NCJ Number
85263
Journal
Victimology Volume: 5 Issue: 2-4 Dated: (1980) Pages: 161-174
Date Published
1982
Length
14 pages
Annotation
There are conflicting images of auto theft as a 'happy crime' and as a serious problem because some victims gain while others lose when their cars are stolen. A typology of the direct or immediate victims clarifies the degree of responsibility, if any, the victim shares with the offender for the crime.
Abstract
Current estimates of the proportions of the six types of motorist victims reveal that the majority cannot be blamed for their losses whether or not they are totally, largely, or partly innocent or are substantially, largely, or fully responsible. Some of the fault lies with the secondary or indirect victims -the automobile manufacturers, the insurance companies, and the salvage industry -- as well as with the amateur and professional thieves, the police, and the legal system. The victimological perspective can contribute to the formulation of sound crime prevention strategies by transcending any preoccupation with the criminal-victim relationship and going beyond blaming the immediate victims. The high profit, low risk environment within which thieves operate can be altered by regulating the actions of the secondary victims who share complicity with the offenders, the usually cautious but sometimes careless motorists, and the basically honest but occasionally fraudulent car owners. Twenty-nine references are supplied. (Author abstract modified)