Evren Atish
Faculty of Science and Literature, Department of Geography, Kastamonu University, Kastamonu, Turkey (E-mail: [email protected])
A Geographical investigation of the crimes against property in the «Araç» (Kastamonu/Turkey) district center in terms of crime geography
Abstract. The different social values and cultural lives of human beings have caused the phenomenon of crime to differ between societies. The concept of crime has always been regarded as an important problem in everyday and social life that has become complicated. It is argued that in the emergence of crime, it is mostly the psychological and sociological factors that are effective.
However, in addition to the various geographical features of the place where the crime occurs, the effect of the socio-economic characteristics that the people living in the particular place interact with the environment should not be overlooked either. As a matter of fact, these factors are some of the factors that impact the number and type of crime in any given place.
Just as a crime occurs in a geographic location as a result of various variables, various preventive factors should come together in an attempt to reduce the number of the crime and prevent it from being committed in that place. In fact, perceiving crime as a duty of law enforcement officers and seeking solutions only in this way is a method that is not realistic. In order to prevent crime, which is a social event, many disciplines need to work together and the results of these studies should be evaluated and implemented by the decision makers.
In this study, the spatial and temporal distribution of crimes against property, the general characteristics of crimes against property, the numerical and proportional distribution of crimes against property and the relationship between the geographic features affecting it and the crimes against property were investigated and revealed in the Araç District Center of the Kastamonu province within a period of three years (2016-2018). As a result of these data obtained in the study, the reasons for the crimes committed against the property in the Araç District Center, which was the area of the investigation were examined and evaluated, and based on the findings, some suggestions were made in order in an attempt to prevent the crimes and reduce their numbers.
Keywords: Crime and geography, Spatial distribution of crime, Crimes against property, Araç District
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32523/2616-6771-2020-132-3-102-123 1. Introduction. The word ‘suç’ (crime) is used in exchange of the Arabic word ‘cürüm’ and its plural ‘ceraim’ (crimes). The criminal is called “mücrim” (criminal). The concept of Criminology, which deals with crimes as well as the deviant behavior and which is also a discipline of crime science, has passed down from the Arabic root “cürüm” (crime) to English as “crime”.
According to the definition made by the International Criminology Congress in the Tokyo meeting, crime is “a boundary mark drawn against obedience; it includes all kinds of verbal and verbal behaviors committed with the intent of harming another” (Fındıklı: 2011). Nevertheless, it is
also stated that crime is a multi-causal and complex phenomenon. The fact that this phenomenon of crime cannot be explained with a single factor has led to the emergence of many theories from various disciplines (İçliGüncen: 2011).
Even though the criminological studies included spatial variables until the 19thcentury, the professional geographers were not included in these studies until the 1970s, when the behavioral dimension of criminality began to be studied more comprehensively (Herbert: 1982). However, in the human geography discipline, individual-society-space and crime phenomena (including the murders) cover a wide range and attract the attention of multidimensional researches.One of these research areas is the behavioral geography. Examining the perceptions, attitudes towards any environment that an individual knows, senses or sees, and the impressions / images and understanding (s) built by that individual in his/her mind as a pattern of all these with various approaches and methods are included within the relevant field of behavioral geography, hence human geography (Özgen, Bindak.
: 2017).
In addition to the scientific studies carried out by many branches of science on crime, geography also makes important contributions to this field under the name of crime geography. In fact, it is not possible to consider the criminal incidents independent from the characteristics of the population and the geography, that is, the place we live in. Geography, which achieves certain results by synthesizing the connection between the natural conditions and human factors, which have a great impact on our lives, of the causes and consequences of the distribution of criminal events in the space, is also of great importance in terms of crime geography.
Crime is not a new phenomenon. It is a universal and general event that has always existed in varying degrees in every society and will continue to exist (Uzun, Aliağaoğlu: 2009). The definition of crime varies according to the disciplines related to crime and criminality (Aliağaoğlu, Alaeddinoğlu:
2005). As a matter of fact, the demographic characteristics of societies have a significant effect on the criminal behavior (South, Messner: 2000). Nonetheless, the phenomenon of crime takes place in a space and process where various factors are effective depending on the human and physical characteristics of an environment. Due to this feature, it is vital to identify the spatial and temporal distribution characteristics of crimes in terms of the measures to be taken (Aksak, Çalışkan: 2010).
Geography, which is an important discipline, also considers theincidents in terms of spatial differentiation (Özgüç, Tümertekin: 2000). For this reason, crimes committed against property and persons occurring in the space show different distributions depending on the location (Gürbüz, Karabulut: 2007).
Indeed, the socio-economic characteristics of societies are reflected in the space. The differences in economic terms in geographical space can cause spatial differences, and therefore, different distribution in crime and space as well. Similarly, the cultural characteristics of societies also affect the perception of the people living in that place to the concept of crime. The fact that an incident that is considered a crime in one society does not even create a perception of crime in another society affects the distribution and differentiation of the crime type in the space. This distinct difference has become more pronounced in urban settlements, that is, in the spaces with urban identity compared to rural areas.
In this day and age, the crime phenomenon, which affects social structures with its various types, requires more and more efforts in order to protect the social system and individuals. The crime phenomenon is not only the main problem of underdeveloped or developing countries; it has become one of the important problems of countries with developed industries, even those that are called superpowers (Yıldırım: 2014). American Chief of Police and Police Counsel August Wollmer said,
“I’ve spent my life for law enforcement. This approach did not solve the problem, and will not solve it in the future either unless it is supported by preventive measures (Seyhan, Eryılmaz: 2014)”.
Both fear of crime and crime phenomenon are more common in cities and urban societies (Carvalho, Levis: 2003). As a matter of fact, one of the most important problems experienced in urban areas (cities) compared to the rural areas is the crimes. The biggest part of these crimes in cities is the crimes
against property (Uğur: 2013). In the present day, the cities of both industrialized and developing countries are faced with urban problems such as crime (Karakaş: 2006).
The types of crimes committed against property may differ in spatial terms, depending on the characteristics of the population. The education level of the suspects who have committed the crime compared to other crime types shows a different situation in terms of crimes committed against their properties. Indeed, it is commonly known that the number of crimes decreases in places where the education level is high. However, aggravated fraud or theft, designing and acting out the crimes against property through informatics or cybercrime, often requires superior engineering knowledge and intelligence. It is known that such crimes are mostly carried out in big metropolises reaching every point of countries or the world and aggravated fraud is committed.
2. Purpose, Data and Method. In this study, which investigates the crimes against property between 2016 and 2018 in the AraçDistrict Center of Kastamonu province, we attempted to identifythe types of crimes and the relationship between the place and the demographic, socio-economic characteristics and the distribution and connection of crime. Araç District Center of the Kastamonu province wasselected as the study area. The reason is that the fact that the district in question is on the Zonguldak-Karabük-Kastamonu transportation corridor and that the heterogeneous of the population with a certain ethnic structure in certain places in the district center have clustered here and the effect of this situation was significanton crime.
In this study, based on the group studied, a quantitative research method based on making generalized inferences about the social environment (universe) to which that group belonged (Öztürk, 2014: 69) was adopted. In the study, the survey approach, one of the quantitative research data collection models, was used. Simple random sampling was used in the questionnaires and we tried to reach the desired number of people from the universe. A questionnaire form covering the reasons for the occurrence of the crime, the spatial distribution and what could be done to reduce the number of crimes was prepared by the experts for the people living in the Araç District Center.
After obtaining an expert opinion on the questionnaire items, questionnaires were applied to the people selected from different days, hours and localities and the findings obtained from them were reflected in the study. While applying the questionnaire, we tried to provide maximum variety. As a result of these applications, evaluations about the distribution of the crime in the space, its causes and consequences were included.
The crime statistics and other data used in the study were obtained from the statistical data obtained from the official institutions of the Araç District, and from the surveys and interviews conducted with the local people. Moreover, field studies were conducted through non-participant observation. The other data used in the study were obtained from the Araç Municipality, District National Education Directorate and STI (Turkish Statistical Institute). Data showing the status of the neighborhoods (boundaries of the neighborhoods, their public areas, the number of buildings and ongoing constructions in the neighborhoods and the number of floors of these constructions, the city development plan, the days when the city was established and their location, etc.) were obtained from the Araç Municipality. The population statistics of 2019 (population and educational status of the population on the basis of neighborhoods) were obtained from the STI (Turkish Statistical Institute).
Along with crime statistics, it is necessary to know the distribution of the crime in the same year and the socio-economic characteristics of the place where it belongs. Therefore, it would be better to interpret the distribution of the crime in space with different variables. The crime statistics obtained from the official institutions were the raw data. In order to make them geographically usable, the type of crime was classified annually according to hour and month parameters, based on the neighborhoods where the crime was committed.
The questionnaire form was prepared considering the classified statistical data. At the end of all these processes, the findings of the study were determined in line with the data obtained, and the cause-effect relationships between these findings were explained, the distribution of the crimes committed in the research field was emphasized, and their distribution was interpreted and the causes and consequences of this distribution were examined.
3. Location of the Study Area. The Araçdistrict, which is the study area, is located in the Western Black Sea Part of the Black Sea Region. Araç, a district of the Kastamonu province, is located in the west of Kastamonu Central District and has an important position since it borders with Karabük on the west and Çankırı on the south. It is largely adjacent to Daday (Kastamonu) district from the north of Araç District. It is surrounded by Kastamonu Central District and İhsangazi (Kastamonu) from the east. The Araç district center, located on the Zonguldak-Kastamonu-Karabük highway, is located in the northern part of the Araç Stream (Map 1).
Map 1. Location Map of the Study Area damage to property
Type of Crime Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Housebreaking 7 6 1 5 9 2 30 20.5
Workplace Burglary 1 2 0 6 3 2 14 9,5
Explicit Burglary 8 3 0 10 5 2 28 19,1
Extortion(Looting) 4 0 0 2 0 1 7 4,7
Damage to Property 10 5 0 15 10 2 42 28,7
Auto Theft 0 0 0 3 1 0 4 2,7
Auto Breaking 0 0 0 3 1 0 4 2,7
Fraud 3 1 0 7 4 2 17 11,6
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Graph 1: Proportional Distribution of Crimes Committed against Property in the Araç District Center
The crimes against property were mostly committed in the Yeni Neighborhood (51). This neighborhood was followed by the Yeşil (33) and Çay Neighborhoods (33). MesudiyeNeighborhood (1) was the place where the crimes committed against property were the least committed during the research period of 2016-2018 in the AraçDistrict Center (Map: 2).
Map 2. Distribution of Crimes against Property in the AraçDistrict Center by Neighborhoods
Basically, two main factors were effective in the high rate of crimes against property in the Yeni Neighborhood. The first of these was that the most important highway that connected the cities of Zonguldak-Karabük-Kastamonu and even connected a significant part of the Western Black Sea Region to the Middle and Eastern Black Sea, passed through theYeni Neighborhood, which constituted a large part of the District Center.While this main road is in the form of an extremely modern and divided highway in the areas outside the district center, the traffic capacity is insufficient since it falls into one lane in the district center. Nonetheless, as a result of the occupation of the sidewalks by the exhibition products of commercial business areas in the section passing through the Yeni Neighborhood, people walking on the road instead of the pavement and the roadway narrowing in a single lane as a result of the commercial business owners and those who come for daily shopping park their cars in one row is an important problem. It is because the mentioned negativities in the section of this highway passing through YeniNeighborhood, the vehicles hitting people as well as causing traffic accidents with material damage causes crime against the person and property.
Photograph 1. A View from the YeniNeighborhoodwhere Crimes against Property are Most Common
When the ring road, which is currently under construction, is fully completed, the fact that a significant part of the traffic is directed to this ring road so that it does not affect the commercial life of the district, and that the sidewalks are arranged so that people can use them, and moving the intercity terminal out of the city, which is located in the busiest part of the district center, will lead to a decrease in crimes against negligent injury and especially against property caused by traffic accidents (Photo 1).On the other hand, MesudiyeNeighborhoodwith the lowest population and the fact the commercial workplaces were almost nonexistent caused the district center to be the neighborhood with few crimes against property.
In the temporal distribution of the crimes committed against the property in the Araç District Center, it is seen that most of the crimes were committed in May (24), April (22) and December (18).
In the seasonal variations, for instance when the season turns to spring, people spend more time outdoors. Workplace burglary crimes are experienced due to the crowd of people being formed outdoors in this time period. Similarly, crimes of damage to property can occur as a result of the aggression that arises in cases where human interaction is excessive. The reason why the crime is committed excessively in the transition to the winter season, for example in December, is that the isolated environment created by the lack of people in the streets in the winter months, that is, the decrease in social control, provides an opportunity for the crime of theft. (Chart 2)
Number of Crimes: January February March April May June July August September October November December
Chart 2. Monthly Distribution of Crimes Committed against Property in the Araç District Center When the daily distribution of crimes committed against property in the study area is concerned, there was a fluctuation from the first days to the end of the week. In general, the crowd ofpeople coming from rural settlements to the district center in order to meet their daily needs in the form of a social activity in the first and last days of the week creates an opportunity for theft crime. Considering the distribution of crimes committed against property in theAraç District Center by days, Thursday (31), Friday (29), Monday (21) and Tuesday (20) were the leading days of the week. (Chart 3)
Number of Crimes:Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
Chart 3. Distribution of Crimes against Property in the AraçDistrict Center by Days
As far as the distribution of the crimes against the property in 2016-2018 in the Araç District Center, which constituted the study area,is concerned, they occurred in the second and third time periods. It was observed that the events mostly intensified between 12:01-18:00 and 18: 01-23: 59 during the day.
