Impacts of Knife Crime on Victims, Youth, and Communities in the UK

Abstract

The primary research question in this dissertation was how the incidence of knife crime affects and impacts the victims, young people, and communities in the UK. Related to this question, the dissertation probed the questions about what knife crime is and how its incidence in the UK is represented in crime statistics and how knife crime impacts communities and victims and the youth. This dissertation has been able to answer this question by reference to data and literature on knife crime and its effects. The dissertation applied a qualitative research methodology to collect and analyse data and present the findings of the research. The principal finding of this dissertation is that the impacts of knife crime are felt most strongly in three groups: youth, poor communities, and minority communities. The research finds that young people experience greater levels of violent crime victimisation as compared to other groups in the society. Those living in poverty are also found to be more impacted by knife crime. BAME communities are also disproportionately impacted by knife crime in terms of victimisation, perpetration, and social control measures.

Introduction

Knife crime is not defined as a specific offence but, it refers to a range of different offences in which a knife is used, as well as being a specific offence of knife possession. As such, knife crime is not a specific crime but a cluster of crimes that are committed by using knife. These crimes can include crimes like robbery, homicide, causing bodily harm and hurt, and even crimes like domestic violence. Knife crime can be defined as a crime that is committed with the use of knife and can include the offence of being in possession of a knife. Over the past two decades, knife crime has become a matter of concern in England and Wales because of the prevalence of knife crimes and the incidence of crime in the British cities, particularly in London.

The concern with incidence of knife crime can also be related to the public discourse and media representation of knife crime, which presents knife crime as one of the most serious problems for the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Media has highlighted knife crime over the last decade as a prevalent concern in public discourse. Some media reports have reported knife crime as a phenomenon on an unprecedented rise since 2008 in the inner city areas of London. Knife crime has been presented as a significant social problem needing responses from the criminal justice system. In that sense, knife crime is a matter for political discourse as well.

Effects of knife crime have also been considered to some extent in the literature. These effects include the formation of moral panic around youth crime and knife crime. Effects also include specific implications of knife crime for young people and Black communities, both of which groups show higher incidence of victimisation and perpetration of the crime amongst its members.

On the other hand, there is an argument that there is no such thing as a knife crime and that it is a gendered crime:

“Indeed, as far as the criminal justice system is concerned, there is no such thing as ‘knife’ crime. The construction of this term, much like in Hall et al.’s (1978) earlier analysis of media coverage of ‘mugging’ (a crime that did and does not exist in criminal law), speaks volumes about the media desire to sensationalize such events whilst at the same time reproducing some silences in relation to them.”

The above argument speaks to the way in which knife crime is represented in the media and public discourse. What the argument posits is that while knife crime is presented as one of the serious issues of our times, the fact is that there is no specific crime called knife crime, so that when media represents the incidence of knife crime as something concerning, this is misleading because the incidence of crime represents a range of crimes like robbery and homicide, which are all clustered as knife crime, which is then presented as a serious issue for the criminal justice system. Instead the incidence of crime really represents a variety of crimes.

At the same time, it cannot be denied that there are statistics that demonstrate the use of knife for the commission of crime; and if the definition of knife crime is commission of any crime using a knife and possession of knife, then the statistics do indicate the incidence of knife crime in the society. The Office for National Statistics reported that from 2007 to 2018, the numbers of young men dying as a result of coming into contact with a sharp instrument was around 200 young men each year and the number of young women being killed by a sharp instrument was around 60 deaths per year. These figures suggest that there is an incidence of homicide committed with a knife or a sharp object and the number of such homicides per year is a significant one. Similarly, there are other crimes, like robbery, which are committed with the use of the knife. Thus, the issue of knife crime can be considered to be relevant and serious so as to demand attention from researchers and policy makers alike.

There are different aspects of knife crime that have been considered in research, including the causes of knife crime and the policy responses towards the incidence of knife crime. This dissertation seeks to look at the effects and impacts of knife crime. The focus of the dissertation is to explore how knife crime has impacts on victims, young people and the communities. As this research will discuss, there are implications of knife crimes for specific groups of people or communities, which makes the issue of more concern with respect to these groups. Majority of the victims of knife happen to be young males and the same is true of perpetration of knife crime. Knife crime also impacts some communities more than others; for instance, Black communities and poorer communities are more impacted by knife crime due to higher rates of victimisation and perpetration. These impacts are discussed with the help of data and evidence in this research study.

The dissertation uses a research methodology that is qualitative. Qualitative research is appropriate in studies that involve layers of information or perspectives or where the researcher seeks more in depth perspective into the subject of research. Qualitative research is not based on numerical data. Qualitative research does not require any pre-specified methods or hypotheses and allows for more flexibility to the researcher. This research uses a secondary method to collect the data. As such, this is a secondary data collection through desk based research, in which a literature review is used to present the data collected for the study. A case study method is also used in this research, the case study being the phenomenon of knife crime. A case study is done with a single unit, which can be a phenomenon. A case study involves an in-depth inquiry on a phenomenon when the data can be used for descriptive and explanatory purposes about the phenomenon under research. The literature review for this research was conducted with the academic work in books and journals, as well as media reports, and government reports and papers on knife crime.

