INTRODUCTION

The decade between 1983 and 1993 was marked by an unprecedented surge of violence, often lethal violence,
among young people in the United States. For millions of youths and their families, a period of life that should
have been distinguished by good health and great promise was instead marred by injuries, disability, and death
(Cook & Laub, 1998). This epidemic of violence not only left lasting scars on victims, perpetrators, and their
families and friends, it also wounded communities and, in ways not yet fully understood, the country as a
whole.
Since 1993, the peak year of the epidemic, there have been some encouraging signs that youth violence is
declining. Three important indicators of violent behavior -- arrest records, victimization data, and hospital
emergency room records -- have shown significant downward trends nationally. These official records reveal
only a small part of the picture, however.
A fourth key indicator of violence -- confidential reports by youths themselves -- reveals that the proportion of
young people who acknowledge having committed serious, potentially lethal acts of physical violence has
remained level since the peak of the epidemic. In 1999, for instance, there were 104,000 arrests of persons
under age 18 for robbery, forcible rape, aggravated assault, or homicide (Snyder, 2000); of those arrests, 1,400
were for homicides perpetrated by adolescents (Snyder, 2000) and, occasionally, even younger children (Snyder
& Sickmund, 1999). Yet in any given year in the late 1990s, at least 10 times as many youths reported that they
had engaged in some form of violent behavior that could have seriously injured or killed another person.
The high prevalence of violent behavior reported by adolescents underscores the importance of this report at
this time.
Americans cannot afford to become complacent. Even though youth violence is less lethal today than it was in
1993, the percentage of adolescents involved in violent behavior remains alarmingly high. The epidemic of
lethal violence that swept the United States was fueled in large part by easy access to weapons, notably firearms
-- and youths' self-reports of violence indicate that the potential for a resurgence of lethal violence exists. Yet
viewing homicide as a barometer of all youth violence can be quite misleading. Similarly, judging the success
of violence prevention efforts solely on the basis of reductions in homicides can be unwise.
This report, the first Surgeon General's report on youth violence in the United States, summarizes an extensive
body of research and seeks to clarify seemingly contradictory trends, such as the discrepancies noted above
between official records of youth violence and young people's self-reports of violent behaviors. It describes
research identifying and clarifying the factors that increase the risk, or statistical probability, that a young
person will become violent, as well as studies that have begun to identify developmental pathways that may
lead a young person into a violent lifestyle. The report also explores the less well developed research area of
factors that seem to protect youths from viewing violence as an acceptable -- or inevitable -- way of
approaching or responding to life events. Finally, the report reviews research on the effectiveness of specific
strategies and programs designed to reduce and prevent youth violence.
As these topics suggest, the key to preventing a great deal of violence is understanding where and when it
occurs, determining what causes it, and scientifically documenting which of many strategies for prevention and
intervention are truly effective. This state-of-the-science report summarizes progress toward those goals.
The most important conclusion of the report is that the United States is well past the "nothing works" era with
respect to reducing and preventing youth violence. Less than 10 years ago, many observers projected an
inexorably rising tide of violence; the recent, marked reductions in arrests of young perpetrators and in
victimization reports appear to belie those dire predictions. We possess the knowledge and tools needed to
reduce or even prevent much of the most serious youth violence. Scientists from many disciplines, working in a
variety of settings with public and private agencies, are generating needed information and putting it to use in
designing, testing, and evaluating intervention programs.
The most urgent need now is a national resolve to confront the problem of youth violence systematically, using
research-based approaches, and to correct damaging myths and stereotypes that interfere with the task at hand.
This report is designed to help meet that need.
The report makes it clear that after years of effort and massive expenditures of public and private resources, the
search for solutions to the problem of youth violence remains an enormous challenge (Lipton et al.,
1975; Sechrest et al., 1979). Some traditional as well as seemingly innovative approaches to reducing and
preventing youth violence have failed to deliver on their promise, and successful approaches are often eclipsed
by random violent events such as the recent school shootings that have occurred in communities throughout the
country.
Youth violence is a high-visibility, high-priority concern in every sector of U.S. society. We have come to
understand that young people in every community are involved in violence, whether the community is a small
town or central city, a neatly groomed suburb, or an isolated rural region. Although male adolescents,
particularly those from minority groups, are disproportionately arrested for violent crimes, self-reports indicate
that differences between minority and majority populations and between male and female adolescents may not
be as large as arrest records indicate or conventional wisdom holds. Race/ethnicity, considered in isolation from
other life circumstances, sheds little light on a given child's or adolescent's propensity for engaging in violence.
This chapter describes the scope and focus of the report and explains how the public health approach advances
efforts to understand and prevent youth violence. Common myths about youth violence are presented and
debunked. Uncorrected, these myths lead to misguided public policies, inefficient use of public and private
resources, and loss of traction in efforts to address the problem. Documentation for the facts that counter these
myths appears in later chapters. This chapter also lays out the scientific basis of the report -- that is, the
standards of evidence that research studies had to meet in order to be included in the report and the sources of
data cited throughout. Final sections of this chapter preview subsequent chapters and list the report's major
conclusions.

