police officers can take advantage of this offer and benefit by receiving a reduced housing cost while the complex has a higher visibility of police. The presence of a police vehicle in the complex can be a deterrent to criminal activity. Developers in some progressive areas are exploring the option of police officers moving into new subdivisions while early construction is occurring. Again, reduced home costs in exchange for police visibility are mutually beneficial.

Although burglary is a crime of conditions and opportunity, sometimes burglars will try to find out if the home is occupied by telephoning. Several suspicious "wrong number" calls or "nobody-at-the-other-end" calls should alert the homeowner of a potential "casing." Family members, especially children, should be warned not to give out information by phone-especially about who is home, who is out, or how long anyone is expected to be away. Homeowners should make it more difficult for burglars to target homes by avoiding names on mailboxes or on doors. Names on display make it easier for the burglar to look your number up in the directory.

What must be understood is that virtually no property is impenetrable. If an individual is determined to burglarize a home, he/she will. The strategies mentioned simply make the property ’owners home or business less appealing to the burglar who wants to have quick and easy access. Most burglars will look for an easier target if these techniques are employed. While this does not prevent burglary from occurring, it displaces the act of burglary to a more attractive target for the burglar.

Topic IV: Local Burglary Prevention Measures

The Memphis Police Department has a broad spectrum of anti-burglary measures in place. These include advice of a technical nature (e.g., home security tips), programs that are aimed at involving citizens in the protection of their communities (e.g., neighborhood watches), policing strategies (e.g., Community Action Officers that live in the neighborhoods they patrol), anti-burglary programs (e.g., Operation ID), and programs that are not aimed solely at burglary, but at crime prevention in general (e.g., National Night Out).

The Memphis Police Department has recently implemented the Crime Mapper program through the Memphis Police Department website (www.memphispolice.org). Over the last decade, the criminal justice community has begun to reap the valuable analytical benefits of geographical information system (GIS) technology. This compelling technology enhances the ability of researchers and practitioners to identify "hot spots" and analyze varied patterns of crime and criminal behavior. This is one of the most innovative links in the area of computerized crime mapping in response to a growing perception that the public can be as important to controlling crime as law enforcement. The Memphis Crime Mapper provides crime information within a specified radius of a requested location. At present, this resource makes only the previous 30 days available to the concerned citizen.

Traditional tips and assistance for how to better protect one’s home is available in standard written format at each Memphis Police precinct, as well as through direct advice from police officers. The Memphis Police Department offers a variety of handbooks, brochures, and leaflets on burglary prevention. Additional information can be found in various other publications on general crime prevention. Two handbooks offer detailed recommendations on how to make it harder for an intruder to enter the targeted objective.

Information includes tips on proper doors, windows, locks, hinges, lighting, landscaping, and other physical barriers. Free crime prevention programs provided by police officers are available to civic clubs, churches and neighborhoods, upon request.

In addition, there is a leaflet that provides information on the concept of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). The Memphis Police Department also offers individual advice on burglary prevention to private homebuilders, developers and architects who can contact their respective precinct and ask for CPTED-tips. Citizens can request a security check of their house or apartment by a police officer. This security questionnaire provided by the Memphis Police Department has a checklist of the things that may be done to secure one’s home.

The Pawn Shop Program is one of the Memphis Police Department’s most successful weapons in their struggle against burglary. It accounts for 25 percent of all burglary arrests. When an item is pawned within the City of Memphis/Shelby County, the pawnshop owner must complete a pawn ticket that provides the name, address, height, weight, age, race and gender of the person pawning the item to the Memphis Police Department electronically within a 48-hour period. These tickets are checked against recent burglaries that have occurred and if a match is made, investigators will contact the pawnshop and retrieve the stolen property. Since the 1970’s, the City of Memphis has required pawnshops to obtain the thumbprint of individuals who pawn items. In 2001, this process was formalized by the passage of enabling legislation requiring all individuals who pawn merchandise and receive $25 or more, to submit a thumbprint as a part of the procedure.