The primary research question in this dissertation is:

How does the incidence of knife crime affect and impact the victims, young people, and communities in the UK?

Incidence of knife crime

Reports have indicated an increase in knife crime in England and Wales. A 2019 article by Humphreys et al reported a 7 percent increase in knife crime in the year since 2018. Another study of 2020 reported a rise in knife crime thereby substantiating reports including media reports that there is an increase in knife crime in the UK. Although an earlier study on knife crime and media reporting has argued that the media reporting on knife crime is disproportionate when seen in context of the actual incidence of knife crime statistics, the two recent studies on state of knife crime discussed before suggest that there is an increase in knife crime in the UK, particularly in the inner city areas of London.

The more recent statistics on knife crime for the year ending March 2020, show that there were approximately 46,000 (selected) offences involving a knife or sharp instrument in England and Wales. The report mentions that there have been some problems with collecting data from Greater Manchester, but even so, the statistics present the highest number of offences since the year ending March 2011. Amongst the cities, London recorded the highest rate of 179 offences involving a knife crime per 100,000 population in 2019- 2020, and Durham recorded the lowest rate of 26 offences per 100,000 individuals. London also shows an increase in the incidence of knife crime. In 2019, juveniles in the ages between 10-17 years were offenders in 20% of all cases recorded. The data from the hospitals shows that there were 4,757 finished consultant episodes in English hospitals in 2019- 2020 due to assault by a sharp object. The data for year ending in March 2020 indicates that there was increase in knife crime in this period.

In the year ending March 2021, the data for knife crime shows some decrease as compared to the previous year. These statistics are maintained by the Office for National Statistics and they show a 15% decrease in knife-enabled crime recorded by the police (44,286 offences). The periods of lower incidence (April to June 2020 and January to March 2021) also coincide with the national lockdowns and the highest levels of restrictions. Therefore, this could mean that the restrictions may have had a role to play in the lower incidence of knife crime in the 2020-2021 period. The statistics also show that the incidence of knife crime is concentrated in urban areas. Decrease in knife crime in this period is seen in London, which saw a 31% decrease, West Midlands, which saw an 9% decrease, and Greater Manchester, which saw a 5% decrease. However, it is reiterated that decrease in knife crime may have been due to the national lockdowns and restrictions for Covid 19. It is also notable that police also recorded “possession of an article with a blade or point” offences falling by 11% to 20,465 in the year ending March 2021; this is more reflective of a lower incidence of crime because it is related to the possession of sharp objects and knives showing a decline, which may not be explained by the national lockdown or restrictions for Covid 19. Hospital and NHS data also reported a 14% decrease in admissions for assault by a sharp object (4,080 admissions).

What can be summarised is that incidence of knife crime shows a marked increase till the year ending March 2020 and then shows a decrease in the year ending March 2021. However, the latter period also included extended periods of strictly enforced national lockdowns and restrictions for Covid 19. Therefore, it would be difficult to assess whether there was a real decrease in knife crime incidence in this period or whether this decrease is artificially caused due to the national lockdowns. It may be tentatively accepted that there is some increase in knife crime in the recent years as compared to the period of time earlier. This may go to suggest that the incidence of knife crime is rightly considered to be a serious issue that needs addressing from the government and policy makers. However, the question of what means of addressing knife crime should be taken is also one that has implications for certain groups and communities in the UK as will be discussed later in this dissertation.

Causes of knife crime

There are different causes of knife crime that are noted in the literature. There are socio-economic factors that are generally revealed in literature as being causes of rise in incidence of knife crime in England and Wales.

One study explains that the majority of the perpetrators of knife crime are young males and many perpetrators are young members of the African origin communities; the study explains the rise in incidence of knife crime due to the impacts of the family breakdown and criminalisation. The study attributes higher incidence of knife crime to the change in the family structures in African-Caribbean community and increase in incidence of family breakdown. The study argues that the deterioration of the family has some role to play in the increase in offending in the African origin youths. The study presents data to show that African origin communities have weaker family structures and there is lack of support of the extended family including grandparents.

Traditionally, African communities have had higher support from extended family and grandparents, and this deterioration of traditional family structures is blamed for the higher incidence of crime and knife crime amongst the African and Caribbean youth. These findings are consistent with earlier research that suggests a link between higher knife crime and Black communities and youth from other communities linked to the familial breakdown. Adverse family circumstances are however, reported to be the most prevalent among African origin youth and this may be linked to higher crime rates amongst the youth of these communities.

Causes of knife crime are also related to socio-economic factors, particularly the factor of residence in low income neighbourhoods, which are associated with higher risk of victimisation by knife crime. Offenders and victims of knife crime tend to come from lower socio-economic groups for homicides by any method. Poverty and knife crime are therefore interlinked because there is greater incidence of knife crime in poorer neighbourhoods and the victims and offenders both generally come from poor families and neighbourhoods.