AIMS & OBJECTIVES

Mission Statement

To develop the skills, capacities and capabilities of young people to enable them to participate
in society as independent, mature and responsible citizens.

The organisation’s main objectives are:

Provide a secure and safe environment for young local people to play and socialise with
her young people, without the fear of crime, bullying and violence.
Organise regular league football, structured football coaching and training sessions.
Access to after school youth club provisions for young people.
Development of personal, social, physical and educational potential of young people
through programmes of sports, educational and social activities.

To establish efficient and constructive networking with schools, agencies and other professional
bodies.

To provide information, advice and guidance for young people on employment,

education, training, sports and other activities.

Participate in local, regional, national and international football competitions so young

people experience traveling, meeting people from different backgrounds and communities.

Organise football tours and non-football related to tours and educational visits in the UK and abroad.

To act as resource and point of contact for young people.

The volunteers of the organisation act as role models for the young members of the organisation.

Work with young people vulnerable from negative peer groups.

Organise educational workshops on crime, drugs, gang violence, healthy living, careers, and jobs.
 Provide information of other services which users can access.

This provides a generic overview of our aims and objectives but Newark Youth London is very
innovative and flexible in its approach and continues to look for different areas that need developing
 Swift administration of justice
 Confronting young offenders with the consequences of their offending, for themselves and their
families, their victims and the community and helping them to develop a sense of personal
responsibility
 Intervention which tackles the particular factors which puts the young person at risk of offending and
which strengthens ‘protective factors’
 Punishment proportionate to the seriousness and persistence of offending
 Encouraging reparation to victims by young offenders
 Reinforcing the responsibility of parents
NEEDS AND IMPORTANCE
The astounding and alarming rates of crime by young adults in our nation have called for attention, not a day
goes by when newspaper headlines don’t read about crimes done by youths. We are talking against gender
inequality, felony, sexual assaults, corruption, poverty, cyber crime, rape and what not, and our own youth, who
are future of the nation, are the one under scrutiny for committing these crimes.
Youth are there to shape the future of the country and statistics of crime amongst youth portrays a dark-clouded
picture for the nation. According to released figures of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), almost
60% crimes against minors are done by youngsters of age 16 and 18. That accounts for, 28,830 out of 43,506
crimes registered against minors under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Special Local Law (SLL).
Most Crimes Trending Amongst Youth Are:
Crime against women : Rape, sex scandals, insulting women via words, gestures or acts rose at an
unbelievably alarming rate. The figures upsets as rape cases by juveniles increased 60%, acts to insult women
raised to 70.5%.
Cyber crime : Majorly used for earning money and blackmailing partners by young teenagers. There had been
53.5% rise in the cyber crime. Out of 324 people arrested under the IT Act, 215 were from the age group of 18-
30 years.
The major cause of increasing crime rates amongst youth is the ‘easy money’. The greedy and attention-seeking
behavior of today’s youth leads them to commit heinous crimes. The more disturbing facts on the crime sheets
are young and qualified teenagers even get involved in doing of such atrocious crimes.
The rate of crime amongst youth has increased to 40% and almost 56% of the crimes are done by youngsters
between age group 16-25. The traceable behaviour and reasons are far from the obvious but majorly such
worrying figures are contributed due to:
1. Easy Money
2. Unemployment
3. Fitting into the group
4. Lust for attention
But blaming the youth for all of it will clearly be wrong. Youth, at most times, in such cases are themselves
victims. Many qualified young criminals are drawn to committing crimes due to scarcity of jobs. Also, peer
pressure plays a negative role, which leads teenagers to earn money in easy ways, show-off and try to gain
attention by buying expensive gadgets.
The upbringing, lack of time provided to youngsters has led to most of the youngsters to be drawn towards the
wrong path. There is not one but many ways to put a stop to let youth destroy their and nation’s future.
We are in dire need for a better education system, huge modifications is called for in terms of upbringing and
social awareness. Youngsters are a sensitive and tender group and need to be dealt with better care and
protection. They need time and need to be talked out with the help of love and care. It does not guarantee that
no offending by youth will be considered or committed but reduces the risk to a minimal level.
Stringent law enforcement, better judiciary setup can discourage youngsters from committing such crimes but
