Crime Scene Report Example Pdf: Fill & Download for Free

This answer may contain sensitive images. Click on an image to unblur it.Cambridge University Press › booksWeb resultsInstrumental and Expressive Motives in Homicide Situations (Chapter ...Instrumental crimes are those conducted for explicit, future goals (such as to acquire money or improve one's social position), whereas ...People also askWhat is instrumental homicide?Instrumental crimes are those conducted for explicit, future goals (such as to acquire money or improve one's social position), whereas expressive offenses are often unplanned acts of anger, rage, or frustration (see Block 1976; Block and Christakos 1995; Block and Zimring 1973; Decker 1993; 1996; Siegel 1998).Cambridge University Press › booksInstrumental and Expressive Motives in Homicide Situations (Chapter ...More resultsWhat is an instrumental crime?What is the difference between expressive and instrumental violence?What are the 4 types of homicide?What is a chronic offender?What is institutional robbery?FeedbackQuizlet › definitions-flash-cardsWeb resultsDefinitions You'll Remember | QuizletCriminal homicide. the unlawful killing of another human being ... why someone kills someone else. Instrumental homicide. goal driven.Springer › link › content › pdfExploring the Social Context of Instrumental and Expressive ...by TD Miethe1999Cited by 148Related articlesInstrumental and expressive homicides are found to have both common and unique social contexts, but the vast majority of homicide ...21 pages·131 KBhttps://www.ncjrs.gov › abstractExploring the Social Context of Instrumental and Expressive ...by TD Miethe1999Cited by 148Related articlesQualitative comparative analysis was used to analyze data from the Supplementary Homicide Reports of the Uniform Crime Reporting ...journals.sagepub.com › doi › pdfExamining the Instrumental–Expressive Continuum of ...by KA Fox2014Cited by 29Related articlesinstrumental–expressive homicide continuum that includes offensive- ... stranger homicides were considered instrumental (Riedel, 1987).People also search forInstrumental homicide definitionInstrumental crimeExpressive or instrumental crimeExpressive crimesjournals.sagepub.com › doi › pdfWeb resultsThe Nature of Instrumentality and Expressiveness of Homicide ...by S Adjorlolo2017Cited by 36Related articlesThe present study examines the instrumental/ expressive offen- der typology developed based on the analyses of homicide crime scene ...MDPI › pdfPDFExpressiveness and Instrumentality of Crime Scene Behavior ... - MDPIby MM Pecino-Latorre2019Cited by 1Related articlesNov 15, 2019 — Keywords: homicide; instrumental homicide; expressive homicide; delinquent; criminal profiling; crime scene behavior. 1.Videos4:06Logic - Homicide (Official Instrumental)YouTube · Solid-Snake4444May 6, 20193:18Logic ft. Eminem - Homicide (INSTRUMENTAL) *reprod*YouTube · Mizzy Mauri the ProducerMay 2, 20192:311080p Logic/Eminem - Homicide ORIGINAL INSTRUMENTAL ...YouTube · DJ STACKTRACEJun 30, 2019More videosFeedbackResearchGate › publication › 28032...Web results(PDF) The Nature of Instrumentality and Expressiveness of Homicide ...Oct 10, 2020 — The validity of the instrumental/expressive dichotomy of homicide offenders have been supported by various studies that ...ResearchGate › figure › Instrum...Instrumental and expressive behaviours in serial homicide ...The first known three offences in each series of 69 US serial homicides committed by 23 offenders, were examined and the ...More results from www.researchgate.netRelated searchesExpressive vs instrumental violenceExpressive or instrumental crime definitionWhat is the difference between instrumental and expressive crimesExpressive crime meaningExpressive motive homicideco-offendingInstrumental crimes examplesPrimary homicidePage NavigationMoreFooter LinksMcCrory Trace, Nashville, TN - From your device - Learn moreTerms

No we don’t.This particular question is worded in a way, that makes the answer very complicated. So please bear with me on this.The wording of the question at the time of the answer:Do gun owners agree that police instead of armed citizens stop a higher percentage of mass shootings?On the surface, the answer to this question could be ‘yes’. But the question is predisposed to two errors in thought that need to be addressed. But first, I’d like to cover the raw data.Raw Data TL;DR: Police intervention accounts for 28.1% of final shooter interactions, armed non-police civilians account for 3.1%Final Response TL;DR: Non-police Civilians are nearly twice as likely to stop a mass shooting as police, and when civilians get involved there are fewer casualties than when police do.Raw data From the FBI [1]:The majority of the 160 incidents (90 [56.3%]) ended on the shooter’s initiative— sometimes when the shooter committed suicide or stopped shooting, and other times when the shooter fled the scene. There were at least 25 incidents where the shooter fled the scene before police arrived.In 4 additional incidents, at least 5 shooters fled the scene and were still at large at the time the study results were released. In other incidents, it was a combination of actions by citizens and/or law enforcement that ended the shootings.In at least 65 (40.6%) of the 160 incidents, citizen engagement or the shooter committing suicide ended the shooting at the scene before law enforcement arrived. Of those:■ In 37 incidents (23.1%), the shooter committed suicide at the scene before police arrived.