Race and knife crime

There may be a general perception that African youth are overrepresented in knife crime and that the majority of such youth comes from broken families. However, statistics indicate otherwise. The statistics on who is likely to commit knife crime can be said to mimic the statistics on who may be likely victimised by knife crime. Statistics indicate that repeat offenders of knife crime are primarily male (92.5%), between the ages of 16 and 24 (42.4%), predominantly White or Northern European (57.3%), followed by Blacks (25.2%) and Asians (11.5%). Therefore, the majority of the offenders of knife crime happen to be white males in the ages between 16 to 24 years. An often neglected group in knife crime statistics is the female group, who are generally victimised by knife crime in domestic settings; research indicates that female victims of knife crime are generally injured in home setting.

Rising incidence of knife crime has led to more surveillance especially in and around schools; this increased surveillance has specific impacts in terms of race especially for the students from minorities communities. In other words, while increased knife crime is predominantly attributed to young males belonging to the North European white community, the consequences of knife crime in the increased surveillance may have impacts on young people belonging to minority communities. Surveillance in schools has been found to impact students of minority communities more disproportionately by reproducing and reinforcing existing inequalities. The ways in which surveillance affects minority students in schools is similar in experience to how stop and search affects young people belonging to minority communities in public settings. In this context, the following statement is significant summary of how surveillance affects the members of minority communities:

“Black, Asian or Minority Ethnic groups (BAME) are seven times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people. The number of arrests for the white group decreased during 2010-11, however arrests of Black persons rose by 5% and arrests of Asian people by 13%. 26% of the prison population comes from BAME groups. In 2010, the highest average custodial sentence length (ACSL) for those given determinate sentences for indictable offences was recorded for the Black ethnic group, at 20.8 months, followed by the Asian and Other groups with averages of 19.9 months and 19.7 months respectively. The lowest ACSL was recorded for the white group at 14.9 months. Equally, in a school context, research has shown that minority ethnic young people are more likely to be excluded from school than white young people. It has been suggested that one reason for this is the perception of teachers, many of whom view minority ethnic children as a challenge or threat, their perceptions shaped by dominant discourses.”

Knife crime is seen to be a rising threat and even though the incidence is not linked disproportionately to members of BAME community, race becomes a significant element in the discourse around knife crime because the responses to knife crime, including stop and search provisions and increased surveillance in schools, often target members of BAME communities disproportionately. In this context, using a Critical Race Theory perspective, Chadderton argues that surveillance and monitoring procedures “for allegedly ensuring the security of young people at school in the UK are actually reproducing structures of white supremacy and both the discourse and the materiality of race” because the structures feed into the dominant discourse on race and security where white bodies are recognised as ‘lives’, and minority ethnic bodies are seen as ‘threat.’

On the other hand, an argument is made that the literature on knife crime and youth violence fails to take into consideration the rise of bad behaviour amongst the youth of certain minority communities because authors are concerned about perpetuating the discourse on race and violence. This approach is considered to be flawed because it fails to take into consideration crimes committed by young black men when the official statistics show that despite being only 12 per cent of London’s male population, black youth commit “54 per cent of all the street crimes, 46 per cent of all knife crimes and more than 50 per cent of the gun crimes in London.” Therefore, there is concern that despite disproportionate representation in knife crime and other youth related crimes, the academic literature does not address the rise of black youth crime adequately.

To summarise this section, there is a perception of knife crime being perpetrated mostly by Black youth, whereas the statistics indicate that the majority of the perpetrators of knife crime are young white males. The implication of such perceptions for black communities is that the measures for social control such as stop and search powers exercised by the police and surveillance in schools, generally target young black males. Therefore, while the statistics show that the majority of perpetrators of knife crimes are white males, the surveillance and stop and search powers disproportionately target young black males. From a wider community perspective, the impact is the increased levels of dissatisfaction of black communities with the police and authorities.

Media reporting on knife crime

One of the questions that has been the subject of the research on knife crime relates to the media representation of knife crime and whether such reporting is reflective of disproportionate reporting on knife crime. This is an important question in terms of impacts of knife crimes for the wider community and the youth because media reporting is partly responsible for creation of perceptions around knife crime including perceptions around moral panics. These also have impacts on youth and communities.

The studies present mixed results on the question of whether media reporting on knife crime is disproportionate. A suggestion that there is disproportionate reporting of media reporting on knife crime was made in 2014 by Blackman and Wilson in their study. They reported that knife crime is being disproportionately reported by the media and that the actual state or incidence of knife crime is lesser than what was represented by the media. The data on the basis of which Blackman and Wilson presented their findings was empirical in nature and they compared the actual incidence of knife crime with the representation of the knife crime in the media; they concluded that media reports on knife crime presents an inaccurate picture. Prior to them, another study had also come to similar conclusions where it was reported that there was no significant increase in knife crime despite media reports suggesting a significant increase in knife crime in the inner city areas.

