Traditional criminological topics
Part one : Weekly Discussion
The topic for this week strays from traditional criminological topics, as environmental harms – particularly those from natural disasters – are not actually a crime. However, these individuals faced with a natural or environmental disaster are still victims in the sense of the effects caused. As discussed in lecture, environmental harms cross the line into criminal victimization when there is a lack of action or response, an omission of a response, lack of prevention, or an inappropriate response by the local/state/national governing bodies (i.e., the “state”), which exacerbates these harms. With this in mind, environmental harms is quite a relevant victimological topic, as people are harmed at two levels, first by the environment, and second by the state. Please review all course materials for this week and respond to the following questions:
1. Give an example (one not discussed in lecture) of an environmental harm that was exacerbated by state in some form (e.g., lack of prevention policy, lack of response, delayed response, etc.). Describe briefly what occurred and how the damages were exacerbated by the state.
2. What are the effects of environmental victimization? Describe three health, social, cultural, emotional, or financial effects. How might these harms be exacerbated when met with a lack of response?
3. There are several examples of environmental harms and crimes provided in the course materials this week. Something that they all seem to have in common is that racial/ethnic minorities and low-income people seem to suffer the most from these harms. This has been termed Environmental Racism. Do you agree with the application of this term to these situations? Explain.
4. In your opinion, who is responsible for these harms? Give specific examples to support your argument. What can we, as a society, do to alleviate these harms?
Respond to the following discussions:
Student one : Edgar
An example of an environmental harm that was further exasperated by the government was the recent Camp Fire that burned the town of Paradise, California late last year. A lack of prevention policy is what led to the fire spreading as quickly as it did and causing $16.5 billion in damage and a death toll of 85 civilians. Former California Governor Jerry Brown’s decision to veto a bill that would have cleared brush and tinder in potential fire hazard areas along with his lack of oversight in public utilities company PG&E to create a fire map are what ultimately led to the destruction caused by the 2018 camp fire. Much damage and loss of life could have been prevented if proper and timely prevention policy had been implemented. “Early reports suggest the failure of Gov. Jerry Brown and his appointees to adequately regulate our public utilities to prevent such fires also fueled the fast-moving flames” (Court, 2018).
https://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/gov-browns-culpability-spreading-wildfires
There exists a potential for financial effects due to environmental victimization. One effect is that people may not have enough money to pay for the logistical expenses accrued in evacuating to a safe location. A second effect is the financial loss incurred from the actual environmental disaster itself such as loss of property. Finally, A third financial is the cost of reconstruction and recovering after an environmental disaster has taken place. “It’s just the money. I don’t have the money like everyone else to get out before the storm. It’s expensive to get a hotel room especially when you don’t know how long you’ll be there” (Faust & Kauzlarich, 94).
I agree with the concept of environmental racism as shown on The Daily Show clip that was part of this week’s module. It was not okay for the fracking company to operate next to the school which had a majority of Caucasian students but there was no opposition to having the company move their fracking site next to Bella Romero which had a predominantly Hispanic population of students. It is clear by this example that environmental racism can occur.
In my opinion, the state is at fault for harm if there exists a failure on its part to do everything possible to protect its people and mitigate harm as much as possible. The example given in the reading regarding hurricane Katrina and the government’s failure to act knowing that the levees had a high probability of failure is a perfect example of why the state is to blame. “While crimes are usually thought of as harmful acts, they can also be conceptualized as harmful failures to act. Kauzlarich et al. (2003) identify these failures as crimes of omission which occur when the state disregards unsafe and dangerous conditions when it has a clear mandate and responsibility to make a situation or context safe.’” (Faust & Kauzlarich, 87).
Student two : shana
1. I may be completely off base here, and if I am, I’m sorry but the environmental harm I chose to discuss is the Flint water crisis. In April of 2014 the city changes its routing of water to save a couple of bucks, instead of bringing in water from Detroit they opt to take water from the Michigan River. This move was supposedly for a little bit, until they can find a “regional water system.” Immediately reports of foul odor, and hair loss come in. In September the following year, 2015, there begins to be a call to stop using the water because there’s lead in it. This is led by a group of doctors who have tested the water. January of 2016 they declare a state of emergency, and now they have lost lives because of the non action. The flint crisis is a disaster and I cannot do it justice by simply going through a timeline, but basically it didn’t get fixed for more than 4 years. And the residents are still hesitant about the water coming through the lead pipes, so to even say this is fixed is also not necessarily correct. Which is insane.The government failed on multiple levels here. The failed to alert the public regarding the possible lead contamination. They failed to ask for help quickly, as soon as they declared a state of emergency the national guard came with water bottles and water filters. While this wasn’t a permanent solution it was the help the town needed. When Detroit offered to reconnect their water system, and flint was like no thank you, THEY WERE COMPLETELY IGNORING THE COMPLAINTS from their residents.
2. Health wise, the lead contamination was said to be able to poison the brain of children. I read a report that said that lead to a child’s brain is detrimental. Its one of the worst things you can supply a child with. As well as the presence of Legionnaires’ disease. This disease was present in the water due to a bacteria that was present in the water they were being supplied with. The city was basically poisoning its residents. I can’t even imagine the emotional harm that comes from going through something like this. You are taught since you are small that city officials, government officials are doing important jobs that are improving the city. Can you imagine only to learn you and your family are being poisoned because the City you trusted and pay taxes to wanted to save a couple of dollars?! I would be pissed off and that’s putting it nicely 🙂
3. Environmental Racism in my opinion is crystal clear in this situation. Had this happened in any of the top 10 richest cities in America, you can bet there would be a public outcry, absolute mayhem. But because they chose an urban city with residents that weren’t necessarily respected or taken seriously.If the city officials did respect their residents they would’ve called to action the water crisis the same year that the residents were complaining.
4. In my opinion these harms fall at the feet of the city officials. It is there job to alleviate the harms, the community in this regard did everything they could. They complained since day 1, they would go and protest for clean water. How much more could they have done as a society when it falls on deaf ears? It was in the best interest of the city to respond the first day they received complaints
Part two : Reading Check – I will attach the reading.
Write a one-page, single spaced (12 pt. font, 1-inch margins, no additional space for heading) summary and reflection of both readings for this week.
This reading write up should be part summary, but primarily reflection of the content of the readings. Include content such as:
1. What did you learn from the readings?
2. What is your reaction to the readings? Did this content surprise you?
3. How can the knowledge gained from this reading be used in your personal and/or professional life?
4. Do you see any issues presented in these readings? If so, what and why?
5. Any other response or reflection of the reading applied to course content.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
