In many cases, society views the young offender and their victim separately, that there is little connection between the two. However, there is connection and we should try to understand this aspect. No matter what the crime is, from the moment the offender commits the crime, there is a relationship between the young offender and his or her victim.

Some of the writers of these articles reveal important findings about the victim-offender relationship. Several writers, in their articles, state that youth violence has been increasing over the last few decades and it has become more important to do some research or write articles about this subject. All the articles for this essay reveal data, showing the increase of youth crime and violence.

All of the writers follow approximately the same definition. In his book “Issues and Perspectives on Young Offenders in Canada,” Winterdyk gives his readers the definition, which is most commonly referred to. He defines a young person as “a person who is or, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, appears to be twelve years old or older, but less than eighteen years old and, if the context requires, includes any person who is charged under this Act with having committed an offense while he or she was a young person or who was found guilty of an offense under this Act.” (Winterdyk 7)

There have been several reports on the issue of youth crime and youth victimization. The writers of these articles, chosen for this essay, base their findings on surveys, statistics, and/or case-control investigation. The researchers themselves for their article use several surveys, which were either done by the writers or the writers found the reports of these surveys, which were under the form of questionnaires. Examples of surveys used are the British Crime Survey, Uniform Crime Report, and National Crime Victimization Survey.

All Canadian statistics that used were taken from and conducted by Statistics Canada, which is the source to most data and statistics in Canada. One of the leading studies used by Statistics Canada is an analytical study. As the name suggests, this type of study “describes or analyses a specific aspect of the social, commercial, financial or economic situation in Canada.” (Statistics Canada) Some of the writers used some self-report studies. Giving a sample of people answer a questionnaire does this type of study, involving the subject of the research. There is only one article, which discusses a self-control investigation. Finally, one article uses data taken by the Social Services of the Province of Saskatchewan.

Despite the fact that all articles are important in shedding light on the subject, the three articles that reveal the most on these subjects are “Victimization and Delinquency among Canadian Youth,” by Dr. Lorne D. Bertrand and Joanne J. Paestch, “The Extent of Youth Victimization, Crime and Delinquency in Alberta, 1999,” by Jeanette T. Gomes et al., and “Canadian kids who kill,” by William Meloff and Robert A. Silverman. Bernard Schissel discusses these topics, briefly, in his book “Still Blaming Children.”

The researches that are discussed look at several different aspects to better understand victimization and youth offenders. Some of the main and common variables that are observed in the articles are: age; gender; types of offenses; and the means of the offenses.

First of all, a look these aspects with regard to the young offenders and/or criminals. One of the articles that looks at this aspect is “Canadian kids who kill,” by William Meloff and Robert A. Silverman. In this article, these two writers look at the variables with regards to youth homicides, in Canada.

The first thing is age. With the research that they used, Meloff and Silverman were able to come to the conclusion that youths of 17 years of age had higher homicide rates in Canada. The rates were higher than the rates for the youths between the ages of 12 and 16. Though with comparison to the youth homicide rates in the United States, the Canadian rates are relatively low.

Then, Meloff and Silverman also discuss gender. From the research used, the writers were able to reveal that approximately 63 percent of homicides were males killing other males. However, 30 percent of the victims of male perpetrators have the tendency to be female youths. The homicides committed by female perpetrators, on the other hand, only represents 11 percent of all homicides, committed by youths. Though, interestingly enough, 57 percent of the time, the victims of female perpetrators are male.

This article doesn’t really touch the subject of different types of offenses. The reason being that the writers touch only the subject of homicides or subjects closely related to homicides within youth offenses and crimes in Canada.

Then there are the different means of homicides used by youths in Canada. Meloff and Silverman were able to discover the rates for the means that youths use to commit homicides.

The two writers found that the primary means of homicide that youths are going to take is using shooting, such as guns, or rifles. The second most common means of committing by youths is stabbing. The third means is beating. The fourth and final means is the category is other (drowning). These means, chronologically, shows the most likely means of homicide that youths may commit.

An article that appears to make the transition from offenders to victims is in Schissel’s book, “Still Blaming Children.” In Chapter 6, “The Reality of Youth Crime and Misconduct,” Schissel looks at youth offenders, who were victimized as young kids and was the reason for they became offenders.