More recent research however, suggests that the incidence of knife crime has increased and media reports are more accurately reflective of this increase. A significant increase in knife crime was reported for the year 2018 which witnessed a 7 percent increase. Literature from 2020 also indicated this increase in knife crime. Therefore, there is a possibility that the media representation of knife crime does align with the actual state of crime. On the other hand, it may be argued that the media sensationalises knife crime through its reporting.

Why this is a significant point is because knife crime may have social impacts of shaping perceptions about youth crime and knife crime in the society, which may be informed by the media reports on the incidence of this crime. Such perceptions may be accurately formed (based on accurately representative media reports) or they may amount to moral panics. Moral panics have implications in the society and if moral panics are formed around the issue of knife crime, then this could have further implications as is also discussed in the literature.

Knife crime as a moral panic

An issue that has been considered in literature with respect to knife crime is whether knife crime is a moral panic. There are some reasons why this question arises in the first place. Media reporting has at times presented knife crime as an ‘epidemic’ which leads to the perception that there is a significant rise in knife crime. An crime epidemic or emergency is a state of unusual crime activity, which may demand more strict responses from the criminal justice system. On the other hand, if the representation of crime amounts to a moral panic, then it can have certain other social implications and impacts that are not directly related to knife crime but are a result of that and for that reason, need to be considered and analysed. These can include impact of policy on communities and youth that are subjected to more social control as a result of moral panic.

Lugo-Ocando and Brandão argue that crime journalists contribute to the creation of moral panic due to less experience and knowledge on formulation of crime statistics. This suggests that there may at times be a disparity between the incidence of crime and the way that it is represented in the media and that this can lead to the creation of false moral panics amongst the general public. Mejias and Banaji argue that the media gives out conflicting representations of the youth; some media reports present youth as a group that is vulnerable to radicalisation, exclusion and criminality, and other reports present them as digitally savvy service users. There are therefore, conflicting perceptions around youth. Some of these perceptions may be related to the formation of moral panics, when the youth is presented as the one driving a ‘crime epidemic’. This can lead to the demand for more stringent criminal justice responses for tackling the crime epidemic and more social control on the youth. This has implications for the relations between police who have to implement these criminal justice measures and the members of the public who are targeted through these measures.

Knife crime has become a part of the discourse on youth crime, and some scholars have argued that there is already a creation of moral panic around knife crime. The constant media reporting and use of terms like ‘epidemic’ have led to the creation of such moral panics. Young et al noted (as a critique on media reports around knife crime) that “currently, there are no national trend data on knives available to support the growing concern (shared by professionals working with young people) about the extent to which knives are carried by 10 to 17 year-olds.” Wood argued that despite what is presented in media reports, factual information about knife crime, victims and the perpetrators suggests that state of knife crime has remained stable over time. These studies suggest that there is a moral panic around youth crime which is fuelled by the media reports that sensationalise knife crime. The result of these moral panics can be seen in the formulation of law and policy as well and has impacts on the youth who are targeted by the law and policy.

Victims and offenders

Victimology studies on knife crime are scarce; one study does provide some insight into the fact that the greatest risk of being victims of knife crime are white males in the ages between 16–34 years and the same age group is at the greatest probability of being offenders or victim offenders of knife crime. There are other factors that increase the risk of being victims of knife crime including the likelihood of having a criminal record. Only 20 percent of knife crimes are gang-related and the majority of the knife crime is experienced between strangers, and as a non-retaliatory ‘one-off event’. Based on this data, it has been suggested that the prevention strategies for knife crime should be focused on prolific violent offenders or repeat victims who are known to the police as this is the group that is more susceptible to knife crime exposure.

One of the arguments made in the literature on knife crime is that there is a victim offender overlapping in many cases (also termed as V-OO), which means that victims and offenders are based on shared characteristics and social space, are ‘one-in-the-same’. V-OO suggests that there is a potential for the reduction of knife crime by focussing on the victimology and the offender profile as well as how this overlaps. The proponents of the V-OO framework argue that it can provide an important assessment of individuals and their risk factors as there can be interdependencies between individuals involved in knife crime, which if understood can also lead to the prevention of knife crime through appropriate strategies. Lauritsen and Laub argue that when considering victimisation, it is not only an individual’s victimisation that is a significant issue, but also the victimisation within their social network.

In the context of impacts of knife crime, V-OO also suggests that the impact of knife crime may not be as widespread in regard to victims of knife crime, but that it may be a crime that happens within a social setting where there is some overlap between the victims and offenders. If this is accurate, then it has implications for the formulation of law and policy for prevention of knife crime.

There are other aspects of victimology and spaces where knife crimes may be more prevalent, which also needs to be considered. According to research on this issue, young males between the ages of 13 and 24 years are substantially more likely to be involved in knife crime. The Serious Violence Strategy has suggested that it is primarily underprivileged children, or children with four or more siblings, that are more likely to be involved in knife crime. More concerning are the research results that suggest that knife crime is more likely to take place in and around schools. This coincides with the results of another research by the BBC News that indicated that weapon possession (primarily sharp objects) at schools had doubled in four years. This translated to over 950 weapon possession offences in schools.

