Motor Vehicle Theft Crime

Between 1993 to 2015, there has been a steady decline in property crime rates from a reported rate of 351.8 per 1,000 households to 110.7 per 1,000 households. (Truman & Morgan, 2016). This significant decline may have to deal with the implementation of different programs in an effort to stop property crime. Even though property crime rate is dropping, it is still costly to society as a whole, especially motor vehicle theft. Studying and understanding motor vehicle theft is essential in reducing the crime rate and calculating costs of the crime on society. According to McCollister, French & Fang (2010), motor vehicle theft costs society approximately $10,772 with estimated victim costs, criminal justice costs, such as legal costs, and crime …show more content…
Offenders who typically commit temporary auto theft for joyriding or transportation, are usually younger males, who do not target a specific vehicle, while offenders who commit permanent auto theft, tend to be professionals and search for a specific target (Block & Fujita, 2013). A study done by Block & Fujita (2013) helped determine the patterns of offenders around temporary and permanent thefts. They collected data on 9,417 motor vehicle thefts over a two year period in Newark, New Jersey, which is known for having a high theft rate, and then separated the incidents into whether or not the vehicles were recovered, so 7,502 vehicles were recovered and considered temporary motor vehicle theft (MVT), and 1,915 were never recovered and considered permanent MVT (Block & Fujita, 2013). The researchers then analyzed the circumstances around the crime. For example, they separated the MVTs into 4 day and 14 day categories to attempt to figure out the time between different thefts (Block & Fujita, 2013). After separating by days, the researchers also looked at the distance between each auto theft. After comparing all the data, the researchers realized that whenever there is any kind of motor vehicle theft, there is a strong likelihood of there being another theft in the exact same location, this is called repeat victimization (Block & Fujita, 2013). However, they found professionals tend to commit many MVT in same exact area at the same time then move on to a new area to plan a new offense, whereas amateur thieves do not plan and tend to commit the auto theft in one certain area repeatedly over time (Block & Fujita, 2013). Since it is known that amateurs tend to commit crime in one selective area, this helps police stay proactive in realizing that the temporary/amaterur offenders usually live in the area they commit the crime (Suresh & Tewksbury, 2013). These results are significant, in