1.Which of the four approaches to crime control do you think would best reduce crime concerns? How does your selected approach reflect the relative and evolutionary nature of crime?
2.Using the concept of Restorative Justice, what four methods could be utilized at municipal, provincial and federal levels to implement restorative justice principles to reduce crime and recidivism?
3.Describe why SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY is the most appropriate method (as discussed in the text) to reduce crime. What are the relative strengths and weaknesses of Social Control theory?
4.Select one group most likely to experience victimization. Then design a policy to reduce victimization for this group. In your paper incorporate a discussion of at least three situational crime prevention techniques. You must also provide recent statistics that indicate your group is vulnerable.
5.According to the latest statistics released by Statistics Canada, crimes are decreasing. Using statistics from Statistics Canada and two other credible academic sources, predict the types of crime and numbers that will be experienced by Canadians within 5 years and then 10 years.
6.Is there a difference in sentencing principles? White collar crimes such as: corporate crime, cyber-crime and organized crime are increasing in Canada. Yet offenders convicted of these crimes seem to receive a lesser punishment than those who commit other types of crimes. Are there different sentencing principles applied by the Canadian Judiciary on convicted offenders who have committed white collar crimes? You must compare the sentencing principles established by Canadian courts to the sentences actually being imposed by judges on offenders.
Diagram Medicinal services and human services strategy has kept on developing throughout the only remaining century. Toward the finish of the nineteenth century because of the headways made in the medicinal and research field, general wellbeing tasks were actualized to battle a portion of the main sources of sickness and to give wellbeing mindfulness and to raise the general soundness of the all inclusive community. Some malady were for all intents and purposes killed. With worry of the general wellbeing and welfare of the country, social insurance projects were reached out into the schools through school medical caretakers. (Fillmore) During the initial segment of the twentieth century, the US saw the foundation of the principal huge restorative insurance agency, the ascent of private medical coverage, and business and trade guild supported human services. (Fillmore) However, it was not until the 1930s-1940s that the national government started to think about the genuine requirement for all natives to have essential medicinal services. Franklin D. Roosevelt, during his 1944 State of the Union Address, set up the political thought that natives of the United States ought to have the principal appropriate to satisfactory social insurance. This political way of thinking been the reason on which administrative medicinal services approach has established upon. Over the past 50 years, government's contribution in medicinal services and in the improvement of human services strategy had expanded because of the fast ascent in social insurance cost and general worry over rising medical problems minorities, and people living in destitution. "Without sufficient human services, nobody can utilize his or her abilities and openings. It is in this way similarly as significant that monetary, racial and social obstructions not hinder great medicinal services for what it's worth to take out those boundaries to decent training and a great job." (Kaiser Health News, 2009) Social insurance Reform Legislation Generally the United States has attempted to abstain from giving all inclusive medicinal services to all natives. Rather, financing medicinal services kept on being connected to work. (Landreanau, 2003) to a limited extent, this shirking has been straightforwardly identified with the overall population's perspective on majority rules system, free enterprise financial matters and a general dread that administration supported all inclusive medicinal services can prompt communism. It has just been during times of incredible monetary and social need that the national government has had the option to effectively execute medicinal services arrangements and projects on a wide range. Discussion over national medical coverage has been seething for over a half of century. 1930-1950s Starting with the vigorously challenged Social Security program of 1935. The Social Security Act gave awards to Maternal and Child wellbeing. As right on time as 1943, recommendations by Senators Wagner and Murray related to Representative Dingell acquainted a bill with give a general extensive medical coverage as a feature of standardized savings. The proposed changes would have given a birth to death social protection for the American open. The proposition did not go during the 1943 administrative session. In 1944, the Social Security Board pushed for an obligatory medical coverage as a feature of the Social Security System. In 1946, even with another official in the White House, support for a national wellbeing system proceeds. In 1946 and 1947, a modified Wagner-Murray-Dingell bill is reintroduced to Congress for a National Health Program. This bill has official help, yet Congress neglected to follow up on the bill. The country keeps on pondering how to manage the expanding number of residents' without social insurance. In 1954, to give impetuses to businesses to give representative social insurance inclusion and with regards to the way of thinking of restricted government intercession into this zone, the Revenue Act of the 1954 was passed. This demonstration gave charge findings to bosses that added to representative wellbeing plans. (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2017) 1960-1970s During the 1960s, the United States human services framework kept on pondering the inquiry about how to give medicinal services inclusion to jobless