The reasons for the intensity of the crimes in these time periods were different from each other. In the second period of time, the areas where the population was mostly available in open public spaces such as avenues and streets and places with high social interaction became hot areas for theft crime.
The type of theft crime differs according to the visibility in the space and the density that people generate in a space. For instance, the areas with high human circulation such as bazaars, fruit and vegetable markets or bus terminals can be given as examples of open theftespecially for products displayed in front of a shop, housebreaking and crimes in the form of extortion suffered by people who carry on with the intensity of their daily routine activities.On the other hand, in the 3rdand 4thhour zones, when the public retired to their homesstarting from the night hours and social control disappeared, workplace burglary, auto theft and auto breaking were among the main types of crime.
Crimes against property in the study area occurred the most in the 2ndtime period (51). This time zone was followed by the third time zone (47). In contrast, the 4thtime zone (20) and 1sttime zones were the zones when the crimes against propertywere the least in the study area. (Chart 4)
Graphic 4. Temporal Distribution of Crimes Committed against Property in the Study Area during the Day 4. 1. Housebreaking. There are many reasons for housebreaking. However, it is possible say that factors such as its relations with geography, characteristics of the population, climate, and urban development were also effective.In fact, people leaving their houses during the daytime created an opportunity for the crime of housebreakingsince the daily socio-economic activities were more intense in the summer seasons when the temperature values were higher than in the winter season. Similarly, detached residences built away from each other were hotspots for housebreaking. In the societies where the concept of crime has not materialized, and in the societies that are underdeveloped in terms of education and socio-economic terms, crime is expected to be observed more frequently.
Amongst the total of 146 crimes committed against property in the study area, 30 housebreaking crimes times were committed according to the three-year averages. In the distribution of housebreaking by neighborhoods, The YeşilNeighborhood (9) ranked first. Yeşil Neighborhood was followed by Çay (7) and İnönüNeighborhoods. On the other hand, Mesudiye and (1) Yukarıaraç were the Neighborhoods in which the crime of housebreaking was committed the least in the study area.In addition to the fact that theneighborhoods with a high crime of housebreaking were the areas where there were mostly detached single-storeybuildings, and there was the lack of security arising from the fact that they were located in the suburbs and the fact that the Zonguldak-Karabük-Kastamonu highway provided an escape opportunity for the thefts committed in these suburbs were the factors that were effective in the high rate of crime.(Table 2, Map 3).
4.2. Workplace Burglary. The act of workplace burglary is generally committed targetingthe high value-added products such as gold and smart phones in the form of forcing the door of the workplace, breaking its window glasses, forcing the windows from the ventilation sections, forcing the entrance door open, duplicating a key, breaking into the workplaces, removing the window bars, waiting for
the time when the workplace owner is distracted and targeting the display products placed in front of the workplace.
Table 2 Type of Crime Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil Yukarı
Araç Total %
Housebreaking 7 6 1 5 9 2 30 20.5
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Map 3. Distribution of Housebreaking Crime by Neighborhoods in the Araç District Center
4.2. Workplace Burglary. The act of workplace burglary is generally committed targetingthe high value-added products such as gold and smart phones in the form of forcing the door of the workplace, breaking its window glasses, forcing the windows from the ventilation sections, forcing the entrance door open, duplicating a key, breaking into the workplaces, removing the window bars, waiting for the time when the workplace owner is distracted and targeting the display products placed in front of the workplace.
14 of the crimes against 146 properties committed between 2016 and 2018 in the Araç District Center were the workplace burglary. In other words, it is possible to say that 9.5% of crimes committed against properties were caused by the workplace burglary.It is a fact that workplace burglary increased in the areas where there was a high concentration of commercial and settlements areas and the places where people congregated in order to meet all their daily needs. When the map of the distribution of the workplace burglarycrime by locations is analyzed, it is clearly seen that the highest crime rate was in the Neighborhood (6). Similarly, as in other crimes, there was no workplace burglarycrime in the MesudiyeNeighborhood (Table 3, Map 4).
Since a significant part of the public institutions and commercial business areas in the Araç District Center were located in YeniNeighborhood, the workplace burglary crime also occurred in this part of the district. Similarly, due to the functional diversity it possessed, the workplace burglary crime was high in this neighborhood. As one moved further away from the YeniNeighborhoodtowards the periphery, the workplace burglary crime decreased due to the decline in the number of central workplaces.In fact, since MesudiyeNeighborhood was at the farthest position from the central business areas and the fact that number of workplaces was very low contributed to the fact that this neighborhood was an area where there was no crime of workplace burglary at all.
Table 3 Distribution of Workplace Burglary Crime by Neighborhoods in the AraçDistrict Center (2016-2018) Type of
Crime Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Workplace
Burglary 1 2 0 6 3 2 14 9,5
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Map 4. Distribution of Workplace Burglary Crime by Neighborhoods in the Araç District Center 4.3. Auto Breaking. Explicit burglary crime differs from other types of crime. In fact, which goods will be considered to be explicit out in the open maintenance location, and which goods will be considered to be non-explicit stolen froma workplace or a car and will be added to the burglary category should be judged accordingly in the Laws of the Republic of Turkey. For this reason, the crime of explicit burglary,which is different from other crimes based on the location of the stolen item and the way the incident takes place, includes the theft action directed against the belongings that people leave in the open area.
All kinds of goods due to their scope, dimensions or intended use may not be protected within the house or its attachments. In fact, different evaluations are available in the TCL (Turkish Criminal Law) for the theft of sports equipment placed in parks and gardens, theft of agricultural equipment left by a person in the garden of his house andthe display products left in front of the shop. In this incident, the actions of the people are as important as the geographical conditions for explicit burglary. For instance, in residential areas with insufficient infrastructure for urbanization functions, showcasing the exhibition products in front of the workplacein an uncontrolled manner to overflow the pavements and sometimes some of the roads is a kind of behavior that paves the way for atheft crime to be committed.
In study area, the crime of explicit burglary occupies an important place with a ratio of 19.1% among the crimes committed against property. Since explicit burglary is mostly seen in areas with workplaces and business offices, the YeniNeighborhood(10), which stood out with its commercial functions, was the neighborhood where explicit burglary was the highest, followed by ÇayNeighborhood (8).
MesudiyeNeighborhood, on the other hand, was a neighborhood where the crime of explicit burglary never took place during the study periods (Table 4, Map 5).
Table 4 Distribution of Explicit Burglary Crime by Neighborhoods in the Araç District Center (2016-2018).
Type of Crime
Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Explicit Burglary
8 3 0 10 5 2 28 19,1
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Map 5. Distribution of Explicit Burglary Crime by Neighborhoods in the Study Area
Based on the crime statistics and the information obtained from the interviews conducted in the region, in the YeniNeighborhood, where the crime of explicit burglary wascommitted the most, it was found that burglary in the form of theft of the products displayed in front of the workplaces in an uncontrolled manner was very common. The crime of explicit burglary in question will be reduced by showcasing the stalls front of the workplaces in a controllable way and taking various safety measures.