why wait for others to better your world when you, yourself can take a step more and stop it from being.
DATA ANALYSIS
 Reducing youth crime
Early intervention plays an important role in keeping minors from embarking on a life of crime. Swift and
consistent punishment for offences can help reduce the incidence of crime. After serving their sentence,
young offenders receive support aimed at preventing re-offending.
Swift justice for young offenders
Young people who commit offences are dealt with as quickly as possible. This is in keeping with people’s sense
of justice. Offences committed by minors are covered by juvenile criminal law.
Preventing re-offending by minors
The government is taking the following measures to prevent young offenders from re-offending:
 Personalised approach
Every young person is different and deserves support that is specifically tailored to them. For example, an
aggressive person can be ordered to attend a course to learn how to cope with and control aggression.
The Offending Behaviour Programmes Accreditation Committee reviews the courses to determine whether
they have actually had the desired effect.
 Training and education programmes
When a young person is released from young offenders’ institution, he or she needs to reintegrate into society
by attending school or university, or finding a job. The training and education programmes provided at the end
of the custodial period are intended to help them prepare for this.
 Proper support and guidance
Young offenders’ institutions, the Child Protection Board, the Youth Probation Service and municipalities work
together in network and process-related consultative bodies. They arrange shelter, income, education and/or
work for young offenders upon release.
Early intervention for children under the age of 12
Children under the age of 12 cannot be prosecuted. The police either speak to their parents or refer them to
a youth care office. The courts can take measures when there is a risk that the situation could become
unmanageable.
Parents of minors required to attend hearings
When a minor is tried for an offence, the parents or guardians are required to attend the proceedings so that
the judge can get a sense of the family situation and the minor concerned. If the parents fail to attend a
hearing, the court can issue a warrant to secure their attendance in court. In such cases, the police pick up the
parents at home and escort them to court.
Parents are also involved before the trial. The police often talk to the parents and the Child Protection Board
also establishes contact with them. The Youth Probation Service contacts them after the pre-trial detention
order is lifted.
Tackling problem gangs of youths
Dealing with problem gangs of youths is one of the government’s policy priorities. Its approach is tailored to
the specific group and individual members. What works best is a combination of care, punitive, educational
and employment measures. The government wants to do more than simply set limits by imposing penalties on
youths who have committed a crime. It is also important to offer young people the prospect of work or
education. This will keep them from embarking on a life of crime.
The integrated approach designed to tackle gangs of youths at local level is coordinated by the municipality in
collaboration with the police, the Public Prosecution Service and the Ministry of Security and Justice.
METHODLOGY AND RESEARCH
THE PROBLEM Around the world levels of crime and violence committed by youths in urban areas are on the
increase. Furthermore, there is an inverse relationship between the crime and the age of the age of the
perpetrators, with the age profile of criminals constantly decreasing. To assess crime amongst young people,
this Youth Offender Profile tool is being developed by the Safer Cities Programme of the United Nations Centre
for Human Settlements (Habitat). This tool is based on previous Kenyan, South African and Tanzanian
experience. Ultimately, researchers wish to know how people either as individuals or as groups within societies
act and think in common situations. The best way to do that is to observe them repeatedly and directly over
time. However, this is not possible, particularly when the actions being measured are those that deal with
delinquent or criminal behaviour. Even if this were possible, there are still kinds of human behaviour that
cannot be observed directly such as attitudes, beliefs and opinions. It is therefore necessary to use surveys,
which are a systematic way of asking people to volunteer information about their attitudes, behaviours, opinions
and beliefs. The success of survey research rests on how closely the answers that people give to survey
questions matches reality that is, how people really think and act. From the outset it was evident that no single
type of survey approach could possibly be applied that would enable the collection of information necessary to
understand why youth engage in deviant behaviour and what types of rehabilitative forms of justice would be
best match different types of deviancy. The first task is to outline theories on causation of youth delinquency
and crime. 1.1 Theories on Causation of Youth Violence Understanding causal effects of youth delinquency
cannot be confined to any one particular discipline but involves understanding an ambit of psychological and
