LİSELERİN, İÇKİLİ YERLERİN VE KAHVEHANELERİN SOKAK ÜZERİNDE OLUŞAN SUÇA ETKİSİ – BURSA ÖRNEĞİ

Abstract

Çalışmada, rutin aktivite, suç örüntüsü ve sosyal düzensizlik teorilerinin birleşiminden oluşan bir modele dayanılarak liselerin, içkili yerlerin ve kahvehanelerin sokak blokları üzerinde oluşan suça etkisi incelenmektedir. Bursa Emniyet Müdürlüğü ve Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu’ndan elde edilen veriler hiyerarşik lineer modelleme tekniği kullanılarak regresyon analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Çalışma sonuçları, muhtemel üçüncü değişkenlerin etkileri de kontrol edildiği halde, üzerinde lise, içkili yer ve kahvehane bulunan sokak bloklarında daha fazla suç oluştuğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, sosyal düzensizlik teorisiyle ilişkili değişkenlerin birbirleriyle olan beklenmedik ilişkileri sosyal düzensizlik teorisinin Türkiye ortamı için yeniden üretilmesi gerektiğine işaret etmektedir

Keywords

• liseler
• içkili yerler
• kahvehaneler
• suç
• hiyerarşik lineer modelleme

THE EFFECT OF HİGH SCHOOLS, ONPREMİSE ALCOHOL OUTLETS, AND COFFEEHOUSES ON CRİME ON STREET BLOCKS - BURSA EXAMPLE

Abstract

In this study, the effects of high schools, on-premise alcohol outlets, and coffee-houses are examined based on an integration of crime opportunity and social disorganization theories. Data coming from Bursa Police Department and Turkish Statistics Institute are analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling techniques. The results of the study show that controlling for possible third variables, street blocks with high schools, on-premise alcohol outlets, and coffeehouses host more crime than other street blocks. Moreover, the unexpected interrelationships among social disorganization variables imply that social disorganization theory should be re-theorized for Turkey

Keywords

• high schools
• on-premise alcohol outlets
• coffeehouses
• crime
• hierarchical linear modeling

References

1. Alaniz, M. L., Cartmill, R. S., ve Parker, R. N. (1998). Immigrants and violence: The importance of neighborhood context. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 20(2), 155-174.
2. Anderson, A. L. (2002). Individual and contextual influences on delinquency: The role of the single parent family. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 575-587.
3. Andresen, M. A. (2006). Crime measures and the spatial analysis of criminal activity. British Journal of Criminology, 46, 258285.
4. Bachman, R. (1991). An analysifs of American Indian homicide: A test of social disorganization and economic deprivation at the reservation county level. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 28(4), 456-471.
5. Barnett, C.,ve Mencken, F. C. (2002).Social disorganization theory and the contextual nature of crime in nonmetropolitan counties. Rural Sociology, 67(3), 372-393.
6. Basibuyuk, O. (2008). Social (Dis)organization and Terror Related Crimes in Turkey. University of North Texas.
7. Blalock, H. M. (1960). Social statistics (Vol. 1221). New York: McGraw-Hill.
8. Bellair, P. E. (1997). Social interaction and community crime: Examining the importance of neighbor networks. Criminology, 35(4), 677-704.