The ÇayNeighborhood, on the other hand, is an area of the district where people of the same race and ancestry live together side by side in residences consisting of a single-storey architectural structure;
they leave some of their daily items haphazardly in front of their houses, which obviously causes theft. Furthermore, in this neighborhood where socio-economic problems are the highest and the awareness of crime has not been sufficiently formed, the crime of explicit burglaryhas had a very high rate in this segment as it was the case in other crimes.Urban transformation in the ÇayNeighborhood, solution to the infrastructure problems, creating awareness of crime through community-supported policing and solving the economic problems will be effective in reducing the number of crimes.
4.4. Extortion (Looting). The crime of extortion is a type of crime that is sometimes more punitive than theft. Since a person’s body may be damaged due to physical force during the extortion of an object that belongs to someone else, it can turn into a combined crime that includes more severe actions than theft. In today’s world, the crime of extortion is one of the biggest security problems of today’s cities since it gives people the feeling that the place they live in is very insecure; it may damage the property during the extortion since it may involve dragging the person damaging not only the body of the person, but also leaves psychological effects on them.
Within the scope of the study examining the crimes against the property, the crime of extortion occurred only 7 times in the study area. More than half of this crimewhich was quite low for a three-
year period, the ÇayNeighborhood (4) ranked first, as it was the case in many other crimes. There are many reasons why crime of extortion is committed the most in this neighborhood.The low education level, poverty and lifestyle adopted by the people of the neighborhood cause the crime phenomenon to be high in this neighborhood. Furthermore, children in the neighborhood grow up with crime incentives, since there is no awareness of crime here. This will cause the incidence of crime to increase gradually in the upcoming years (Table 5, Map 6).
Table 5 Distribution of Extortion (Looting) Crime According by in the Araç District Center (2016-2018).
Type of
Crime Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Extortion
(Looting) 4 0 0 2 0 1 7 4,7
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Map 6.Distribution of Extortion Crime by Neighborhoods in the AraçDistrict Center
4.5. Damage to Property. The crime of damage to property was regulated in articles 151 and 152 of the TCL. According to Article 151 of the TCL; “(1) Any person who partially or completely destroys, demolishes, vandalizes, ruins, breaks or makes someone else’s movable or immovable property unusable,upon the complaint of the victim, is punished with imprisonment from four months to three years or with a judicial fine. (2) The provisions of the above paragraph is to be applied for the person who kills a possessed animal without a just cause, makes it useless or causes it to decrease in value. (Göktürk, Özgenç, Üzülmez: 2012)
42 of the total of 146 crimes committed against property during the study period in the Araç District Center were the crimes of damage to property. The crime of damage to property, which had a 28.7% rate among the crimes committed against property, was higher in the study area; auto breaking, breaking the entrance door of an apartment, kicking a parked vehicle, demolishing the garden wall, breaking the window or door of a workplace, damaging property with revenge anddamaging a car were the examples of damage to property.When the distribution of the crime type of damage to property according to the three-year average by neighborhoods is examined, the neighborhoods of Yeni (15), Çay (10), Yeşil (10) and İnönü (5) were at the forefront, while this type of crime was never committed in the MesudiyeNeighborhood in the same time period. (Table 6, Map 7)
Table 6 Distribution of Damage to Property Crime by Neighborhoods in the AraçDistrict Center (2016-2018).
Type of Crime
Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Damage to Property
10 5 0 15 10 2 42 28,7
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Map 7. Distribution of Damage to Property by Neighborhoods in the Araç District Center
Generally, the crime of damage to property in the geographical area is considered to be higherin the settlements where the population and especially the businesses are concentrated. The main reason why the crime of damaging property in the study area was high in Yeni Neighborhoodwas: It was due to the fact that the neighborhood had a high concentration of central business area that might be the target of the crime of damage to property in the study area. Factors such as the high number of businesses, the market area in this neighborhood and the presence of many public institutions made the Yeni Neighborhood attractive in terms of crime.
4.6 Auto Theft. Within the theft acts, there is a relationship between the statistical increase and scarcity of the amount of auto theft and the development of the country. The theft rate is also on the increase due to the large number of vehicles, especially in developed countries rather than developing countries. It is noteworthy that auto theft crimes are on the increase in the urban areas rather than the rural areas (Karakaş, 2004).
In the AraçDistrict Center, which constituted the study area, auto theft was at a very low level with a rate of 2.7% among the crimes committed against property between 2016 and 2018. In the district center where only four auto theft crimes were committed, three of these crimes took place in Yeni Neighborhood and one in theYeşil Neighborhood. Since people who had a better socio-economic level than those at the other neighborhoods resided in Yeni Neighborhood, it enabled the number of cars to be much higher in this neighborhood. However, as a result of the fact thatthe shopping areas gathered in the Yeni Neighborhood, and that the people who came to this neighborhood by their cars to meet their daily needs parked their cars in the back side streets due to the lack of parking, caused auto theft to be more much higher in this neighborhood. (Table 7, Map 8)
Table 7 Distribution of Auto Theft Crime by Neighborhoods in the Araç District Center (2016-2018).
Type of Crime
Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Auto Theft
0 0 0 3 1 0 4 2,7
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Map 8. Distribution of Auto Theft Crime by Neighborhoods in the AraçDistrict Center of
4.7. Auto Breaking. Among the crimes committed against property in the study area, auto theft crime (2.7%) was among the least crimes committed, just like the auto theft. During the study period, only four out of the total of 146 of crimes committed against property were auto breaking crime. This type of was observed to be committed in the YeniNeighborhood, where people with high economic levels resided more and therefore had more cars. Furthermore, due to the large number of commercial areas in YeniNeighborhood, when people who came to this neighborhood for their daily shopping parked their cars on the roadside, and sometimes on the back streets where there were no social control or security cameras, they caused this neighborhood to become a hotspot for the crime of auto theft and auto breaking. (Table 7, Map 8).
Table 7 Distribution of Auto Breaking Crime by Neighborhoods in the Araç District Center (2016-2018).
Type of Crime
Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Auto Breaking
0 0 0 3 1 0 4 2,7
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Map 8. Distribution of Auto Breaking Crime by Neighborhoods in the Study Area
4.8. Fraud. A crime of fraud occurs when the perpetrator deceives a person with fraudulent behavior, and benefits himself or someone else to the detriment of the victim or someone else.
Aggravated fraud crime is the committal of the crime by using certain religious, social, professional, technological tools or public institutions as a tool (Doğan: 2020).
The fraud crime has also to do with the population geography and the economic structure of the population. This type of crime, which targets the property of people in economically developed regions as well as theeducational characteristics and culture of the population, has been on the increase in today’s world.
A total of 17 fraud crimes were committed between 2016 and 2018in the Araç district center. 11.6%
of the total of 146 crimes against property that occurred during the study period was the fraud crimes.