Like the majority of other metropolitan Police Departments, the Memphis Police Department embraces the concept of Community Policing. The idea of engaging citizens in the public safety process finds expression in Neighborhood Watch Programs. Neighborhood Watch Groups can be found in all areas of town in Memphis, though the degree of participation is at times, lukewarm. Private citizens interact with Neighborhood Watch Coordinators who have offices at local precincts. Coordinators assist citizens in organizing a neighborhood watch and keeping the watch alive after its inception. In addition, coordinators give safety presentations at neighborhood watch meetings, invite speakers, and serve as the watch liaison between the neighborhood and the police by being available to answer questions or provide assistance. Until recently, Memphis had two competing entities that performed the Neighborhood Watch function. In 1984, The Memphis Area Neighborhood Watch, Inc. (later renamed to The Memphis Metropolitan Neighborhood Watch, Inc.) was formed as a citizen controlled, non-profit organization independent of formalized law enforcement oversight. It was sponsored by the National Sheriff’s Association and was a member of the National Association of Town Watches. This organization was operated solely by grant funding and has ceased operation as of June 2002 due to an inability to receive grant funding.¹⁶ In 1986, the City of Memphis initiated the current Memphis Police Department-sponsored Neighborhood Watch Program. The Crime Prevention Division of the Police Department supervises the program, with civilian part-time coordinators functioning within each Police precinct.

These precinct coordinators actively organize the neighborhoods and educate the public in crime awareness and prevention. Meetings are held in centralized neighborhood locations and are flexible to the specific community residents’ needs. Guest speakers and crime prevention projects such as property identification markings are some of the activities that are conducted during these meetings. Neighborhood watch groups are widely considered to be great assets in crime fighting. Beyond their original purpose, they can also serve as excellent catalysts for better neighborhood relations and cohesion.¹⁷

Organizing and maintaining active neighborhood watch groups have their own challenges and problems. Factions tend to form when a concrete problem arises within the neighborhood and once it has been solved, neighborhood watch organizations tend to disband. Keeping the group together usually requires strong leadership and at least one person who assumes the responsibility for keeping the initiative active. Also, people tend to remain passive as long as there is no visible problem. Most groups are formed as a consequence of criminal activity in their neighborhood; the action taken is reactive rather than proactive. Finally, some communities are more receptive than others. Apartment communities are usually less interested in setting up a watch group than single-family dwelling neighborhoods. Other demographic factors that make neighborhood organization more difficult include having a large number of homeless, young residents, and/or low-income households.

A high level of interaction and mutual trust between police and the community is an important tool in effectively combating any type of criminal activity. This is especially applicable in reporting crimes that are committed in the open and that could be prevented by people being watchful and observant. Ideally, the Memphis Police Department should be actively engaged in building partnerships within the communities they patrol. Community Action (COACT) officers are assigned specific neighborhoods during their tours of duty and operate from a satellite location, usually in public housing areas. Citizens are asked to call the police even at the slightest suspicion – based on the principle that it is better to call too many times than one time too few. However, police officer response to non-emergency calls for services are not rapid and often the suspicious person or vehicle has left the area prior to the officer’s arrival. Officers that patrol the neighborhood streets as much as possible lead to several positive effects: Citizens feel safer and they get to know the officers (at least by sight), and high police presence increases deterrence. Finally, officers are encouraged to seek contact with residents and introduce themselves: the "face-behind-the badge" approach.

As noted earlier, juveniles commit a large percentage of burglaries. Thus, it makes sense to engage the juveniles in activities that keep them from being without supervision during the after-school hours. Scientific studies clearly support the notion that Afterschool Programs (see MSCC Best Practice #6 –Crime Prevention through Coordinated and Community based Afterschool Programs) are an effective crime-reduction strategy. However, engaging a potential juvenile offender in meaningful activities is easier said than done. When children and adolescents complete their school day in many areas across Shelby County, but especially in inner city Memphis, they face a plethora of risks— involvement in drugs, gangs, violent and property crime offenses, as well as victimization.

A survey of afterschool programs conducted by the Memphis Shelby Crime Commission found that less than 6,000 children were enrolled in existing community-based afterschool programs. While the survey sample was non-random, and the respondents do not include all available after-school programs for youths in Memphis and Shelby County, the data does suggest that the overwhelming majority of youths under 18 in this community— approximately 100,000 in Memphis alone¹⁸— are not enrolled in afterschool programs. The City of Memphis public school system is engaged in active pursuit of more afterschool programs targeted at youth in lower socioeconomic levels. These programs are targeted at youth that are at higher risk for being involved in criminal activity after school hours. One may conclude from the survey results that an unacceptable number of youths in Memphis are unsupervised in the hours immediately following school. If this conclusion is accurate, the probability is high for inappropriate or illegal behavior by many juveniles in this community during these hours.