First, Schissel discusses gender, although he doesn’t focus or spend too much time on this matter. He points out that the rate of offenses by girls has been fairly stable, since 1993. Though it has been slightly on the rise, but has had much of an increase. Schissel also notices, about offenses committed by males, that there was a slight, sudden decrease in the years 2002-2003. However, Schissel still shows that male youths still tend to commit more offenses and crimes than female youths do. Schissel also notes that males youths are convicted “considerably more often than females.” (Schissel 108)

Then Schissel explains that there are aspects that characterize the lives of youths who are in trouble with the law, which are: “the risk of offending is integrally tied up with education, victimization, and drug use; and familial disadvantage and trauma have a severely negative impact on the welfare of young people.” (Schissel 112) Not to mention that race, gender, and wealth impact the youths, as well. However, an unstable family life can put an individual’s future life in jeopardy.

In the rest of this chapter in “Still Blaming Children,” Schissel looks at the victim side of the young offenders and how their family indirectly lead them towards drugs and committing offenses.

Now we turn to articles, which focus a little more on victimization and the victims of youth crimes and such. The first article is “Victimization and Delinquency among Canadian Youth,” by Dr. Lorne D. Bertrand and Joanne J. Paestch. These writers chose to use data that was “obtained from a study of youth crime and violence conducted by the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family.” (Bertrand, Paestch 3) The focus of this study was students, who were in junior and senior high school. This study looks at both self-report victimization and self-reported delinquency.

This article first discusses self-reported victimization. Bertrand and Paestch revealed that, “males were more likely to report being victimized at school than were females.” (Bertrand, Paestch 6) The only type that males were unlikely to report would be being touched in a sexual manner against his or her will.

The types of victimization, which are showed in Table 1 of this article, seem to diminish, as youths get older. For instance, in Table 1, under the “Something Damaged on Purpose” column, in Grade 7, there 105 (87.6%) cases reported, but, in Grade 12, there are only 17 (20%) cases reported. Some of the types don’t have the same kind of drastic numbers, but they follow approximately the same pattern.

Secondly, Bertrand and Paestch turn to self-reported delinquency. They divide the data they collected into categories: property-related behaviors and violence-related behaviors. A little more than half of the students (56%) questionned “reported engaging in at least one delinquent behavior within the past year.” (Bertrand, Paestch Then 45 % of the students say that they were engaged in at least one violent behavior and 39% said they were involved in at least one type of property offense. However, there appears to be offenses committed between Grades 9 and 11, within the property-related delinquency. In the violence-related delinquency, the data is a different matter. Each sub-category varies from each other. Though, the students in Grade 12 still appear to commit fewer offenses in this category.

A second article involving victimization is “The Extent of Youth Victimization, Crime and Delinquency in Alberta, 1999,” by Jeanette T. Gomes, Lorne D. Bertrand, Joanne J. Paetsch, and Joseph P. Hornick. Much like in the article, “Victimization and Delinquency among Canadian Youth,” the writers use studies that focus on junior and senior high school, in the Province of Alberta. The studies looked at schools located large cities, smaller cities, and rural areas.

These writers look at two prevailing aspect in regards to victimization, which are the prevalence of victimization while at school and the prevalence of victimization outside of school. The questionnaires used, for the students who were at school, revealed eleven types of victimization. These incidents range from assault or physical violence, to implied violence (such as threats), to property-related events.

The writers include in their article a table in which they show the data of different types of offenses, in percentage. They found that the three highest types in and out of schools are: slapped/punched/kicked (22%); something stolen (22%); and threaten (21.5%).

The survey used by these writers has also shown that the “family compition was related to whether the respondent reported being threatened or hurt, and whether the respondent was threatened with a weapon.” (Gomes 29) Depending on the composition, the students who go through different threatens. First, if a student were living with both parents, he or she were the least likely individual to report being victimized, whithin the prior year. In contrast, the students who living in a reconstructed family, a parent and step-parent, were the most likely to have gone through at least one threat of bodily harm and report such threat.

This aspect of youth has gained importance, in society. It could be said that we need to take more time and dealing with these issues, especially when they are young. The earlier we being dealing with these issues and young offenders, the less likely we may end up having incidents, such a young 15-year old gets killed for being gay or another incident such as the September 2006 Dawson Shooting.