Proceeding from the discussion on knife crime and schools above, one of the impacts of knife crime is the association of carrying a weapon in school with underachievement as reported by one research that such underachievement is seen amongst 10 to 18-year old individuals in school and is also associated with school exclusions and persistent abstention from school.

Impacts of knife crime

Impacts of knife crime are considered in this part of the dissertation. This is the main part of the dissertation where the principal research question drives the presentation of themes and data. The impacts of knife crime are considered in context of policy formation, community relations with police, youth, victims, and the BAME communities in the UK.

Impact of knife crime on policy formation

An important impact of knife crime and the development of public discourse on knife crime is that it leads to the development of policy responses from the government and Parliament. Government may at times use the highly charged public discourse on some criminal justice issue and even moral panics created around the issue to make policy responses; Pearson had argued in 2006 that even though the state of knife crime was not high, the responses of the government invoked tough measures justified on the basis of social perceptions. Knife crime reporting by the media are also used by the government to generate public support for its programmes for youth justice system. Pearson argues that “what is wrong with government and media responses to youth crime and anti-social behaviour is its emphasis on the unprecedented nature of the problem, while losing its grip on the actual social and historical background.”

One of the responses of the government to knife crime is the inclusion of a mandatory minimum custodial sentence for 16 and 17 year olds convicted of a second knife crime offence under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. There are other legislations that also relate to knife crime, which include Section 139AA of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 which punishes the offence of threatening with an article with a blade or point or offensive weapon, Section 28 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, which punishes the offence of using another person to mind a dangerous weapon, and Section 1 of the Knives Act 1997, which punishes the unlawful marketing of knives. However, Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 is a significant aspect of the law because it provides a mandatory sentence for young people. This requires that the youth who are found in possession of knife or a sharp object that can be used as a weapon be mandatorily sentenced; the problem with this approach is how it sits with the principles of youth justice that are more aligned with reformation. Statistics on sentencing and imprisonment of youth offenders for knife crime indicate the increase of sentencing of individuals. This needs to be considered briefly to understand how this presents certain impacts on the youth. It has been reported that since 2013 an increasing number of knife and offensive weapon possession offences have resulted in a sentence of immediate custody and a prison sentence the leading disposal while cautions and community sentences have significantly reduced since 2009. The prison sentences are for more than six months for the knife and offensive weapon possession offences and these have increased since 2009. The ‘two strikes’ rule introduced by Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 requires that people over 18 convicted of carrying a knife more than once automatically receive a sentence of between six months and four years, while those between 16 or 17 years receive a minimum four month detention and training order. These measures have been criticised as being not just or effective and for being damaging and disproportionate for minority communities. Continue your exploration of Merging Ideas from Multiple Criminal Theories with our related content.

The impact of knife crime has been the development of a certain political and public discourse that is focussed on the depiction of youth crime as an emergency or epidemic; for instance, in 2019, the home secretary, Sajid Javid, called for a shift in the government’s mindset to deal with the “national emergency” of youth violence. By terming youth violence as a national emergency and knife crime as an epidemic, politicians and members of the public seek to create a national discourse about the need to develop stringent policy in response to knife crime. In Sajid Javid’s own address, he sought to develop a consensus on the issue of knife crime to be treated like the “outbreak of some virulent disease” and that all parts of the government must work together to “ensure there is no let-up until the violence is eradicated”. These policy responses are driven by a security and social control driven narrative that can have a negative impact on the youth that may be subjected to stop and search and surveillance measures that are usually part of such responses.

That children can be motivated to not carry knife or not indulge in knife crime through policies that are not rooted in security narrative is established by the findings related to the impact of the ‘Devastating After Effects anti-knife crime sessions’ that were delivered to group assemblies of 13 to 15 year olds in secondary schools in London average. The sessions were delivered to approximately 14000 pupils in this age group in the period between June 2016 to March 2019. Some 9875 pupils then completed questionnaires on how they responded to these sessions and the findings of these data indicate that there were significant attitudinal including “reduced the number of young people who would consider carrying a knife, reduced the number who thought carrying a knife was a way to keep safe, reduced the number who thought using a knife only affected the person carrying it, and increased the number who would do something if they knew someone was carrying a knife.” These findings suggest that there can be different kinds of policy responses other than those that are related to security narrative and driven by social control objectives and that such responses can also be positively impactful for children in the age group surveyed for this research.

Impact of knife crime on community-police relations

There is a lack of trust in the police amongst some groups of the British youth, which is reported in literature; indeed, research on young people’s lack of trust in policing has suggested that there is an unwillingness to cooperate with the police and feelings of unsafety, that lead to some young people carrying a weapon for self-protection. In a study carried out collaboratively with a community organising group in the London Borough of Hackney, exploring young people’s experiences of safety in relation to knife crime in their everyday life, young people feeling unsafe, and young people’s risk perceptions of knife crime and perceptions of trust in policing, the research found that more than half the respondents experienced a previous knife related incident in the past 12 months. Furthermore, the research found that the majority of the respondents were worried about becoming victims of knife crime with varying levels of threat perception. Out of the 85 respondents of this survey, the question on how worried they were about victimisation of a knife incident, 20 indicated “Not at all worried” or “Not very worried” while in 65 respondents were either “Fairly worried” or “Very worried” about victimisation. These responses of the respondents to the survey suggest that there is a fear of knife crime and being victimised by the same amongst the young people who responded to the survey.