As far as the distribution of this crime type by neighborhoods is concerned, the neighborhoods ofYeni (7), Yeşil (4) and Çay (3) were in the forefront. On the other hand, Mesudiye Neighborhoodwas the place where fraud was not committed at all (Table 8, Map 9).
Table 8 Distribution of Fraud Crime by neighborhoods in the Araç District Center. (2016-2018) Type of
Crime
Çay İnönü Mesudiye Yeni Yeşil YukarıAraç Total %
Fraud 3 1 0 7 4 2 17 11,6
Total 33 17 1 51 33 11 146 100
Source: Surveys, Compiled from TSI and Data of Other Official Institutions.
Factors for the high rate of fraud crime in the YeniNeighborhoodwere; the fact that this neighborhood was the central business area in the region, the number of workplaces was high, market areas such as public and peasant food and vegetable markets were also in this neighborhood, there were many state institutions and people from all walks of life were the intersection point made the neighborhood the focal point of people prone to crime in terms of fraud crimes.
Map 9. Distribution of Fraud Crime by Neighborhoods in the Study Area
5. Conclusion and Recommendations. During the study period, a total of 146 crimes against property were committed in the AraçDistrict Center. Among the types of crimes committed against property in the study area, the damage to property crime was the highest with the rate of 28.7%, followed by the housebreaking crime with the rate of 20.5%. On the other hand, the crimes of auto theft and auto breaking were among the least committed crimes with a rate of 2.7%.
The crimes against property were committed the most in YeniNeighborhood (51). This neighborhood was followed by Yeşil (33) and Çay Neighborhoods (33). Mesudiye Neighborhood (1) was the place where the crimes committed against property were the least during the 2016-2018period, which was the study period in the AraçDistrict Center.
In the temporal distribution of the crimes committed against the property in the Araç District Center, it was observed that the crimes were committed the most in May (24), April (22) and December (18).
As far as the daily distribution of crimes committed against property in the study area is concerned, a fluctuation was observed from the first days of the week to the end of the week. In general, people who come from the rural settlements to the district center in order to meet their daily needs in the first and last days of the week created an opportunity for the crime of theft due to the intense population movement that occurred due to a social movement. Considering the distribution of crimes committed against property in the District Center by days, Thursday (31), Friday (29), Monday (21) and Tuesday (20) were in the forefront.
When we consider the distribution of crimes against property during 2016-2018 periodin the AraçDistrict Center, which constituted the study area, it was found that the hours of the crimes occurred mostly in the second and third-hour time periods. It was observed that the events mostly intensified between 12: 01-18: 00 and 18: 01-23: 59 during the day.
Considering the geographical distribution of crimes committed against property in the Araç District Center, two main neighborhoods came to the fore. YeniNeighborhood and ÇayNeighborhoods ranked first in terms of committing many types of crimes in the study area. Yeni Neighborhood was almost the core of the district center. Since public institutions, commercial areas, a significant portion of the residences, market areas, areas such as parks and gardens where people did their daily shoppingactivities, were located here and a significant section of the Zonguldak-Karabük-Kastamonu Intercity Highway passes through this neighborhood, this caused many of the hotspots that were the source of crime incidences to be in this neighborhood.
There were two main factors that were effective in the high rate of crimes against property in the YeniNeighborhood: The first of these was that the most important highway that connected the cities of Zonguldak-Karabük-Kastamonu and even connected a significant part of the Western Black Sea Region to the Middle and Eastern Black Sea, passed through the YeniNeighborhood, which constituted a large part of theAraç District Center. While this main road is in the form of an extremely
modern and divided highway in areas outside the district center, the traffic capacity is insufficient since it falls into one lane in the district center.
Nonetheless, as a result of the occupation of the sidewalks by the exhibition products of commercial business areas in the section passing through the YeniNeighborhood, people walking on the road instead of the pavement and the roadway narrowing in a single lane as a result of the commercial business owners and those who come for daily shopping park their cars in one row is an important problem. It is because the mentioned negativities in the section of this highway passing through YeniNeighborhood, the vehicles hitting people as well as causing traffic accidents with material damage causes crime against the person and property.When the ring road, which is currently under construction, is fully completed, the fact that a significant part of the traffic is directed to this ring road so that it does not affect the commercial life of the district, and that the sidewalks are arranged so that people can use them, and moving the intercity terminal out of the city, which is located in the busiest part of the district center, will lead to a decrease in crimes against negligent injury and especially against property caused by traffic accidents.
Furthermore, establishing checkpoints in an attempt to increase the visibility of law enforcement officers in YeniNeighborhood, installing city surveillance cameras with high resolution degrees to reduce the crime of auto and house breaking in the back streets, offering incentives for commercial and residential areas to other neighborhoods to reduce the population and commercial area pressure in this part of the town and most importantly, and raising the level of education of the public in generalwill be positive in terms of creating awareness.
In the ÇayNeighborhood, which is another neighborhood with a high crime rate in the study area, on the other hand, it is possible to assume by considering the shanty house-looking residences that people living in this part of the district have economic problems. Due to socio-economic problems and economic needs, the Çayhas become a neighborhood where people living herelessened their interest in education, there was no awareness for committing crimes, people from a single identity have gathered together here, and the district has almost spatial and cultural contrasts with the other neighborhoods; all these factors have caused the crime rates to get higher.
In order to reduce the number of crimes in the ÇayNeighborhood, the economic, educational and socio-cultural problems, which are the biggest problems for now, should be solved in the first place. In the name of social awareness, some people from this neighborhood can be offered employment in line with their abilities and capabilities in order to generate an economic income within the bounds of possibility through the Employment Agency. Awareness trainings should be provided by the Community Policing Office in order to create an awareness of crime and free courses offered based on some manual skills for a sustainable job opportunity that will generate economic income through the Adult Education Center.
Demolition of the abandoned buildings, which have become hotspots for some crimes in the ÇayNeighborhood, within the scope of the permits granted by the District Municipality and the encouragement of the residents of this area to more modern housing are some of the solutions that will contribute to the decrease in the number of crimes in this neighborhood. In fact, it strengthens the feeling of aggression and exclusion among those who live in neighboring places, where modern and outdated houses, which have been formed due to the difference in economic income, are in dire contrast, and it potentially encourages crime.
The YeşilNeighborhood (9) ranked first in the distribution of housebreakingby neighborhoods.
Yeşil Neighborhood was followed by the neighborhoods of Çay (7) and İnönü. The neighborhoodswith a high crime of housebreaking are mostly composed of detached single-storey buildings, the lack of security arising from the presence of these house in the suburbs, and especially the fact that Zonguldak-Karabük-Kastamonu highway is an escape opportunity for the theft activity in these suburbs are some of the contributing factors.
Trainings should be providedfor those living in single-storey houses on how the crime of housebreaking occurs, and security checkpoints should be established at the entrances and
exits of the district center and inspections should be made on the days and hours when the theft incidencesoccurthe most.