Another crime prevention strategy that has proven to be an efficient instrument in the reduction of juvenile delinquency is the implementation of Truancy Programs (see MSCC Best practice #8 – Reducing Crime and Supporting Education through a Comprehensive Truancy Reduction Strategy). Truancy is often described as a "gateway behavior," a portal through which a child enters the juvenile court system via additional status and delinquency allegations, the adult welfare system via chronic unemployment or under-employment, or the penal system through adult criminal behavior. Research has demonstrated that truant students are at higher risk of being drawn into behavior involving gangs, daytime crime and violence, drugs, and/or alcohol. Many youths who are habitually truant and experience school failure are the same youths who bring weapons to school, bully or threaten their classmates, or regularly disrupt the school’s learning environment. Youths not in school and not in the labor force are at a high risk of delinquency and crime.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) has made truancy a primary focus of their ongoing efforts to formulate a comprehensive juvenile crime prevention strategy. Studies by the OJJDP show that truancy is a national problem, highly amplified in metropolitan areas. Research has shown that those students who skip school on a regular basis are more likely to engage in unlawful activities than those who do not. Also, truancy is directly connected to dropping out, and the number of high-school dropouts who become part of the criminal system is disproportionately high.

Juvenile Court, the Memphis City Schools, and the Memphis Police Department had programs in place to reduce chronic absenteeism; however, this was discontinued by the Memphis Police Department after a lawsuit was brought against the department when a home schooled youth was picked up during a truancy sweep in 1998.

One problem the Memphis Police Department is currently facing, both in the implementation of its proactive anti-burglary strategies, as well as during the investigation of burglary offenses, is a lack of cooperation on the part of the general population. This opposition is certainly not exclusive to the crime of burglary, but a persistent pattern regarding a lack of community support has been identified that has its roots in a multitude of factors, such as race, class, factual or fictional police misconduct, as well as a personal past or present involvement in criminal activity. People who live in neighborhoods that are plagued with gang-violence, drug trafficking, and the frequent use of guns, might tend to view a burglary as yet another unpleasantness, but by no means an incident that requires involvement of the police. In fact, residents may be a victim one day, and a perpetrator the next. As a result, cooperation with law enforcement personnel is limited and, in many instances, the victim of a burglary might abstain from calling the police altogether.

Gap Analysis

The purpose of this section is to highlight the gaps that exist between national and local efforts.

Internet: The Memphis Police Department has an excellent tool in the Crime Mapper accessible on their police homepage, although limited information on burglary prevention and on neighborhood initiatives is offered. Many excellent examples of interactive sites, information and links on crime prevention can be found on the Internet. Distinguishing how to prevent crime and burglaries is as critical as identifying that these crimes have occurred. Further, no links are found to provide home security information or crime prevention tips. According to a report released by the Memphis Regional Chamber of Commerce (www.themediaaudit.com), 53.4% of City of Memphis households have access to the Internet.¹⁹ The percentage is reduced in the areas that have the highest number of burglaries; however, improvement to the current web site will provide important burglary prevention information to those residents who are ‘connected’ and are interested in protecting themselves more effectively. Since a great number of burglary victims live in low-income neighborhoods which may have a lower percentage of Internet users, the Memphis Police Department must utilize methods other than the Internet to disseminate information on burglary and tips on where to get the needed information. Examples for these methods would be flyers, bulk mail, posters (e.g. in public buildings, churches, buses), and TV-ads.

Information on Crime Trends, Recent Neighborhood Activities, and other Burglary-Prevention Programs: Although the Shelby County District Attorney General has a web page (www.scdag.com) that provides information to local Memphis residents about recently committed crimes, crime trends, and neighborhood activities, the Memphis Police Department does not have a program that informs those residents who do not have access to the Internet. In Minneapolis, when a burglary is committed, a saturation of alert flyers goes out to the neighborhood advising residents of the incident and passing on any relevant information that may lead to the capture of the perpetrator. Consideration of implementing some type of mailing that saturates the area recently burglarized with crime information may not only alert homeowners to recently committed crimes in their areas, but may be a catalyst for receiving crime tips on suspects and/or past criminal activity.

