One of the biggest misunderstandings relates to the popular saying “random crime.” You would be hard-pressed to listen to a tv newscast or read a newspaper without finding a reference to a “random act of violence” or a “random crime.” Although the idea has incredible appeal for those looking to bump-up their ratings, the phrase itself is a lie – a popular expression that emerged, not out of a careful examination of crime trends, but out of a broader commercial desire to shock and entertain viewers. Crime, by its very nature, cannot be random in any sense of the term. If it was, it would be impossible for professionals to solve even the most basic criminal case. If crime were random, the police would be out of a job because nothing could ever logically lead them to understanding what took place following an assault, homicide, or fraud. Moreover, if crime were random, both you and I would be just as likely to be crime victims as offenders – this is clearly absurd, yet it is precisely what the phrase implies.

“Random crime” is really a phrase that speaks to a much deeper anxiety that has nothing do with random acts (which, in general, are impossible). What most of us are reacting to when we suggest that a shooting (for example) was random, is an inability to understand the offender's motivation or state of mind. Because we find it so removed from our own state of mind, we cope by suggesting that the act actually had no rationale, no apparent reason. Of course, we eventually confront the contradictions of our own logic when it comes time ro prosecute the offender. At this point we insist that the crime was motivated, planned, and should be punished accordingly – the very opposite of “random.”

What does this have to do with victimization? The belief that crime is random causes many of us to fear criminal behaviour. In fact, it helps to generate a sense of anxiety and fear that seems to blanket us all somewhat equally (although women tend to fear certain kinds of victimization more than others). The truth is (and I use the word “truth” lightly here – read last weeks article), particular kinds of people are more likely than others to be victimized. And these victimizations are more likely to happen in particular locations than others. In short, crime isn’t random, it is actually patterned; albeit, these patterns are very complex.

Who, then, is more likely to be victimized overall than anybody else? From Asia to Africa, from central Europe to North America, the social group most likely to be victimized is 15-24 year old males. In fact, they are also the most likely to offend as well. The international data is actually quite amazing. The age/victimization (as well as the age/offender) curves look incredible alike. If there was ever something that approximated a social law in criminology, this would be it. Why is this so?

Although there are a number of theories as to why this group is most likely to be victimized, the general rationale that I find most convincing is the following. Every criminal victimization – especially those involving robbery, assault, and homicide – requires a motivated offender and a suitable victim. This age group tends to put itself in the path of motivated offenders most often because it is the very group that is the most socially active. When combined with elements such as alcohol, testosterone, narcotics, courtship, access to firearms (especially in the US), competition, and unemployment, the stage is set for this group to victimize itself. Interestingly, whether or not young males are married or not tends to undermine this relationship. Traditionally marriage alters the social/interactive patterns of young males (and females), removing them from those behavioural patterns that place them in the greatest jeopardy. This said, criminals tend to victimize people who are similar to themselves in terms of age, economic status, and place of residence.

Of course, by the same logic the group least likely to be victimized is, in fact, the elderly. While this may be difficult for some of us to believe, it is a well known fact for criminologists. Canada’s elderly population engage in behavioural patterns that rarely put them into contact with the bulk of motivated offenders. 20 year old males rarely spend their time with 80 year old men and women on a regular basis. In fact, because the elderly are so rarely victimized, criminologists and Statistics Canada are often forced to report victimization rates so small that they cannot be mathematically trusted.

Does this mean that the elderly are never victimized? Of course not. In fact many of us could likely identify an older individual who had been victimized. Often the elderly are privately victimized by their family or become victims of fraud in the consumer market place. Nevertheless, in the aggregate, they remain the least likely to be victimized when compared to all other social groups. This may contradict what popular culture tells us, but then again, our daily sources of such information often seek to entertain us by portraying the elderly as incompetent victims of a cruel and exploitive society.

The larger point here is that certain social groups are more likely to be victimized than others. Certain behavioural patterns place particular kinds of individuals in the path of motivated offenders on a regular basis (such as an active night-time social life). Of course, this is not about blaming a group for their likely victimization. One should not have to change one’s social life because it may bring danger to the forefront. Rather, it is important to understand the entire criminal event, including the victim’s role, if we are to fully understand crime in general. We are not equally exposed to possible criminal victimization. Our 15-24 year old sons are far more likely to suffer than we are. Crime is, therefore, never random.

About Patrick Parnaby
Patrick Parnaby is currently completing his Ph.D. in Sociology at McMaster University in Hamilton. His current research includes Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design and the sociology of deviance. E-mail Patrick at patrick@mycaledon.com

Comments? Questions? Have your say in our Message Boards!