According to the crime statistics and the information obtained from the interviews conducted in the study area, it was found that theft in the form of stealing goods placed in the stalls front of the workplaces was common in YeniNeighborhood, where there was a lot of theft. The theft crime in question will naturally be reduced by opening the stalls in front of the workplaces in a controllable way and taking various security measures.
Regarding the high rate of fraud crime in the YeniNeighborhood, factors such as the fact that that neighborhood was the central business area in the district, the number of workplaces, the presence offruit and vegetable market area in this neighborhood, the presence of many public institutions and the intersection point of people from all walks of life made the YeniNeighborhood the focal point in terms of fraud crime.
Fraudsters need places wherethere are high concentrations of people, and where there are commercial areas and a transportation point such as Zonguldak-Karabük-Kastamonu Intercity Highway through which they can easily escape. The Yeni Neighborhood became a hotspot and welcoming place for criminal incidences due to these factors. Effective controls should be carried out in order to prevent fraudulent activities either by directly coming to the District Center or via information systems such as telephoning or internet, and raising awareness to those living in that part of the district with the brochures showing the fraud methods will be effective in reducing the fraud crime.
Stating Contribution: I would like to thank Mehmet EKİNCİ, one of my students for whom I superviseda graduation thesis in the field of crime geography, for his contribution to this study during the field studies and compilation of statistical data.
References
1 Andersen A. Martin The Ambient Population and Crime Analysis// Journal The Professional Geographer.- 2011. -Vol.63, Issue: 2 ABD.
2 Ansel in Luc - Cohen Jackeline - Cook David - Garr Wilkenand Tita George, Spatial Analysis of Crimes//
Measurement and Analysis of Crime and Justice, U.S. Department of Justice// Office of Justice Programs, Washington D.C.- 2000. -Vol. 4.-Р. 213-263.
3 Aksak P., ÇalışkanV. Investigation of Geographical Distribution Characteristics of Crimes Committed against Property in the Province of Çanakkale, Marmara Geography Magazine, Istanbul. 2010.
4 Aliağaoğlu A., Alaeddinoğlu F. Crimes Committed against Property in the Province of Erzurum: A Geographical Approach// Journal of Police Science. -2005.-Vol.- № 7
5 Aliağaoğlu A. Crimes in the Province of Balıkesir: A Geographical Approach (2005). Ankara: Detay Publishing. (2007).
6 Aliağaoğlu A. ÇıldamYılmaz S. Crimes in the Province of Bandırma 2006-2008.A Geographical Approach.
Detay Publishing, Ankara. (2016).
7 Alkan, A., (2016) Spatial Analysis of Crimes Committed Against Property in the Province of Siirt, GEOMED The 4thInternational Geography Symposium, 23-26 May 2016, Kemer / Antalya.
8 Andresen M. A., Crime Measures and the Spatial Analysis of Criminal Activity// British Journal of Criminology, -2005. –.Р.1-28
9 Atasoy E. Cultural Geography and Fundamentals of Ethnogeography//Change Publications, Istanbul. 2019 10 Brown, M.A. Modelling the Spatial Distribution of Suburban Crime. Journal Economic Geography, -1982.
-Vol.-№ 58. Issue 3
11 Blumen O. andRattner A. Urbanized Peripheries: A Regional Study of Crime in Israel//Sociological Spectrum.- 2002. -Vol.22. -Р. 407–443.
12 Cahill M. A., Geographies of Urban crime: An Itraurban Study of Crime in Nashville, TN Portland OR;
Tuscan AZ, Doctoral Dissertation The University of Arizona USA., (2004).
13 CeccatoV. Routledge Studies in Crime and Society (Rural Crime and Community Safety, New York. 2016).
14 Ceccato V., Haining, R. andSignoretta, P. Exploring Crime Statistics in Stockholm City Using Spatial Analysis Tools// Annals of Association of American Geographers, -2002. -Vol.92 -№1.-Р.29–51.
15 Carvalho I., Lewis Dan A., Beyond Communıty: Reactions to Crime and Dısorder Among Inner-Cıty Resıdents,academia.edu. 2003.
16 ÇildamYılmaz, S. Geographical Analysis of Crimes Committed against People in the Province ofSiirt, Turkish Geography Magazine, 2019.Р.73.
17 D T Herbert., Geography of Urban Crime, Longman Inc.Longman IncNew York// NY 10036 United States of America 1982.
18 De Blıj J. H. Why is Geography Significant. (F. Yavaş, B. Kaya Cevirler). Ankara: Hece Publications. 2019.
19 Fındıklı, R. The Role of Cultural Values in the Prevention of Crimes, Crime Prevention Symposium (Ed:
Bozdemir, S., Argun, U.), Bursa Police Department Publications 2011. №1.
20 Günal, V., Şahanalp, S. Spatial Analysis of Theft Crimes in the Şanlıurfa City Center//Journal of Police Sciences, -2009. -Vol. -№11.Р.1
21 Gürbüz M., Karabulut M., Mapping and Analysis of Juvenile Crimes with Geographical Information Systems in Adana BeşOcak Police Station Responsibility Area, Çukurova University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, -2007. –Vol.16, №1.
22 Gyamfi A.J. Urban Crime Trend and Pattern in Ghana:The Case of Accra// Journal of Criminal Justice.
-2003. -Vol.31,-Р.13-23.
23 Hannon L. Criminal Opportunity Theory and the Relationship between Poverty and Property Crime//
Sociological Spectrum. 2002.
24 Herbert D. T. and Hyde S. W. Environmental Criminology: Testing Some Area Hypothesis// Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series. -1985. -Vol.10.-№3.-Р.259–274.
25 İçli G. T. Criminals in Turkey (Their Social Cultural and Economic Characteristics). (1993). Atatürk High Institution of Culture, Language and History, Atatürk Cultural Center Publication. İçli T.G. Criminology.
Ankara: BizimBüro Printing House. 2001.№71
26 İçli G. T. Social, Economic and Cultural Properties of Crimes in Turkey// Crime Prevention Symposium (Ed: Bozdemir,S., Arg U.), Bursa Police Department Publication. 2011 .№ 1.
27 Karakaş E., Distribution and Characteristics of Theft Crime in the Province of Elazığ// Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences. -2004. -Vol.14.-№1.-Р.19–37.
28 Karakaş E. Crime Map Types in Applied Geography I: Data Sources// Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences. -2005. -Vol.15.-№1.-Р.57-69.
29 Karakaş E. Distribution and Characteristics of Crimes in the Province of Elaziğ// Eastern Geographical Review. -2016.-Vol.11, -№15.-Р.83–112.
30 Karakaş E. Data Sources in Criminal Geography Studies// Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences, Elazığ.2019.Vol.19.№ 2.
31 Kızmaz Z. Economic Structure and Crime: An Overview of Some Research Findings// Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences. -2003. -Vol.13.-№2.-Р.279-304.
32 Madenüs M., The Effect of Changing Rural Life Habits on Theft Crime// Gendarmerie Schools Command, Journal of Security Sciences. (2016).