■ In 21 incidents (13.1%), the situation ended after unarmed citizens safely and successfully restrained the shooter. In 2 of those incidents,24 3 off-duty law enforcement officers were present and assisted.■ Of note, 11 of the incidents involved unarmed principals, teachers, other school staff and students who confronted shooters to end the threat (9 of those shooters were students).■ In 5 incidents (3.1%), the shooting ended after armed individuals who were not law enforcement personnel exchanged gunfire with the shooters. In these incidents, 3 shooters were killed, 1 was wounded, and 1 committed suicide.■ The individuals involved in these shootings included a citizen with a valid firearms permit and armed security guards at a church, an airline counter, a federally managed museum, and a school board meeting.25■ In 2 incidents (1.3%), 2 armed, off-duty police officers engaged the shooters, resulting in the death of the shooters. In 1 of those incidents, the off-duty officer assisted a responding officer to end the threat.26Even when law enforcement arrived quickly, many times the shooter still chose to end his life. In 17 (10.6%) of the 160 incidents, the shooter committed suicide at the scene after law enforcement arrived but before officers could act.In 45 (28.1%) of the 160 incidents, law enforcement and the shooter exchanged gunfire. Of those 45 incidents, the shooter was killed at the scene in 21, killed at another location in 4, wounded in 9, committed suicide in 9, and surrendered in 2.So it appears on the surface, that this question is based on facts. And looking at the numbers as presented here one certainly can not argue with this claim.I mentioned there are two errors in thinking with this situation. These are location, and effectiveness.Let’s talk about effectiveness first.An independent study done of attempted mass shootings showed something that was rather interesting. When armed citizens engaged the shooter, on average the number of casualties was less than 3.[2] This means it fails to be an active shooter situation as defined by the FBI for the purpose of their report.So there are cases, not being counted by the FBI, in which a shooter was stopped before he could reach the number of casualties to be counted in this study. [1] So right off we start with an important point. Armed, and unarmed, citizens make a huge impact. While police reactions do not.According to the audit, police response has an average of over 14 casualties per incident. Compare to the number above and we see that even if the premise of the question is accurate, non-police civilians using their weapons reduces the number of impacted lives by a factor of 3.What about location?Let me start off with this, there is a huge debate on what defines both the terms ‘Mass shooting’ and ‘Gun Free Zone’. Everytown considers familicide a mass shooting and Washington Post thinks, for example, that the White House isn’t a ‘Gun-Free Zone’. But unless you’re with the Secret Service, or approved personnel, I’d warn against treating it like it isn’t. So, for the purpose of this response I am using Lott’s definition of ‘Gun-Free Zone’: Any place where a member of the general public can not carry a gun. This would include most military bases, as only MPs are allowed to carry on a daily basis. I think this is a reasonable definition if we are trying to determine the effectiveness of non-police civilians in stopping a mass shooting. For the same reason I am only considering mass shootings that happen in public locations. If you disagree with these definitions, you convince me that I am wrong in the comments with logical arguments.Now using that definition. What can we say about locations?Between 2009 and 2016 only 10% of mass shootings have happened in an area that is not a “Gun-Free Zone.”*Notice that 3.1% of shootings were stopped by armed civilians it is logical to assume that these all happened in the areas that people were allowed to carry their own private weapons in, in other words not in the “Gun Free Zones”That leaves 6.9% of shootings to absorb all the other categories. These are most likely evenly, or at least semi-evenly, distributed among the responses. So 3.88% were ended by the shooter themselves. 1.5% saw the shooter commit suicide before the arrival of police.That means that police were effective in approximately 1.6% of cases, which happened where both civilians and police are allowed to carry their weapons. As such civilians, allowed to carry, are almost twice as likely to stop the shooting than police, and when they do, there will be fewer casualties as a result.[1] Active Shooter Resources Link is to the website where you will find the data, direct link was to the PDF download.[2] Auditing Shooting Rampage Statistics*Everytown’s statistics are blatantly false, they pad the incidents with things that are not mass shootings, by redefining the term to include things that generally aren’t included in the data set. Everytown includes shootings during other crimes, familicide, and other forms of non-public shootings. For the determination of stopping ‘mass shootings’ one can not reasonably include these in the data set.