With respect to policing and trust, the same study that is discussed above, also asked respondents to elaborate on issues around policing and trust. The factors that affect the issues of trust of the young people are related to “Stop-and-Search,” “Street Patrol”, (/Visibility), and police “Response”. The responses of the young participants in the study showed the rise of negative concepts like “feeling unprotected,” “feeling targeted,” “racism” in their perceptions and experiences with the police.

The feelings of mistrust and lack of protection on the part of the young people are linked to knife crime in a cyclical way, if that term may be used in this context. This is because the factors that lead to the development of such feelings on the part of the young people, especially in the inner city areas are somewhat related to knife crime. These factors are increased stop and search use of powers and street patrol by the police and these lead to the increased mistrust between the police and the young people. On the other hand, the police use these powers of stop and search as well as street patrol because of the incidence of knife crime or other such criminal activity. In this regard, it has been noted:

“Policing activities prominent in young people’s mental models are primarily associated with negative concepts (e.g., “feeling unprotected,” “feeling targeted,” “racism”). In line with other studies (Murray et al., 2020), stop and-search appears to be the prototypical interaction and practice of policing young adults, and for many interviewees it was the only encounter that they ever had with the police or heard about most through peers. Their perception of stop-and-search is further linked to other police measures, which young people describe as discriminatory or linked to everyday or institutional “racism” (including increased police powers due to “Section 60s” or the “Gang Matrix”). Young people emphasize that the current use of these practices make them feel “unfairly treated, abused or harassed by the police” (lay interviewee) and that they target specific individuals (i.e., ethnic groups or males from specific areas), an impression that was notably also shared by white respondents.”

Thus, there is a negative impact of police exercise of powers of stop and search on the young people; while on the other hand, the police exercise of these powers are predicated on the state of crime in the society which may necessitate the use of such powers for social control.

Impact of knife crime on young people

It is also noteworthy that the incidence of knife crime against young people and children does not always get reported to the police as data suggests that in the age group of 10 to 25 years, those who had been the victim of a robbery or an assault causing injury, only 28 and 24 per cent of incidents respectively came to the attention of the police. This has implications for the interventions that can be devised by the police to address knife crime because it would seem that such interventions may not be completely successful in addressing knife crime as a significant number of crimes go unreported and therefore, unaddressed. Furthermore, there may be a significant number of cases involving threatening a young person with a knife or having possession on a knife that may go unreported.

Young people may be more susceptible to victimisation by knife crime or violence because of the interaction between the characteristics of the communities and societies in which they live, their relationships with people and groups and other individual level factors. Certain groups can be considered to be more vulnerable to violent victimisation as compared to others, and young people from poor families and broken families may fall in that category making them more vulnerable to knife crime. There is also data on the increase in the vulnerable population of children, particularly children in care, children excluded from school, and homeless adults since 2014. One research study found that there is normalisation of knife carrying amongst the adolescents who say that it is normal, trivial and inevitable. This suggests that there is greater risk of more adolescents carrying knife as something that is normal and even inevitable.

Impact of knife crime on those living in poverty

Those living in poverty are suggested to be more impacted by knife crime. Research suggests that there is a higher likelihood of victimisation of those who live in poor neighbourhoods, are unemployed or live in hard pressed ACORN areas. ACORN refers to the categorisation of UK postcodes, based on demographic statistics and lifestyle variables. Therefore, those who live in poorer neighbourhoods are more likely to be victims of knife crimes as compared to those who live in wealthier neighbourhoods. Living in poverty intersects with young age to increase the chances of victimisation by knife crime as research suggests that in the age groups of 10 to 25 year olds, there was a higher risk of victimisation for those who were part of households that had difficulties managing on their income and living in areas experiencing disorder problems.

Low income neighbourhoods are also associated with higher levels of physical disorder; this is again associated with higher risk of victimisation by knife crime because people in neighbourhoods with high level of physical disorder are more likely to experience violent victimisation. This is corroborated by research that offenders and victims both tend to come from lower socio-economic groups for homicides by any method. This is also corroborated by the research that suggests that the homicide rates in the wealthiest areas of Britain have continued to decline as they have risen in Britain in general; while the “wealthiest 20 per cent of areas have witnessed the homicide rate fall, the homicide rate in the poorest tenth of areas in Britain rose by 39 per cent in the eighties and nineties.” While these figures are not representative of the latest data, they do represent a general trend that is reported in literature on crime in poor neighbourhoods as compared to crime in wealthy neighbourhoods. This is in line with more recent research that indicates that there is a link between poverty and violence and that inequality of circumstance can lead to higher risk of victimisation by certain types of violent crime.

