Recent studies reveal significant and growing evidence that crime, exploitation and fear of crime can be prevented. This information shows us that appropriately targeted and well-designed prevention initiatives can reduce levels of crime and victimization and increase the safety and well-being of our communities. The problem is that Canada does not make sufficient use of this vital knowledge. We must do more to leverage this experience to build a safer Canada. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The level of crime in society is measured through two primary data sources: police statistics and crime victimization surveys. Police statistics have the advantage of being able to provide trends over time, but are limited to crimes reported to the police. Crime victimization surveys interview samples of citizens about their experiences and perceptions of crime and have the advantage of capturing crimes that have not been reported to the police. However, these investigations are limited by the fact that they do not include all types of crimes, do not interview children or businesses, and are only conducted every five years. While both data sources contribute to our knowledge of levels of crime, victimization and fear of crime, both have a limited ability to capture the full picture and likely underestimate the true level of crime in Canada. Crime rates vary across the country. Rates are higher in the territories and are higher in provinces west of Ontario than in central and eastern Canada. This involves identifying a problem and identifying what is amenable to intervention. This phase is actually much more difficult than you might imagine. For one thing, a significant portion of crimes never come to the public's attention. This reality is complicated by the myths and misinformation surrounding crime and justice, and the lack of an accepted set of indicators that help diagnose problems and evaluate the impact of our interventions. We often do not have the knowledge and skills necessary to identify all the risk and protective factors involved in a particular problem or to select those most open to intervention. Scientific evidence provides some indications in this regard. However, decisions about priorities are never purely scientific. Problems and their solutions intersect with a wide range of interests. The challenge is to translate problems into priorities for action and identify “solutions” that we are willing to try and can afford. Goal setting is a political process, and reaching agreement on goals and objectives requires trade-offs between competing concerns and interests. There is a wealth of guidance available in the extensive evidence-based literature on crime prevention, both on the types of programs that work and on their implementation. mechanisms they require. Unfortunately, prevention initiatives tend to run into three main obstacles. The first is that much of the evidence is little known by those in decision-making positions or by the public. The second is that organizations that are tasked with responding, and that have the greatest relative level of resources, are usually inclined to keep doing the same thing over and over again. It is very difficult and risky to break new ground and there is pressure to stay true to what is already tried and true. Given the direction of the criminal justice system, this usually is.