people, the old, and youngsters. In 1965, the US started to see significant social insurance change. With the section of the Social Security Amendments Act of 1965, Medicare and Medicaid were set up. These projects are still in presence today and have kept on being developed. (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2017) The 1970s brought a period of swelling, high joblessness, and intemperate rising medicinal services costs. These worries were making a developing concern politically, socially, and financially. By and by, policymakers started to advocate for National Health Insurance. In 1973 President Nixon marked the Health Maintenance Organization Act. This bit of enactment was advantageous in light of the fact that it evacuated hindrances that disallowed HMOs at the state level, gave finances to qualified HMOs and ordered businesses who gave worker medical coverage to offer HMO alternatives when conceivable. President Nixon trusted that HMO Act would be a springboard for his Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan. "The national medical coverage charge that I will present the following session of this Congress will enable patients to utilize such protection to join HMO's. Hence, it is especially significant that this show exertion get in progress promptly and expand upon the force which has just been accomplished in this field." (Nixon, 1973) This proposition never observed realization since it was eclipsed by the political embarrassment encompassing his administration and resulting abdication. As the economy kept on declining, policymakers started to concentrate on the need to contain human services cost notwithstanding giving inclusion to uninsured. (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2017) 1980-2000 Every decade keep on growing government's job in social insurance and the arrangements gave to general society. Discussion was regularly warmed among policymakers about the extension of government into social insurance, however administrative projects kept on extending because of worry for the general wellbeing and welfare of people in general. In 1980, the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act was passed. In 1990, the Clinton Administration chose to make National Health Coverage a need. Despite the fact that the proposed Health Security Act of 1993 neglected to pass, by and by the Nation is confronting the inquiries of how to manage rising human services cost, the free market, and the uninsured. Notwithstanding the extension different government supported wellbeing system and government based motivating forces, the quantity of uninsured kept on rising. (Cohen, et.al, 2009) From 1968-1980, for people under age 65, private protection inclusion was 79%. This rate remained generally until the retreat of the 1980s. From 1980 until 2007, the level of people under the age 65 with private inclusion kept on declining at a normal rate of 1% every year. This descending pattern of private, boss supported protection kept on showing national requirement for medicinal services inclusion for all resident. (Cohen, et.al, 2009) As states understood that complete medicinal services change was not going to happen rapidly at the national level, a few states started to put research and assets into structuring far reaching social insurance change at the state level. Massachusetts and Vermont effectively pass enactment in 2006. These plans become a working model for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. Quiet Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, much of the time called "Obamacare" was marked into law March 23, 2010. This progressive, disputable, single bit of enactment extended government's job in human services and ordered an essential degree of medicinal services. It changed the connection between the individual, business, and the government. (Twight, 2009) Prior to this broad bit of enactment, the choice to have or not have medical coverage was an individual decision. It was viewed as a major appropriate to settle on an educated decision. Preceding the section of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, access to social insurance was restricted to those that could most bear the cost of it, in spite of legislative projects, for example, Medicaid and Medicare. One sees how this general bit of enactment was at first supported and upheld by many. The "arrangement lucky opening" was open due to soaring wellbeing cost, restricted access to wellbeing administrations, rising medical issues, expanding premiums, and patient spending on deductibles outpacing compensation. (Altman, 2016) In 2008, 27% of the nonelderly with at least three incessant conditions spend over 10% of their salary on social insurance. In 2010, the United States burned through 2.6 trillion dollars on social insurance. (Henry J Kaiser Foundation, 2012) Following a rough multi year time of expanding administrative contribution in medicinal services and open acknowledgment through projects, for example, Medicaid, Medicare, Veteran Health Affairs (VA), a huge part of society appeared to be anxious to see this sort of enactment become a reality. Defenders of a national social insurance framework had the option to earn the help of the greater part in the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch and with inventive showcasing and "politicking" guaranteed that the bill progressed toward becoming law. Following 10 years the time has come to assess the strategy. There are a few primary segments to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. To start with, it forbids insurance agencies from denying inclusion for people with previous conditions and inclusion can't be disavowed aside from rates including misrepresentation. Second, each state is required to set up a Health Benefit Exchange to enable organizations and people to buy protection and states are required to build up at least one reinsurance element to extend accessible inclusion. Third, people must buy fundamental medical coverage or bring about a fine. Fourth, managers with fifty or>GET ANSWER