Impact of knife crime on BAME communities

Two points that can be summarised from the sections immediately preceding this section are that knife crime affects young people and poor people more than it affects other demographic groups of the society. With connection to the second point, which is that people living in poor neighbourhoods are more likely to be victimised by knife crime, the point that can be made in this section is that there is a disproportionate impact of knife crime on BAME communities. This can be seen in the context of members of BAME communities more likely to be living in or disproportionately concentrated in deprived areas. This may lead to the members of BAME communities being more likely to experience violent crimes which involve a high proportion of knife usage. In the research conducted in the decade to 2006, the findings revealed that on an average, the annual representation of black homicide victims was around 12 per cent which was five times of their actual population estimates. This was similar to Asians who represented 7 per cent of victims with much lower actual population representation.

Differences in knife carrying habits were also reported based on the ethnicities of the students in mainstream schools with white pupils more likely to report carrying a penknife and black pupils more likely to admit to carrying a flick knife than white or Asian young people and rates for knife carrying being significantly higher for white British and black Caribbean young people than for black African and South Asian young people. Therefore, the impact of knife crime on members of BAME communities can be seen in the context of the perpetration of the crime as well as victimisation, both of which indicate a higher risk than the proportion of black people in the total population of the UK. Thus, as compared to white and Asian members of the society, young males from Caribbean community are more likely to be victimised as well as to perpetrate knife crime.

The impact of knife crime on BAME communities, particularly black communities, is also felt because the use of social control measures like stop and search, and surveillance in schools are considered to be more impactful for these communities.

Conclusion

Young people are affected by knife crime in that they form the significant proportion of those who are targeted as victims of knife crime. Young people experience greater levels of violent crime victimisation as compared to other groups in the society. Young people may be more susceptible to victimisation by knife crime or violence if they come from poor families and broken families may fall in that category making them more vulnerable to knife crime. Those living in poverty are suggested to be more impacted by knife crime. Research suggests that there is a higher likelihood of victimisation of those who live in poor neighbourhoods, are unemployed or live in hard pressed ACORN areas. Low income neighbourhoods are also associated with higher levels of physical disorder; this is again associated with higher risk of victimisation by knife crime because people in neighbourhoods with high level of physical disorder are more likely to experience violent victimisation. BAME communities too show high incidence of knife crime when the actual population is compared with the involvement in knife crime statistics. Knife crime affects young people and poor people more than it affects other demographic groups of the society. People living in poor neighbourhoods are more likely to be victimised by knife crime. Members of BAME communities are more likely to be living in or disproportionately concentrated in deprived areas. This may lead to the members of BAME communities being more likely to experience violent crimes which involve a high proportion of knife usage. This may explain the annual representation of black homicide victims at around 12 per cent being five times of their actual population estimates.

One of the important impacts of knife crime is that it has led to the development of a securitisation approach for addressing the knife crime by youth. This is one of the consequences of the public discourse on knife crime which may also amount to a moral panic. The government has responded by introducing a mandatory custodial sentence for 16 and 17 year olds convicted of a second knife crime offence under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 and the application of the ‘two strike’ rule. The youth who are found in possession of knife or a sharp object that can be used as a weapon be mandatorily sentenced and this leads to a compromise with the principles of youth justice that emphasise on reformation. Instead there is an approach that emphasises on punitive sentencing. This approach also has negative impacts on the youth and minority communities. It can be recommended that there are alternate kinds of policy responses other than those that are related to security narrative and driven by social control objectives and that such responses can also be positively impactful for reducing knife crime in the youth. These alternative approaches can be grounded in public health discourse.

Another impact of knife crime is on the increase of mistrust between police and certain groups of British youth, as suggested by literature that shows that there is increasing lack of trust in policing and unwillingness to cooperate with the police and feelings of unsafety, that lead to some young people carrying a weapon for self-protection. Policy responses to knife crime including the use of “Stop-and-Search,” “Street Patrol”, (/Visibility), and police “Response” have further led to the negative feelings of “feeling unprotected,” “feeling targeted,” and “racism” in the perceptions and experiences of the young black males with the police. Thus, there is a negative impact of police exercise of powers of stop and search on the young people; while on the other hand, the police exercise of these powers are predicated on the state of crime in the society which may necessitate the use of such powers for social control. Alternate approaches to control of knife crime, other than the securitisation approaches can be useful in bridging some of the trust gap between the police and the youth particularly in the black communities. Public health approaches can also be useful in reducing the incidence of knife crime. In this regard, the ‘Devastating After Effects anti-knife crime sessions’ delivered to group assemblies of 13 to 15 year olds in secondary schools have already indicated the potential success that such methods can have; this research suggested that there were significant attitudinal changes including “reduced the number of young people who would consider carrying a knife, reduced the number who thought carrying a knife was a way to keep safe, reduced the number who thought using a knife only affected the person carrying it, and increased the number who would do something if they knew someone was carrying a knife.” Therefore, there is something to be said for the public health approach for mitigating some of the impacts of knife crime in terms of social control measures for the youth as well as the BAME communities.