sociological factors that impact on behavioural patterns. Psychological approaches to youth delinquency include
social learning theory which posits that behaviour is learned through imitation of role models and reinforced by
rewards and punishments received in interaction with others. Developmental theory focuses on deterrents to
violence in the form of early parent-child ties of love; childhood experiences relatively free of punitive
discipline or abuse; and experiences that reinforce the child’s attachments, minimise frustrations, and encourage
flexible inner controls. Sociological approaches to understanding violence include four components: cultural (or
sub-cultural), structural, interactionist, and economic. Again, these are not mutually exclusive explanations, but
each contributes in an important way to our overall understanding of the problem. The cultural approach points
toward interventions designed to change the norms, values, typical behaviours, or beliefs of specific high-risk
groups. Such changes 3 might be accomplished, for example, through education or by changing media images
of persons with who target group members are likely to identify. Understanding cultural factors that may
predispose a person to violence includes understanding: • Male belief in physical prowess, toughness, search for
thrills and action • Underdeveloped verbal skills • Belief that one should not intervene in another’s fights •
Televised violence and media support • Encouragement of fighting by bystanders Understanding prevention
strategies on the other hand would include understanding how to: • Reduce media violence • Increase
community and witness intolerance for violence The structural approach holds that rates of assaultive violence
are largely influenced by broad-scale social forces, such as poverty, lack of opportunity, that operate
independently of human cognition. In one widely recognised formulation, violence and other "illegitimate"
behaviours arise when persons are deprived of "legitimate" means and resources to realise culturally valued
goals. This theory does not adequately explain, however, why conflicts arising from structural deprivation lead
to violence in one situation and other behaviours, passivity for instance, in other situations. Structural factors
that may predispose a person to violence include: • Poverty • Ideology that masculinity means a dominant male
social role • Racial segregation and discrimination Prevention strategies would include polices aimed at: •
Eliminating poverty and unemployment • Changing conceptions of masculinity • Reducing racial segregation
and discrimination The interactionist approach focuses on the nature of the interaction sequence as it escalates
into violent behaviour and describes the process through which assaultive violence occurs. This kind of inquiry
has been used most frequently to describe family violence. Research has shown that violence grows out of a
series of provocative arguments that can escalate to murder. Interactionist factors that may predispose a person
to violence: • Drug and alcohol consumption • Weapons possession • Physical or verbal abuse Prevention
strategies include policies aimed at: 4 • Reducing alcohol and drug consumption • Reducing firearm injuries •
Teaching conflict resolution skills for young men The economic approach, also referred to as deterrence theory
or the theory of economic choice, represents a particularly important perspective on the causes of assaultive
violence because it provides the basis for many current policies aimed at reducing homicides and assaults. This
perspective represents an extension by orthodox economists of the principles of microeconomic theory of illegal
activity. The main thrust of this theory is that decisions to engage in criminal behaviour (e.g., the perpetuation
of physical assaults) are based on rational considerations. This theory assumes that all people have an equal
capacity to make rational judgements under all conditions and circumstances. But in the case of people under
the influence of alcohol or drugs, for example, the ability to make rational judgements may be impaired.
Undertaking research that tackles psychological and sociological issues requires the correct design that gets the
right information. Essentially, the research process needs to ensure accurate measurements of psychological and
sociological influences on behavioural patters, as well as a host of different attitudes, values and beliefs related
to both to these behaviour patterns and experiences of individualsRESEARCH AS A POLICY TOOL The
aspiration to support policy-relevant, development-orientated research means that the agenda for research will
largely be set by local stakeholders. As such a consultation with stakeholders is an integral part of the process of
formulating research questions and analysing the research output whilst formulating it into policy
recommendations. The proposed process is geared towards stimulating policy-oriented and development-related
research. The research program that should evolve from the research process should be multi-disciplinary,
problemoriented and policy-relevant. Most developing countries lack sufficient articulation between the
research undertaken and the national needs for social, economic, intellectual and cultural construction. As such,
many donor led research programs fail to impact within policy-making paradigms and are simply wasted. The