It depends on which society and which working life enclaves are involved.People are inherently greedy. It is part of our nature, an inborn instinct that makes our competitive. Loyalty is commonly regarded as a virtue, a lost virtue in an increasingly individualized world.Needless to say, whenever money is involved, people will be motivated to work hard competitively. Today’s society needs this trait to stimulate people’s hardworking spirits and creativity to create new wealth.Today’s market economy provides a fair competition environment for people to gain as much as they can. No customer would be loyal to a company with a brand without a reason when they find they could have a better choice. Buying a similar quality product with a lower price from another company is very attractive to them. That is the competition of the free market. In market territory, greed truly overrides loyalty.However, in some working life enclaves, loyalty is institutionally demanded and enforced such as the military environment and the law enforcement force or police force. Loyalty and camaraderie is critical for ensuring the law enforcement officers to ignore danger and assist their colleagues regardless of the peril. They must be loyal to rely on each other for their safety in the unsafe environment. Loyalty and teamwork in all branches of law enforcement are critical in preventing crime, investigating crime, and guarding prisoners. Greedy behaviors such as taking bribes, stealing at a crime scene , and taking money from a wallet were described as very serious. It is the loyalty that made some officers not report them to a supervisor. Police officers who breach loyalty to report minor ethical violations may be seen to damage the overall team or structure of a law enforcement agency (2). There, loyalty overrides greedy.As a form of greedy, police corruption is very prevalent and one of the main social problems in some countries where the legal system is imperfect and social treasure is not rich enough such as China, Russia etc. It could be soliciting or accepting bribes in exchange for not reporting organized drug or prostitution rings or other illegal activities and violations of law. It could also be receiving free drinks, meals, and other gratuities or stealing from an arrest and crime victims or corpses. There, whether loyalty overrides greedy should be questioned.In academic institutions, I personally think that loyalty exceeds greedy. Albert Einstein is an example. He said “I refuse to make money out of my science. .... I do not care for money.” One of my teachers in University of Calgary said that he could go to industry to make more money than being a professor in university. He was loyal to his teaching career since he loved teaching. When people do their favorite things, they would not easily be attracted by the desire to get more money stuff. For scientists who dedicate their life to science, loyalty would override greedy. They could be greedy to get more funding, get more graduate students, publish more paper and make more progress in scientific research.Political corruption means government officials and politicians are greedy. They use various greedy methods for illegitimate private gain, such as bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, parochialism, patronage, influence peddling, graft, and embezzlement. Political corruption is very prevalent in China and president Xi has been dealing this issue very seriously since he got the power. In China, there is only one communist party and people withing the party and outside the part have to be loyal to to president Xi. They have no choice. Therefore, greedy is a main issue in China. But for England with both labour party and parliamentary party, the collective interest of government and the party should supersede personal preferences or interests.Jeremy Corbyn the leader of the Labour Party in England is openly at war with his parliamentary party and the result is Labour is fast losing the support of the electorate. (4)Generally speaking, loyalty overrides greedy in a society having a good order with relatively perfect law enforcement systems. And for people with high moral standards, good and right greedy goes along with the loyalty to go forward.For those countries or societies who are growing fast economically and are centralized in power, greedy overrides loyalty for sure.Sources:(PDF) The problem of loyalty in greedy institutionsEthics in Law EnforcementPolice corruption - WikipediaPolitical corruption - WikipediaLoyalty and politics - Making Progress | The Star Online 2017