Citizens’ Attitudes: Complacency about crime and criminal activity is common when one is not the victim. Whenever the opportunity arises, citizens should be encouraged and emboldened to take every burglary seriously, contact the police, and cooperate with the officers. As noted earlier, many burglaries go unreported. Citizens must reorient their thinking away from believing that burglary and theft are minor offenses. Given that many citizens are facing violence in their neighborhoods on a weekly basis, the belief that burglary is not a serious offense is understandable; however, no citizen should believe that the burglary of his or her residence does not matter to the police. Citizens’ attitudes will change when they see the positive impact of their involvement with law enforcement. More community outreach needs to be done in this area so that residents will believe that their prompt notifications to police are a benefit to them and their neighborhood’s security.

Citizen Patrols: Memphis should consider a volunteer force that patrols certain segments of the community. Dallas and Houston, Texas, have found retired Citizens on Patrols (COP) programs to be effective tools in the struggle against the burglary problem (and against crime in general). Opponents of the COP programs raise concerns of civilians overstepping the boundaries; however, in each of these cities, the assets of the program greatly outweigh the liabilities encountered. Legal issues are certain to be a part of this discussion, but individuals who could report suspicious activity immediately to police are an alternative to consider.

Education of Architects, Developers, Contractors, and Private Home Builders: Although the concept of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) is embraced by the Memphis Police Department, it is not widely understood by the public and there is no central clearinghouse for interested parties.

The Memphis Police Department should consider appointing officers or civilian CPTED-representatives and educate professional homebuilders as well as home improvement stores of this program. An active campaign to partner with home improvement stores with police department endorsement will keep the home owner informed of the appropriate devices that can be used to safeguard homes and deter burglars and thieves.

Truancy Program: The lack of educational success is a major detriment to a juvenile as well as the juvenile's community. Truancy is a strong risk factor to delinquent and criminal activity. Many cities have truancy programs in place to reduce chronic absenteeism in schools. The Memphis Police Department discontinued its practice of picking up juveniles solely for truancy after a lawsuit was brought on behalf of a home-school student who had been detained during a truancy sweep in 1998. Since school aged youth commit almost 20% of burglaries, resuming some type of monitoring system should be considered. Of course, compounding the issue of truancy is the strong correlation between high numbers of unexcused absences and delinquent behavior, with some justice officials now considering truancy to be the leading cause of delinquency. Truant students are quickly becoming a primary target for prevention programs, because of their acute risk of involvement in delinquent activity. Judge Kenneth Turner, Presiding Judge of Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County is frequently quoted as saying that "all truants are not delinquent, but almost all delinquents are truants."²⁰

In late January, 2000, twelve agencies, including Memphis City Schools, Shelby County Schools, Juvenile Court, Shelby County Sheriff’s Office and the Memphis Police Department signed a detailed memorandum of understanding which officially established the Truancy Assessment Center, (TAC).²¹ Over 6,000 cases were handled in the TAC in its first four months of operation. Although, the TAC is a great instrument for identifying truant youth, the center has been only marginally effective for a variety of institutionalized and organizational reasons.

Afterschool Programs: Since 20 percent of all burglaries are committed by offenders under the age of 18, engaging Memphis’ youth in meaningful activities is likely to lead to a reduction in the burglary rate. Afterschool programs need to be a part of a comprehensive juvenile crime reduction strategy that focuses on youth crime prevention and reduction as a critical part of the program.

The Department of Children’s Services identified afterschool programming as a high priority in its recently published needs assessment. There is absolutely no question that in Memphis, where many single parents have low incomes and less time to spend with their children and where many schools are already overburdened, community-based youth-serving organizations are of increasing strategic importance. Youth organizations readily provide necessary resources that many children and teens fail to find elsewhere. A survey of teens concerning programs or services desired during nonschool hours reveals a sensible list:  

• Safe parks and recreation centers
• Libraries with the latest books, videos, and records
• Opportunities to go camping and participate in sports
• One-on-one mentoring with trustworthy, knowledgeable adults
• Opportunities to learn new skills.²²

On a local level, traditional youth organizations such as Boys and Girls Clubs, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Bridges have long met many of these requests; however, the emergence of such coordination programs as the Memphis Mentoring Partnership (www.memphiscrime.org) reflects the future.