9. Bernasco, W.,ve Block, R. (2009). Where offenders choose to attack: A discrete choice model of robberies in Chicago. Criminology, 47(1), 93-130.
10. Bernasco, W.,ve Luykx, F. (2003).Effects of attractiveness, opportunity and accessibility to burglars on residential burglary rates of urban neighborhoods. Criminology, 41(3), 981-1002.
11. Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., ve Farrington, D. P. (1988). Criminal career research: Its value for criminology. Criminology, 26(1), 1-35.
12. Brantingham, P. L., ve Brantingham, P. J. (1993). Nodes, paths and edges: Considerations on the complexity of crime and the physical environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13(1), 328.
13. Brantingham, P. L., ve Brantingham, P. J. (1995). Criminality of place: Crime generators and crime attractors. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 3(3), 1-26.
14. Brantingham, P. L., ve Brantingham, P. J. (1999). A theoretical model of crime hot spot generation. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 8(1), 7-26.
15. Brantingham, P. L., ve Brantingham, P. J. (2003).Anticipating the displacement of crime using the principles of environmental criminology. Crime Prevention Studies, 16, 119-148.
16. Bursik, R. J. (1988). Social disorganization and theories of crime and delinquency: Problems and prospects. Criminology, 26(4), 519-551.
17. Bursik, R. J., ve Grasmick, H. G. (1993). Neighborhoods and Crime: The Dimensions of Effective Community Control. New York: Macmillan.
18. Cohen, L. E., ve Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588-608.
19. Cohen, L. E., Felson, M., ve Land, K. C. (1980). Property crime rates in the United States: A macrodynamic analysis, 19471977; with ex ante forecasts for the mid-1980s. American Sociological Review, 86(1), 90-118.
20. Cohen, L. E., Kluegel, J. R., ve Land, K. D. (1981). Social inequality and predatory criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Sociological Review, 46(5), 505524.
21. Cömerter, N., ve Kar, M. (2007). Economic and social determinants of the crime rate in Turkey: Cross- section analysis. Ankara Universitesi, Siyasal Bilimler Fakultesi Dergisi, 62(2), 37-57.
22. DeFronzo, J. (1996). Welfare and burglary. Crime & Delinquency, 42(2), 223-230.
23. DeFronzo, J. (1997). Welfare and homicide. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34(3), 395-406.
24. Demren, C. (2007). Coffee House Masculinity: A Case of a Gecekondu District in Ankara. Hacettepe University, Ankara.
25. Dobson, J. E., Bright, E. A., Coleman, P. R., ve Bhaduri, B. L. (2003). Landscan: A global population database for estimating population at risk. V. Mesev (Ed.), Remotely Sensed Cities (pp. 267279). London and New York: Taylor and Francis içinde.
26. Dobson, J. E., Bright, E. A., Coleman, P. R., Durfee, R. C., ve Worley, B. A. (2000). Landscan: A global population database for estimating populations at risk. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 66, 849-857.
27. Duru, H. (2010). Crime on Turkish Streetblocks: An Examination of the Effects of High-Schools, On- Premise Alcohol Outlets, and Coffeehouses, Cincinnati Üniversitesi, yayınlanmamış doktora tezi.
28. Duru H. ve Yiğit.M. (2014).Terör ve terörle mücadeleden doğan zararların karşılanması hakkında kanun, uygulanması ve etkileri, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi IIBF Dergisi, 9(2), 123149.
29. Eck, J. (1994). Drug Markets and Drug Places: A CaseControl Study of the Spatial Structure of Illicit Drug Dealing. University of Maryland, College Park.
30. Erman, T. (2001). The politics of squatter (Gecekondu) studies in Turkey: The changing representations of rural migrants in the academic discourse. Urban Studies, 38(7), 983-1002. Farrington, D. P. (1986).Age and crime. Crime and Justice, 7, 189-250.
31. Felson, M., ve Clarke, R. V. (1998). Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory for Crime Prevention. London: Crown. Gottfretson, M. ve Hirschi T. (1990). A General Theory of Crime, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
32. Gök, O. (2009). Structural Disadvantage, Terrorism, and Non-Terrorist Violent Crime in Turkey.University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
33. Greenberg, S. W., Rohe, W. M., ve Williams, J. R. (1982). Safety in urban neighborhoods: A comparison of physical characteristics and informal territorial control in high and low crime neighborhoods. Population and Environment, 5(3), 141-165.