Books

Achinewhu-Nworgu E, C Nworgu, S Azaiki, and H Nworgu, Examining the Reasons Black Male Youths Give for Committing Crime with Reference to Inner City Areas of London (Bulgarian Comparative Education Society 2013).

Blackman S and Andrew Wilson, ‘Psychotic (e)states: Where anti-social behaviour with recreational drug use to signify the social problem group’ in Anti-Social Behaviour in Britain: Victorian and Contemporary Perspectives (Springer 2014).

Bright C, Preventing youth violence and gang involvement: A review of risk and protective factors (Early Intervention Foundation 2015).

Collis J and Roger Hussey, Business Research: A Practical Guide for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students (London: Palgrave Macmillon 2009).

Creswell JW, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (Los Angeles: Sage 2013).

Dorling D, ‘Prime suspect: murder in Britain’, in P Hillyard et al (eds.), Criminal Obsessions: Why Harm Matters More than Crime (London: Crime and Society Foundation 2005).

Eades C, R Grimshaw, A Silvestri, E Solomon, Knife crime: A review of evidence and policy (2nd ed. London: Centre for Crime and Justice Studies 2007).

Gilbert E and Peter Sinclair, Devastating After Effects: Anti-Knife Crime Sessions (Flavasum Trust 2019).

Grimshaw R and Matt Ford, Young people, violence and knives: Revisiting the evidence and policy discussions (London, UK: Centre for Crime and Justice Studies 2018).

Lauritsen JL and JH Laub, ‘Understanding the link between victimisation and offending: New reflections on an old idea’ in JM Hough and MG Maxfield (eds.), Surveying crime in the 21st century: Crime prevention studies (New York: Criminal Justice Press 2007).

Lemos G, Fear and fashion: The use of knives and other weapons by young people (York: York Publishing Services 2004).

Nicholas S, S Kershaw and A Walker, Crime in England and Wales 2006/07 (London: Home Office 2007).

Willis JW and Muktha Jost, Foundations of Qualitative Research: Interpretive and Critical Approaches (Thousand Oaks: Sage 2007).

Wilson D, C Sharp and A Patterson, Young People and Crime: Findings from the 2005 Offending, Crime and Justice Survey (London: Home Office 2006).

Yin R, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 5 (London: Sage Publications 2009).

Journals

Bailey L, Vincent Harinam, and Barak Ariel, ‘Victims, offenders and victim-offender overlaps of knife crime: A social network analysis approach using police records’ (2020) 15(12) PLoS one e0242621.

Chadderton C, ‘UK secondary schools under surveillance: What are the implications for race? A critical race and Butlerian analysis’ (2015) Power and education 128.

Cook EA and Sandra Walklate, ‘Gendered objects and gendered spaces: The invisibilities of ‘knife’ crime’ (2020) Current Sociology 0011392120932972.

Densley J, R Deuchar and S Harding, ‘An Introduction to Gangs and Serious Youth Violence in the United Kingdom’ (2020) Youth Justice 1473225420902848.

Gottfredson MR, ‘On the etiology of criminal victimisation’ (1981) 72(2) The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 714.

Graham K and S Wells, ‘Somebody’s gonna get their head kicked in tonight’: Aggression among young males in bars–A question of values?’ (2003) 43 British Journal of Criminology 546.

Humphreys DK, M Degli Esposti, F Gardner and J Shepherd, ‘Violence in England and Wales: does media reporting match the data?’ (2019) 367 BMJ l6040.

Lugo-Ocando J and R Faria Brandão, ‘Stabbing news: Articulating crime statistics in the newsroom’ (2016) 10(6) Journalism Practice 715.

Malik NS et al, ‘Violence-related knife injuries in a UK city; epidemiology and impact on secondary care resources’ (2020) 20 EClinicalMedicine 100296.

McGloin JM and DS Kirk, ‘An overview of social network analysis’ (2010) 21(2) Journal of Criminal Justice Education 169.

Mejias S and Shakuntala Banaji, ‘Backed into a corner: challenging media and policy representations of youth citizenship in the UK’ (2019) 22(12) Information, Communication & Society 1714.

Osidipe T and Suzella Palmer, ‘Serious Youth Violence in Britain: Is the Public Health Approach the Solution?’ (2018) British Society of Criminology Newsletter 22.

Palasinski M, ‘Security, respect and culture in British teenagers' discourses of knife‐carrying’ (2013) Safer communities.

Ruth P, C Thompson and P Sara, ‘We need a renewed focus on primary prevention to tackle criminal knife violence in the longer term’ (2019) 365 BMJ l1769.

Skarlatidou A, Lina Ludwig, Reka Solymosi, and Ben Bradford, ‘Understanding Knife Crime and Trust in Police with Young People in East London’ (2021) Crime & Delinquency 00111287211029873.

Toman E, ‘The victim-offender overlap behind bars: Linking prison misconduct and victimisation’ (2017) Justice Quarterly 1.

What Makes Us Unique

24/7 Customer Support
100% Customer Satisfaction
No Privacy Violation
Quick Services
Subject Experts