emphasis and direction of the proposed research should therefore fit into the themes defined by local
stakeholders and should demonstrate that a demand for such knowledge exists in the area of youth crime
prevention and rehabilitation. The starting point therefore must originate from within local policy priority areas
and should seek to stimulate the formulation of alternatives within and outside government policies. Continuous
interaction between researchers, policy makers and stakeholders in the society under investigation makes such a
process possible. Indeed it is essential that such a process is led and approved by stakeholders and from the
formulation of the research questions to the output. As such whatever research direction is proposed should be
specifically geared towards generating a knowledge need where from policy may be enacted. Due to the fact
that such a 5 research process cannot be prescribed prior to it’s initiation, it is possible that both new and
alternative methodologies, that may not necessarily fit into existing paradigms, are stimulated. In a study such
as this it is important to acknowledgement, up front, the core principal that "the youth", “offenders”,
“community” and “the various stakeholder groups” are not homogeneous entities, but rather a complex myriad
of parts that constitute the sum of all the different interests that live in a particular defined area. As such a
research-based analysis of youth in particular urban locations must be processed orientated and approached as if
there is heterogeneity of needs, constraints and resources. It is therefore critical to incorporate procedural
mechanisms by which the dynamics and needs of youth, their families and involved stakeholders, both
institutional and non-institutional within the survey region can be drawn out. In order to achieve this, it is
necessary to involve the relevant youth, their communities and stakeholders in a process of consultation and
empowerment Furthermore, embedded in such a process ought to be mechanisms that allow for ongoing
evaluation of research, policy planning and implementation stages and the root causes of why these are either
successes or failures. A stakeholder led involvement in the generation of appropriate requirements and best
practice statements that is based upon the needs and perceptions of all the effected persons, lays a solid
foundation for the understanding of the issues on hand, impacts on future delivery, and acts as a yardstick by
which implementation can be measured. In so doing it recognises the potential pitfalls in the implementation of
a youth crime prevention program and an ex-offender rehabilitation program and puts in place a process that
minimises any potential failure by managing potential conflict through the generation of information and
alternatives around which consensus can be found. Similarly the process enables points of common
understanding and concern to be instantaneously identified and thus provide the necessary building blocks for
the bridges to be created between youth and stakeholder organisations. Finally, this process results in the
creation of a dynamic process that pursues the aims of the youth various programs past the implementation
phase.
SUGGECTION
In recent years, a number of social forces have changed both the landscape of family and community life
and the expectations for young people. A combination of factors have weakened the informal community
support once available to young people: high rates of family mobility; greater anonymity in
neighborhoods, where more parents are at work and out of the home and neighborhood for long periods,
and in schools, which have become larger and much more heterogeneous; extensive media exposure to
themes of violence and heavy use and abuse of drugs and alcohol; and, in some cases, the deterioration
and disorganization of neighborhoods and schools as a result of crime, drugs, and poverty. At the same
time, today’s world has become increasingly complex, technical, and multicultural, placing new and
challenging demands on young people in terms of education, training, and the social and emotional skills
 needed in a highly competitive environment. Finally, the length of adolescence has extended to the mid-
to late twenties, and the pathways to adulthood have become less clear and more numerous. In addition,
many youth are entering the labor market with inadequate knowledge and such skills as the ability to
communicate effectively, resolve conflicts, and prepare for and succeed in a job.
References
Acosta, J. and D. Chavis. (2007). Build the capacity of communities to address
crime. Criminology and Public Policy, 6(4), 651–662.
Bursik, R. and H. Grasmick. (1993). Neighbourhoods and Crime: The Dimensions of Effective
Community Control. New York: Lexington Books.
Decker, S. (2007). Expand the use of police gang units. Criminology and Public Policy, 6 (4),
729–734.
Justice Policy Institute. (2007). Gang Wars: The Failure of Enforcement Tactics and the Need
for Effective Public Safety Strategies. Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute.
Klein, M. and C. Maxson. (2006). Street Gang Patterns and Policies. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Skogan, W. (2006). Asymmetry in the impact of encounters with police. Policing and Society
16 (2), 99–126.
Waller, Irving. (2006). Less Law, More Order. Westport, CT: Praeger.