34. Hindelang, M. J., Gottfredson, M. R., ve Garofalo, J. (1978). Victims of Personal Crime. Cambridge, Mass: Ballinger. Horney, Julie (2006). An alternative psychology of criminal behavior, Criminology, 44(1): 1-16.
35. Kornhauser, R. R. (1978). Social Sources of Delinquency: An Appraisal of Analytic Models. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
36. Kurbin, C. E., ve Weitzer, R. (2003). Retailatory homicide: Concentrated disadvantage and neighborhood culture. Social Problems, 50(2), 157-180.
37. Krivo, L. J., ve Peterson, R. D.(1996). Extremely disadvantaged neighborhoods and urban crime. Social Forces, 75(2), 619-648.
38. Köseli, M. (2006). Poverty, Inequality & Terrorism Relationship in Turkey.Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
39. LaGrange, T. C. (1999). The impact of neighborhoods, schools, and malls on the spatial distribution of property damage. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(4), 393-422.
40. LandScan TM Global Population Database (http://www.ornl.gov/ landscan/ adresinden erişilebilir)(Cartographer). (2008).
41. Lockwood, D. (2007). Mapping crime in Savannah: Social disadvantage, land use, and violent crimes reported to the police. Social Science Computer Review, 25(2), 194-209.
42. Loftin, C. ve McDowall, D. (2010). The use of official records to measure crime and delinquency, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26: 527-532.
43. Long, A. D. (2005). Residential community identification and psychological well-being: The predictive utility of self-identity as situated in the street block as social group and physical place. Society for Community Research Action. Champaign, Illinois.
44. Lowenkamp, C. T., Cullen, F. T., ve Pratt, T. C. (2003). Replicating Sampson and Groves's test of social disorganization theory: Revisiting a criminological classic. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(4), 351-373.
45. McCord, E. S., ve Ratcliffe, J. H. (2007). A micro-spatial analysis of the demographic and criminogenic environment of drug markets in Philadelphia. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 40(1), 43-63.
46. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672-682.
47. Messner, S. F., ve Blau, J. R. (1987). Routine leisure activities and rates of crime: A macro-level analysis. Social Forces, 65(4), 1035-1052.
48. Miethe, T. D., ve McDowall, D. (1993). Contextual effects in models of criminal victimization. Social Forces, 71(3), 741-759. Miethe, T. D., Stafford, M. C., ve Long, J. S. (1987). Social differentiation in criminal victimization: A test of routine activities/lifestyle theories. American Sociological Review, 52(2), 184-194.
49. Miller, W. B. (1958). Lower class culture as a generating milieu of gang delinquency. Journal of Social Issues, 14(3), 5-19.
50. Moneroff, J. D., Sampson, R. J., ve Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Neighborhood inequality, collective efficacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology, 39(3), 517-559.
51. Muş, E. (2010). Examining Violent and Property Crimes in the Provinces of Turkey for the years of 2000 and 2007.Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
52. Osgood, D. W. (2000). Poisson-based regression analysis of aggregate crime rates. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16(1), 2143.
53. Osgood, D. W., ve Anderson, A. L. (2004). Unstructured socializing and rates of delinquency. Criminology, 42(3), 519-549.
54. Osgood, D. W., ve Chambers, J. M. (2000). Social disorganization outside the metropolis: An analysis of rural youth violence. Criminology, 38(1), 81-116.
55. Perkins, D. D ve Taylor, R. B. (1996). Ecological assessments of community disorder: Their relationship to fear of crime and theoretical implications. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24(1), 63-107.
56. Raudenbush, S. W., ve Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods, Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Ltd.
57. Rice, K. J., ve Smith, W. R. (2002). Socioecological models of automotive theft: Integrating routine activity and social disorganization approaches. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39(3), 304-336.
58. Roncek, D. W., ve Faggiani, D. (1985). High schools and crime: A replication. The Sociological Quarterly, 26(4), 491-505.
59. Roncek, D. W., ve LoBosco, A. (1983). The effect of high schools on crime in their neighborhoods. Social Science Quarterly, 64(3), 598-613.