33 Marshall B. and Johnson, S. Crime in Rural Areas: A Review of the Literature for the Rural Evidence Research Centre// London: Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science. 2005. [Electronic resource]. Available at:https:
//www.researchgate.net/publication/254955314_Crime_in_Rural_Areas_A_Review_of_the_Literature_for_the_
Rural_Evidence_Research_Centre.
34 Nelson A.L. Bromley R.D.F. Thomas, Identifying MicroSpatial and Temporal Patterns of Violent Crime and Disorder in Tlic British City Centre//Applied Geography -2001.- №21, -P.249-274.
35 Lowman J. Conceptual Issues in the Geography of Crime: Toward a Geography of Social Control, School of Criminology// Annals of the Association of American Geographers, -1986. -Vol.76.-№1.-Р.81–94.
36 Önkal G., Sarı Ö. (Ed). Sociology of Crime Philosophy of Punishment, Nobel Academic Publishing, Ankara. (2013).
37 Özgen N., R.,Bindak A Global Perspective on the Space-Murder Relation: A Behavioral Geography Study//
Journal of Human and Social Sciences Research, -2017. -Vol.6, -№ 2.- P.1070-1087.
38 Özgüç N., Tümertekin E., Geography, Past Concepts, Geographers// Çantay Bookstore, Istanbul. (2000).
39 Sargın S.Temurçin, K. Crime Geography of Turkey (Urban Public Order Crimes). Ankara: Beyaz Kalem Publications. 2009.
40 Seyhan K., Eryılmaz B. E. Developed Countries and Crime Prevention Strategies in the Case of Turkey, 2014. [Electronic resource]. Available at:https://www.academia.edu/Crime Prevention Strategies.
41 Sözer A. M., Daniel R. L. Crime Prevention (Theory, Practice and Evaluation), Adalet Publishing House, Ankara. (2011).
42 South J.S., Messner F.S. (2000) Crime and Demography: Multiple Linkages, Reciprocal Relations, Jostor Issue:26, 2011 [Electronic resource]. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/223438
43 Uğur A., Spatial Analysis of Crimes Committed against Property in the Province of Denizli, Journal of Police Sciences, Issue: 2013. Р.15-2.
44 Uzun, A. (2008). Crimes against Property in the Province of Tokat (2006): A Geographical Approach.
Unpublished Master’s Thesis// Balıkesir University Institute of Social Sciences, Balıkesir.
45 Uzun A., Aliağaoğlu A. Crimes against Property in the Province of Tokat// International Journal of Social Research, Issue 2/8. (2009)
46 Yıldırım A. The Relationship between Socio-Cultural Structure and Crime: The Case of Malatya Province//
Karamanoğlu Mehmet Bey University Journal of Social and Economic Research. -2014 -Vol.3.
47 Yılmaz G. Crime and Space: Reflections on the Representation of Crime. Journal of Architecture. -2006.
-Vol.328.-Р.41-46.
48 Yılmaz, A., Günay-Ergün, S. Urban Public Order Crimes in Turkey: Main Characteristics and Distribution//
Ministry of National Education, Journal of Education and Social Sciences. -2006. -Vol.35 -№170.-Р.230-249.
49 Wilsem V.J., Graaf N.D., and Wittebrood K. Cross-National Difference in Victimization Disentangling the Impact of Composition and Context.European Sociological Review.-2003. Vol.19.-Р.125-142.
50 Internet Source: [Electronic resource]. Available at:https: //barandogan.av.tr/blog/ceza-hukuku/nitelikli- dolandiricilik-sucu-cezasi.html. Transportation date is (Accessed: 10.08.2020).
Эврен Атиш
Кастамону университетінің Жаратылыстану және әдебиет факультетінің география кафедрасы, Кастамону университеті, Кастамону, Түркия
Арач (Кастамону/Түркия) аудан орталығындағы меншікке қарсы қылмыстарды қылмыстар гео- графиясы тұрғысынан географиялық тергеу
Аңдатпа. Әлеуметтік құндылықтар мен адамдардың мәдени өмірі қылмыс құбылысының әртүрлі қоғамда түрліше болуына себепкер. Қылмыс ұғымы әрдайым күнделікті және қоғамдық өмірдегі маңы- зды мәселе ретінде қарастырылды, ол күрделене түсті. Қылмыстың пайда болуында негізінен психоло- гиялық және социологиялық факторлар әсерін тигізеді деп айтылады. Алайда, қылмыс жасалған жердің әртүрлі географиялық ерекшеліктерінен басқа, белгілі бір жерде тұратын адамдар қоршаған ортамен өзара әрекеттесетін әлеуметтік-экономикалық сипаттамалардың әсерін де назардан тыс қалдыруға бол- майды. Шын мәнінде, бұл факторлар кез келген жерде қылмыстың саны мен түріне әсер ететін фактор- лардың бірі болып табылады.
Қылмыс географиялық ортада әртүрлі айнымалылар нәтижесінде пайда болатыны сияқты, әртүрлі алдын алу факторлары қылмыстардың санын азайтып және олардың сол жерде жасалуына жол берме- удің шараларын қарастыру керек. Іс жүзінде қылмысты құқық қорғау органдарының қызметкерлерінің міндеті ретінде қабылдау және шешімдерді тек осы негізде қарастыру-бұл шындыққа жанаспайтын әдіс.
Әлеуметтік оқиға болып табылатын қылмыстың алдын алу үшін көптеген әскери тәртіптер негізінде бірге жұмыстар атқарылып, зерттеулер нәтижелерін шешім қабылдаушылар бағалап, жүзеге асыруы қажет.
Аталған зерттеу аясында меншікке қарсы қылмыстардың кеңістіктік және уақытша болып бөлінуі, мүлікке қарсы қылмыстардың жалпы сипаттамасы, мүлікке қарсы қылмыстардың сандық және пропор- ционалды бөлінуі және оған әсер ететін географиялық ерекшеліктер мен Кастамону провинциясының
Арач ауданының орталығындағы меншікке қарсы қылмыстар арасындағы байланыс үш жыл ішінде зерттелңп, анықталды (2016-2018). Зерттеу барысында алынған осы мәліметтердің нәтижесінде тергеу ауданы болған Арач ауданының орталығында меншікке қарсы жасалған қылмыстардың себептері зерт- теліп, бағаланды және алынған нәтижелер негізінде қылмыстың алдын алу және олардың санын азайту мақсатында бірнеше ұсыныстар жасалды.
Түйін сөздер: қылмыс және география, қылмыстың кеңістіктік таралуы, меншікке қарсы қылмыстар, Арач ауданы.
