Biting Once, Twice: The Influence of Prior on Subsequent Crime Location Choice

Abstract

Properties, victims, and locations previously targeted by offenders have an increased risk of being targeted again within a short time period. It has been suggested that often the same offenders are involved in these repeated events and, thus, that offenders' prior crime location choices influence their subsequent crime location choices. This article examines repeated crime location choices, testing the hypothesis that offenders are more likely to commit a crime in an area they previously targeted than in areas they did not target before. Unique data from four different data sources are used to study the crime location choices of 3,666 offenders who committed 12,639 offenses. The results indicate that prior crime locations strongly influence subsequent crime location choices. The effects of prior crime locations are larger if the crimes are frequent, if they are recent, if they are nearby, and if they are the same type of crime.

Domestic migration, home rentals, and crime rates in China

“…Housing policies can kill two birds with one stone (Coulson 2002). This study supports the hypothesis that domestic migration increases the crime rate, deeming that the housing and living patterns (Lammers et al 2015;Brantingham and Brantingham 1993, 1995 of migrants largely shape the crime distribution in transitional China. Housing coverage is related to social management and stability and becomes the primary concern of the public.…”

“…The crime pattern theory is first concerned with why crimes are more likely to take place at certain places and among certain people, rather than why some people are more prone to commiting crimes (Lammers et al 2015;Brantingham and Brantingham 1993, 1995. It adopts the routine activity theory on how changes in human activities can affect crime rates (Cohen and Felson 1979;Felson and Cohen 1980), the analysis by school of rational choice on the decision mode of criminals (Becker 1968), and defensive space theory on the importance of space (Newman 1966).…”

“…Crime pattern theory and routine activity theory both argue that habits and daily activities are very important. When people's activities become more detached from the family, the number of single-person families increases, or monitors decrease, and infringers will have more available targets on which to commit crime (Lammers et al 2015;Brantingham and Brantingham 2011;Cohen and Felson 1979;Sherman et al 1989). This is partly the reason why a higher proportion of population migration can contribute to higher rates of victims and gross crimes.…”

“…We do not deny that home ownership or renting may partially reflect differences in household socioeconomic status or community collective efficacy (Sampson et al 1997). The housing pattern as an independent variable is an important predictor of crime and other social consequences (Kirk 2012;Lammers et al 2015). After controlling for population structure, how housing renting or ownership affect crime still lacks empirical research.…”

Family Matters: Effects of Family Members’ Residential Areas on Crime Location Choice*

“…Because most people visit their family members rather frequently, and because places visited frequently are key elements of awareness space, the residential areas of offenders’ family members should have an increased risk of being targeted. However, no previous empirical crime location choice studies have focused explicitly on the effects of residential areas of family members of offenders; only the importance of current or former residential areas of the offenders themselves (e.g., Bernasco, ) and their previous crime locations have been shown (Bernasco, Johnson, and Ruiter, ; Lammers et al., ).…”