60. Roncek, D. W., ve Maier, P. A. (1991). Bars, blocks, and crime revisited: Linking the theory of routine activities to the empiricism of "Hot Spots". Criminology, 29(4), 725-754.
61. Rountree, P. W., ve Warner, B. D. (1999). Social ties and crime: Is the relationship gendered? Criminology, 37(4), 789-814.
62. Sampson, R. J. (1988). Local friendship ties and community attachment in mass society: A multilevel systemic model. American Sociological Review, 53(5), 766-779.
63. Sampson, R. J., ve Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. The American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 774-802.
64. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., ve Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A mutlilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918-924.
65. Sampson, R. J., ve Wooldredge, J. D. (1987). Linking the micro- and macro- level dimensions of lifestyle- routine activity and opportunity models of predatory victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3(4), 371-393.
66. Shaw, C. R., ve McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
67. Sherman, L. W., Gartin, P. R., ve Buerger, M. E. (1989). Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27(1), 27-55.
68. Smith, W. R., Frazee, S. G., ve Davidson, E. L. (2000). Furthering the integration of routine activity and social disorganization theories: Small units of analysis and the study of street robbery as a diffusion process. Criminology, 38(2), 489-524.
69. Snijders, T. A. ve Bosker, R. J. (1994). Modeled variance in two-level models. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(3), 342-363.
70. Stewart, E. A., ve Simons, R. L. (2006). Structure and culture in African American adolescent violence: A partial test of the "Code of the Street" thesis. Justice Quarterly, 23(1), 1-33.
71. Taylor, R. B. (1997). Social order and disorder of street blocks and neighborhoods: Ecology, microecology, and the systemic model of social disorganization. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34(1), 113-155.
72. Taylor, R. B., ve Harrell, A. V. (1996). Physical Environment and Crime. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Justiceo. Document Number)
73. Taylor, R. B., Koons, B. A., Kurtz, E. M., Greene, J. R., ve Perkins, D. D. (1995). Street blocks with more nonresidential land use have more physical deterioration: Evidence from Baltimore and Philadelphia. Urban Affairs Review, 31(1), 120-136.
74. Topçuoğlu, T (2013). Türkiye’de polise kayıtlı suçların rutin aktiviteler teorisi açısından bölgesel dağılımı, Polis Bilimleri Dergisi, 15(13), 125-147.
75. Veysey, B. M., ve Messner, S. F. (1999). Further testing of social disorganization theory: An elaboration of Sampson and Groves's "Community Structure and Crime". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(2), 156-174.
76. Warner, B. D. (2007). Directly intervene or call the authorities? A study of forms of neighborhood social control within a social disorganization framework. Criminology, 45(1), 99-129.
77. Warner, B. D., ve Pierce, G. L. (1993). Reexamining social disorganization theory using calls to the police as a measure of crime. Criminology, 31(4), 493-517.
78. Warner, B. D., ve Rountree, P. W. (1997). Local social ties in a community and crime model: Questioning the systemic nature of informal social control. Social Problems, 44(4), 520-536.
79. Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., Lum, C., ve Yang, S.-M. (2004). Trajectories of crime at places: A longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle. Criminology, 42(2), 283-321.
80. Wilcox, P., Quisenberry, N., Cabrera, D. T., ve Jones, S. (2004). Busy places and broken windows?Toward defining the role of physical structure and process in community crime models. The Sociological Quarterly, 45(2), 185-207.
81. Wilkinson, D. L. (2007). Local social ties and willingness to intervene: Textured views among violent urban youth of neighborhood social control dynamics and situations. Justice Quarterly, 24(2), 185-220.
82. Wolfgang, M. E., ve Ferracuti, F. (1982). The Subculture of Violence: Toward an Integrated Theory in Criminology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
83. Wooldredge, John (2002). The (ir)relevance of aggregation bias for multilevel studies of neighborhoods and crime with an example comparing census tracts to official neighborhoods in Cincinnati, Criminology, 40(3): 681-710.