Pawn Shop Program: The estimation of the amount of stolen property at any given pawnshop varies depending upon who is asked. Pawnshop owners cite less than one tenth of one percent of property is stolen, while law enforcement estimates range from 20-40%. Even though persons who pawn items in Memphis are required to submit a thumbprint, oftentimes the person pawning the item may not have a criminal record, making obtaining the thumbprint ineffective for identification of individuals who would pawn stolen property. Investigators’ inability to positively identify the person pawning stolen merchandise would be greatly improved if a photograph were taken of the individual. This change would require enabling legislation; however, requiring a photograph of all persons pawning items would close the gap with those individuals who do not have a criminal record, but who could be identified through police investigative procedures such as photo line-ups, etc. During this study, no cities/states were located that had this statute or ordinance in place.

Electronic Surveillance: The use of electronic monitoring has been introduced in many areas, primarily in the arena of photo enforcement, speed detection and high crime area surveillance. Electronic surveillance cameras were installed near the Peabody Place in 2001, and soon after their installation, a murder was solved through the use of this technology. At the time of this report, no municipalities were identified that were using electronic surveillance to monitor high burglary locations, specifically. Critics of the use of cameras remark that they simply displace crime, requiring suspects to commit crimes in other areas that are not being monitored. The use of cameras in many states in public areas has been the subject of much debate regarding constitutionality. Consideration should be given to these types of passive crime deterrents.

Police Visibility: Nothing assures the immediate dispersal of criminals more than police patrol and visibility in a neighborhood. Increased and focused police deployment, matching the times and locations where burglaries are occurring, is the best deterrent for residential burglaries. Though the most effective solution, this is the most staff intensive answer to the burglary problem. Lack of sufficient personnel, high call volume and other commitments make proactive patrolling by commissioned officers a luxury that cannot be afforded with the current personnel deployment. A concentrated look at police deployment and patrol patterns in general must be explored.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are specific to addressing burglary prevention in Memphis. In some cases, recommendations for change are made, while others suggest improvements upon existing measures; in other circumstances, new policies may be recommended. The majority of the responsibility for these recommendations lies with the law enforcement; however, community opportunities exist as well, and are italicized.

Conclusion

Combating burglary effectively requires efforts by virtually every element of society. Local police departments, neighborhood watch groups, home owners, landlords, tenants, courts, probation officers, legislators, pawnshops, schools, and last, but not least, every concerned citizen, play an important role. In this regard, it is vital to educate and inform the public of the nature of the problem itself, the institutions that are responsible for addressing it and that serve as contacts for citizens concerned about burglaries, and the means that have proven effective in fighting it. The public’s understanding of the burglary issue must be devoid of unrealistic expectations and, at the same time, prevent them from developing groundless fears and feelings of vulnerability.

Fortunately, adequate knowledge of the burglary problem in Memphis has been documented, and this is a first step toward developing effective burglary prevention strategies. Some of them are derived from our analysis of existing data and information on burglaries in Memphis. Others stem from our study of the measures and initiatives that are in place in other cities.

The Memphis Shelby Crime Commission has made recommendations and suggestions as to how local police departments, specifically the Memphis Police Department, can achieve better results in their efforts to reduce burglary. At the same time, it is necessary that the public be responsible and contributes its share to put an end to the burglary epidemic. Finally, all stakeholders need to be formally incorporated in this struggle.

While it is important to understand that burglaries increase where there are opportunities for them to occur, causal variables must be addressed if we are going to have a clearer explanation of burglary. Improving the effectiveness of traditional burglary prevention strategies could benefit from more attention to the forces that determine the supply of offenders. Carroll and Jackson (1983) show that increases in criminal activity are related, and in fact swell in proportion, to the increasing numbers of female-headed, single parent households, many with marginal incomes. The number of single parent families living beneath the poverty level in the City of Memphis in 1999 was 33.5%.²³ This formula contributes directly to increasing the supply of burglary offenders, assuming the accuracy of Carroll and Jackson’s premise.

The Memphis Police Department embraces many of the traditional, reactive burglary prevention activities in place that could reduce the impact of burglary and crime in the Memphis area. Short of turning our homes into fortresses and assuming that protection is the only defense, examination of the environmental factors that contribute to this crime cannot be ignored. More proactive programs such as the Truancy Assessment Center and Afterschool Program development need to receive resource allocation and attention so that they can more fully impact the foundational issues that contribute to the size of the offender pool. Like many cities, higher profile crimes and crimes against persons appear to drive the resources Memphis invests in the community; however, reducing the number of burglaries committed will have a positive impact on the reduction of other crimes.

DATA SOURCES

Notes

23 US Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table DP-3. Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics: 2000

| Back to Research |