3 years ago

PLS ANSWER/HELP: Which element distinguishes routine activity theory from situational crime prevention?

2 answers:

6 0

Answer:

The correct answer is B. The presence of an overbearing guardian distinguishes routine activity theory from situational crime prevention.

Explanation:

Situational crime prevention is a criminal theory that establishes that all crime can be stopped before its development if the situations or contextual conditions that favor its development are modified.

Thus, the presence of a policeman in a certain place, for example, modifies the context for the criminal, who knows that he will not be able to carry out his crime in the place where this policeman is. Thus, the presence of a guard limits the development of the crime, by modifying the context in which the criminal seeks to develop his activity.

sdas [7]3 years ago

3 0

Answer:I got it correct on quiz

Explanation:

You might be interested in

Please help answer this asap!

Ann [662]

Answer:

WE NOT FINNA READ ALL THIS YOU CRAZY

7 0

2 years ago

To some drivers a few miles an hour over the posted speed limit is an acceptable risk; luckily, the worst that can happen to the

lozanna [386]

Answer:

False they can get a speeding ticket and possibly get there car toad aswell

6 0

2 years ago

The decisions of the federal courts are primarily driven by legal doctrine or individual judges’ political ideology?

Lunna [17]

When you do all that and get nothing don even ask me because I don’t know to be honest

5 0

2 years ago

2. What happened to savings in the United States? How did consumers contribute to this change?

Rina8888 [55]

Answer:

What happened to savings in the United States?

Explanation:

The saving rate went from 10% savings rate to a negative savings rate. Consumers did this by binged buying items. Consumers would buy so many things that that weren't necessary, consumers supersized everything they had, instead of saving.

4 0

3 years ago

In the case of ________, the Supreme Court gave the lower courts some discretion over how they applied the test for qualified im

asambeis [7]

Answer:

Pearson v. Callahan

Explanation:

This was a case that was decided by the United States which would deal with the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Hope this Helps!

3 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers