Your Perfect Assignment is Just a Click Away

Starting at $8.00 per Page

100% Original, Plagiarism Free, Customized to Your instructions!


CJUS 610 Liberty University Victimization Surveys Discussion

CJUS 610 Liberty University Victimization Surveys Discussion

Question Description

please respond to the following discussion question with 250 EACH, 1 reference EACH AND a biblical viewpoint EACH!

This is the original post. You DO NOT have to respond to the original post. Only respond to the two classmates: After reading Chapter 5 of the Mosher textbook, the article entitled “Internet Development, Censorship, and Cyber Crimes in China” by Liang and Lu, and the article entitled “‘Snitches End Up in Ditches’ and Other Cautionary Tales” by Morris, discuss the following prompts:

  • Although presented differently, how do the research articles affect the development of criminal justice public policy?
  • As a criminal justice leader, does the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) give you a reason for concern? How/Why?
  • What are the advantages of the NCVS versus the Uniform Crime Report (UCR)/National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) data?
  • As a criminal justice leader or school safety leader, does the “‘Snitches End Up in Ditches’ and Other Cautionary Tales” article cause you to act? In what way?

1) Emanuel-According to the textbook (Mosher, 2011), victimization surveys elicit information about crimes that citizens report to the police and those they do not. Therefore, victimization surveys provide us with further information regarding the dark figures of crime. These surveys have also had a profound effect on theories of crime causation. “Routine activity, opportunity, and even rational choice theory have flourished in the discipline of criminology in recent years in part because of the availability of victim survey data” (Mosher, 2011).

In the article “Snitches End Up in Ditches” and Other Cautionary Tales, evidence suggests that “stop snitching” has broadened into a more general “street code” (Anderson 1999; Rosenfeld, Jacobs, and Wright 2003), which criticizes any cooperation with police or other authorities. Some might adhere to the “no snitching” precept from simple fear of retaliation, and some might genuinely believe that cooperating with police creates more harm than good. Regardless, “the newest incarnation of this longstanding ethos among criminals has trickled out into larger segments of society, including otherwise law-abiding people (Kahn 2007)” (Morris, n.d.). Therefore, data must be collected from individuals but at the same time, its members could obscure it due to the pact they make through their network. Despite the fact they are doing something wrong, they rather protect the people next to them, giving them a sense of accomplishment when in fact, they become guilty by association.

Additionally, interviewees recounted stories of police bias, invasive surveillance, and brutality. In logical extension, these interviewees reported acute distrust of police and no desire to aid law enforcement. Even if interviewees stated that they themselves were victimized, they still disavowed seeking police help. These offenders thus adhered to a “code of the street” (Anderson 1999) in which “respect, security, and status come only to those with the proven ability to take care of their own business” (Rosenfeld et al. 2003: 298). These offenders emphasized resolving their own conflicts, without interference from external sources of authority” (Morris, n.d.).

As a criminal justice leader, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) gives me a reason for concern due to unconscious bias from both sides and the accuracy/validity of the information collected. You can see for different reasons people hold information or censor it due to personal or federal regulations, such as in China. “China’s Internet control represents an “imperfect control,” aiming at keeping the vast majority from sensitive materials and preventing the nonconforming small minority from mounting a real challenge (Hartford, 2000)” (Liang, 2010). These sorts of regulations make people operate in the dark and in fear for their government; however, people are smart and will always find a way around it.

Some of the advantages of the NCVS provide data on reported and unreported crimes, such as rape, which are not reported to the police. The second advantage of NCVS data is that they offer a wide range of criminal victimization variables, including information about crime victims such as their age, gender, race, Hispanic ethnic origin, marital status, income, and educational level. Moreover, a criminal offender’s gender, race, approximate age, drug/alcohol use, victim-offender relationship, and the crime context like the time and place of occurrence, use of weapons, nature of the injury, and economic consequences. The third advantage of NCVS data is the high response rates. UCR also has its advantages. Some of its benefits begin with the fact that its oldest reporting system currently available in the country. It also provides a resource that reviews hate crime statistics in the United States, and it is highly accessible by everyone; it collects information about specific crimes in several different categories and places the data into a usable format.

