Official Statistics and Crime

Official Statistics and Crime
Many sociologists use official statistics in their research.   There are many reasons why using official statistics can be useful: they are cheap, readily available, and provide detailed quantitative data which is reliable and often representative.   Official statistics also provide data for the whole country.   Given the scarcity of resources and the expense of funding research, sociologists would be unwise to disregard a cheap and easily available source of data.   However, some sociologists, such as Barry Hindess, have argued that official statistics on crime do have serious deficiencies.
There are several reasons for these deficiencies.  
Firstly, there are many reasons why the public may not report all crimes to the police: they may not realise they’ve been a victim, embarrassment, they may implicate themselves in a criminal act, etc.
Secondly, there are also many reasons why the police may not take action against all offences which are known to them.   Sociological studies of the police, such as that conducted by Simon Holdaway in the 1980s, demonstrate that the police simply cannot take action against all offences which they identify, and therefore have to prioritize their activities.   Holdaway shows how the police develop an occupational culture which emphasises the notion of police discretion, and how officers are socialised into a particular set of norms and values.   The concept of police discretion implies that police officers have discretion – that is, they have the power to turn a ‘blind eye’ to offences when they feel that an offence is too minor to bother taking further action, or perhaps when they feel that the probable outcome will not warrant the effort that will be required on their part.   The notion of police discretion, Holdaway argues, is something which officers learn through the occupational culture.   According to Holdaway, the occupational culture of policing puts great value on action and aggression.   This...