Эврен Атиш
Университет Кастамону, факультет естественных наук и литературы, кафедра географии, Кастаному, Турция
Географическое расследование преступлений против собственности в районном центре Арач (Кастамону/Турция) с точки зрения географии преступлений
Аннотация. Различные социальные ценности и культурная жизнь людей привели к тому, что фе- номен преступности различается в разных обществах. Понятие преступления всегда рассматривалось как важная проблема в повседневной и общественной жизни, которая усложнилась. Утверждается, что в возникновении преступности в основном действуют психологические и социологические факторы. Од- нако, помимо различных географических особенностей места совершения преступления, не следует так- же упускать из виду влияние социально-экономических характеристик, которые люди, проживающие в данном конкретном месте, взаимодействуют с окружающей средой. На самом деле, эти факторы яв- ляются одними из факторов, влияющих на количество и тип преступлений в любом конкретном месте.
Точно так же, как преступление происходит в географическом месте в результате различных пере- менных, различные превентивные факторы должны объединяться в попытке уменьшить число престу- плений и предотвратить их совершение в этом месте. На самом деле воспринимать преступление как обязанность сотрудников правоохранительных органов и искать решения только таким образом-это ме- тод, который нереалистичен. Чтобы предотвратить преступность, которая является социальным событи- ем, многие дисциплины должны работать вместе, и результаты этих исследований должны оцениваться и реализовываться лицами, принимающими решения.
В рамках данного исследования были исследованы и выявлены пространственное и временное распре- деление преступлений против собственности, общая характеристика преступлений против собственно- сти, численное и пропорциональное распределение преступлений против собственности и взаимосвязь между географическими особенностями, влияющими на нее, и преступлениями против собственности в районном центре Арач провинции Кастамону в течение трех лет (2016-2018). В результате этих дан- ных, полученных в ходе исследования, были изучены и оценены причины преступлений, совершенных против собственности в районном центре Арач, который был районом расследования, и на основе по- лученных результатов были сделаны некоторые предложения в целях предотвращения преступлений и сокращения их числа.
Ключевые слова: преступность и география, пространственное распределение преступности, пре- ступления против собственности, Арачский район
References
1. A.Andersen Martin The Ambient Population and Crime Analysis. Journal The Professional Geographer, 2011. Vol.63, Issue: 2 ABD.
2. Ansel in Luc - Cohen Jackeline - Cook David - Garr Wilkenand Tita George, Spatial Analysis of Crimes.
Measurement and Analysis of Crime and Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Washington D.C. 2000. Vol.4.Р. 213-263.
3. Aksak P., ÇalışkanV. Investigation of Geographical Distribution Characteristics of Crimes Committed against Property in the Province of Çanakkale, Marmara Geography Magazine, Istanbul. 2010.
4. Aliağaoğlu A., Alaeddinoğlu F. Crimes Committed against Property in the Province of Erzurum: A Geographical Approach. Journal of Police Science. 2005.Vol. № 7
5. Aliağaoğlu A. Crimes in the Province of Balıkesir: A Geographical Approach (2005). Ankara: Detay Publishing. (2007).
6. Aliağaoğlu A. ÇıldamYılmaz S. (2016). Crimes in the Province of Bandırma 2006-2008.A Geographical Approach.Detay Publishing, Ankara.
7. Alkan, A., (2016) Spatial Analysis of Crimes Committed Against Property in the Province of Siirt, GEOMED The 4thInternational Geography Symposium, 23-26 May 2016, Kemer / Antalya.
8. Andresen M. A., Crime Measures and the Spatial Analysis of Criminal Activity. British Journal of Criminology, 2005.Р.1-28
9. Atasoy E. Cultural Geography and Fundamentals of Ethnogeography, Change Publications, Istanbul. 2019 10. Brown, M.A. Modelling the Spatial Distribution of Suburban Crime. Journal Economic Geography, 1982.
Vol.№58, Issue 3
11. Blumen O. andRattner A. Urbanized Peripheries: A Regional Study of Crime in Israel.Sociological Spectrum. 2002.Vol.22.Р.407–443.
12. Cahill M.A., Geographies of Urban crime: An Itraurban Study of Crime in Nashville, TN Portland OR;
Tuscan AZ, Doctoral Dissertation The University of Arizona USA. (2004).
13. CeccatoV. Routledge Studies in Crime and Society (Rural Crime and Community Safety,) New York. 2016.
14. Ceccato V., Haining R. andSignoretta, P. Exploring Crime Statistics in Stockholm City Using Spatial Analysis Tools. Annals of Association of American Geographers.2002.Vol.92.№1.Р.29–51.
15. Carvalho I., Lewis Dan A., Beyond Communıty: Reactions to Crime and Dısorder Among Inner-Cıty Resıdents,academia.edu. 2003.
16. ÇildamYılmaz, S. Geographical Analysis of Crimes Committed against People in the Province ofSiirt, Turkish Geography Magazine, 2019.№73.
17. D T Herbert., Geography of Urban Crime, Longman Inc.Longman IncNew York, NY 10036 United States of America 1982.
18. De Blıj J. H. Why is Geography Significant. (F. Yavaş, B. Kaya Cevirler). Ankara: Hece Publications. 2019.
19. Fındıklı R. The Role of Cultural Values in the Prevention of Crimes, Crime Prevention Symposium (Ed:
Bozdemir, S., Argun, U.), Bursa Police Department Publications 2011. №1.
20. Günal V., Şahanalp, S. Spatial Analysis of Theft Crimes in the Şanlıurfa City Center. Journal of Police Sciences, 2009. Vol. №11.Р.1
21. Gürbüz M., Karabulut M., Mapping and Analysis of Juvenile Crimes with Geographical Information Systems in Adana BeşOcak Police Station Responsibility Area, Çukurova University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 2007. Vol.16. № 1.
22. Gyamfi A.J. Urban Crime Trend and Pattern in Ghana:The Case of Accra. Journal of Criminal Justice.
2003.Vol.31.Р.13-23.
23. Hannon L. Criminal Opportunity Theory and the Relationship between Poverty and Property Crime.
Sociological Spectrum. 2002.
24. Herbert D. T. and Hyde S. W. Environmental Criminology: Testing Some Area Hypothesis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series. 1985. Vol.10.№3.Р.259–274.
25. İçli G.T. Criminals in Turkey (Their Social Cultural and Economic Characteristics). (1993). Atatürk High Institution of Culture, Language and History, Atatürk Cultural Center Publication. İçli, T.G. Criminology.
Ankara: BizimBüro Printing House. 2001.№71
26. İçli G. T. Social, Economic and Cultural Properties of Crimes in Turkey, Crime Prevention Symposium (Ed: Bozdemir, S., Arg, U.), Bursa Police Department Publication.2011. № 1.
27. Karakaş E., Distribution and Characteristics of Theft Crime in the Province of Elazığ” Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences.2004. Vol.14.№1.Р.19–37.
28. Karakaş E. Crime Map Types in Applied Geography I: Data Sources. Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences.2005. Vol.15.№1.Р.57-69.
29. Karakaş E. Distribution and Characteristics of Crimes in the Province of Elaziğ. Eastern Geographical Review.2016.Vol.11.15.Р.83–112.