Finally, the information presented in Snitches End Up in Ditches’ and Other Cautionary Tales article causes a reaction, not an action, to the data collected. The article suggests that Bourdieu’s notion of habitus helps explain the problem of anti-snitching. “Habitus can capture the fact that “stop snitching” has indeed become codified in certain communities. However, because of the flexibility and experiential basis of habitus, it does not imply that anti-snitching is rooted in torpid oppositional values” (Morris, n.d.). The article suggests it’s not a function of race, urban location, or criminal activity necessarily, but rather a collective response to institutional marginalization, which may be found within a number of disadvantaged communities. But this seems to excuse the fact that their actions clearly define them in that environment. So how can these be dismissed exactly? The only rationale I can give to maybe make some sense of these results is that the previous oppression had suppressed and marginalized the population to operate in fear. Yet, they are working in the dark to commit crimes and cover for one another. Despite previous experiences, the law doesn’t consider the past it weighs your actions in conjunction with the immediate now and the future. Are you doing what’s right as a law-abiding citizen, or are you doing what you want against the law…?

A Biblical perspective on the issue is pretty simple. Proverbs 10:18 says, “He who conceals hatred has lying lips, And he who spreads slander is a fool” (Biblica, 2021). Isaiah 29:15 also goes on to say that “Woe to those who deeply hide their plans from the Lord, And whose deeds are done in a dark place, And they say, “Who sees us?” or “Who knows us?” (Biblica, 2021). So eventually, what you hide will come to light, and there will be repercussions for it. Something that is very excusable with this new culture reform wave we see erasing our very own morals and values in society today.


Bachman, R., & Schutt, R. K. (2008). Fundamentals of research in criminology and criminal justice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Biblica, (2021). The holy bible. NIV. colorado springs, CO. Retrieved January 20, 2021, from

Liang, B. (2010). Internet Development, Censorship, and Cyber Crimes in China2. Retrieved January 23, 2021, from

Morris, E. (n.d.). “Snitches End Up in Ditches” and Other Cautionary Tales. Retrieved January 23, 2021, from

Mosher, C. J., Miethe, T. D., & Hart, T. C. (2011). The mismeasure of crime. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.

2) Sierra- Both articles present challenges in the development in criminal justice public policy. What is acceptable? What is going to far in law? As criminal justice practitioners we want to be proactive. As a criminal justice leader the NCVS does give me concern because as previously discussed it varies in reports compared to the UCS in that there are un-reported crimes. Why are these crimes not being reported? Could it be out of fear? Such as being considered “a snitch.” The NCVS gives an advantage over the UCR and NIBRS to see previously unreported crime and get a comparison to be more proactive in the future. As a criminal justice leader or a school safety leader “Snitches end up in ditches and other cautionary tales” is concerning and should cause anyone to act. We should be proactive to youth to prevent adult offending. Many of these youth could be gang related. The Pittsburgh youth study found that 52 to 57 percent of juvenile delinquents continue to offend up to age 25 (NIJ, 2014). Next looking at censorship, we should consider this as well because it can impact our youth. However, what amount of censorship is too much censorship? In a sweeping victory for free speech rights in cyberspace the Supreme Court struct down the Communications Decency Act in Reno vs. ACLU in June 1997 (ACLU, 2021.) One state Virginia, proposed a bill blocking software at state-funded libraries for communicating online material that is harmful to minors, resulting in criminal penalties. This form of censorship would impact cyber bullying and help prevent it. Romans 7:12 says, “So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” When we propose law we should put our trust in God and ensure that our hearts are in the right place and that it’s for the good of the people.


ACLU (2021) Online censorship in the states. Retrieved from…

NIJ (2014) From juvenile delinquency to young adult offending. Retrieved from…

"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."

Order Solution Now

Our Service Charter

1. Professional & Expert Writers: Eminence Papers only hires the best. Our writers are specially selected and recruited, after which they undergo further training to perfect their skills for specialization purposes. Moreover, our writers are holders of masters and Ph.D. degrees. They have impressive academic records, besides being native English speakers.

2. Top Quality Papers: Our customers are always guaranteed of papers that exceed their expectations. All our writers have +5 years of experience. This implies that all papers are written by individuals who are experts in their fields. In addition, the quality team reviews all the papers before sending them to the customers.

3. Plagiarism-Free Papers: All papers provided by Eminence Papers are written from scratch. Appropriate referencing and citation of key information are followed. Plagiarism checkers are used by the Quality assurance team and our editors just to double-check that there are no instances of plagiarism.

4. Timely Delivery: Time wasted is equivalent to a failed dedication and commitment. Eminence Papers are known for the timely delivery of any pending customer orders. Customers are well informed of the progress of their papers to ensure they keep track of what the writer is providing before the final draft is sent for grading.

5. Affordable Prices: Our prices are fairly structured to fit in all groups. Any customer willing to place their assignments with us can do so at very affordable prices. In addition, our customers enjoy regular discounts and bonuses.

6. 24/7 Customer Support: At Eminence Papers, we have put in place a team of experts who answer all customer inquiries promptly. The best part is the ever-availability of the team. Customers can make inquiries anytime.