Victim compensation

Students Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course Title

Professor’s Name

Date

Victim Compensation

 Crime is an action that has been endless and has been practically committed ever since the beginning of time. Around the 1970’s, lawmaking offering compensation to sufferers of violent crimes was implemented in numerous nations comprising of Australia, England, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and Northern Ireland. Compensation of victims can be referred to payments done by the administration to crime victims. It is different from restitution that comprises payments in both services and money done by the criminal to the crime victim. Modern victim reimbursement plans are largely tracked to Margaret fry of London together with her actions throughout the late 1960’s. Throughout the country, compensation amenities offer essential monetary assistance to the victims. In my own opinion, I absolutely agree with this limitation, reasons beings violent crime victims of may encounter financial hardships in addition to physical injuries and emotional distress.

 The difference between violent crime and property crime is that in violent crime, a target is injured or exposed to violence. This crime may include sexual assault and rape, robbery, and even murder. On the other hand, Property crime is a type of crime in that money is obtained, assets, or even other benefits. Examples include burglary offenses, motor vehicles, and even arson. It’s factual that violent crime victims most times do suffer from criminals’ excessive force that may lead to devastating their health physically through injuries and other health factors. I think recuperating from abuse or violence is challenging without worrying about the way to settle the medical care costs or even how to substitute lost earnings because of death or disability. The positive news is that there is a compensation program for crime victims that may offer substantial financial aid to victims of crime and even their families. I agree that no volume of finance may remove the suffering and sorrow victims go through, but this aid may be critical in the crime aftermath. However, I still maintain my opinion that compensation should be limited to the victim of violent crimes as opposed to property crime because the physical impact caused by the property is not as severe on health.

In the view of violent crime, you might encounter victims that have undergone severe incidents such as rape. Looking at the act of rape comes with psychological effects or emotional distress that will require the affected victim to undergo some counseling programs. This means that the victim will have to stop going to work hence the absence of an income; furthermore, in order to undergo counseling, the victim also needs some funds. Hence, I strongly believe that the compensation of crime victims should be mostly limited to the violent crime victims because they are much more in need of it in comparison to the victims of property crime. 

I think government compensation is the first method of restoring the crime victims to their novel financial situations. In the case of robbery and murder, which does mostly occur in violent crime than in property crime, the victims are at most times left with a huge financial burden of trying to recover. The compensation offers important monetary funding for the victims’ families in case of death. Despite money not being able to heal the sorrows and distress that victims undergo, this assistance is still vital in the wake of crime. Thus this service does support the victims’ in direct methods by providing funds for starting over or even burial expenses in case of death. Nonetheless, in my opinion, property crime victims aren’t qualified for this package because most of them have taken up insurance covers for their property and will get reimbursement from the provider of their insurance.

In conclusion, victim compensation should only be limited to victims of violent crimes. This is because they undergo a huge ordeal with the offenders as compared to property crimes victims because of the number of abuses they go through. The aftermath of most victims of violent crime is usually enormous, and its effects devastating. Most of the victims struggle with recovering financially, and some are left with health complications such as injuries, and other grapple with mental distress. It is challenging for someone to recover from such unless with some assistance such as compensations to them. Since most property crime victims are covered by insurance, my opinion is that compensation should be limited to violent crime victims.