Public parking areas are often hotspots for various types of crimes. The presence of security guards can play a significant role in mitigating crime. This essay will examine the effectiveness of security guards in preventing crime in public parking areas, drawing on specific examples and findings from two published papers. It will also provide advice on what to do if you’re a victim of a crime that occurs in a public parking lot.
The Role of Security Guards in Crime Prevention
Security guards serve as a form of formal surveillance, which is a key component of situational crime prevention. Their presence can deter potential offenders by increasing the perceived risk of being caught. According to Welsh et al. (2010), formal surveillance aims to produce a deterrent threat to potential offenders through the deployment of personnel whose primary responsibility is security.
This concept is supported by Clarke and Goldstein's case study on thefts from cars in Charlotte, NC. That paper highlights the importance of focused patrolling by police and security personnel in reducing crime, specifically thefts from motor vehicles.
Clarke and Goldstein's Case Study: Charlotte, NC
Clarke and Goldstein's study provides a detailed analysis of a problem-oriented policing project aimed at reducing thefts from cars in the center city of Charlotte, NC. The project involved a progressive tightening of focus, leading to a detailed analysis of the risks of theft and the associated security features in 39 decks and 167 surface lots.
The term "progressive tightening of focus" refers to the methodical approach taken by the project team to narrow down the scope of their analysis and interventions over time. Initially, the project aimed to address thefts from cars in the entire center city of Charlotte, NC. However, as the team gathered more data and insights, they progressively refined their focus to specific areas and aspects that were most relevant to the problem.
The study found that risks of theft were much greater in lots than in decks, and higher risks were associated with inadequate fencing, poor lighting, and the absence of attendants.
The project team, which included Clarke and Goldstein, worked closely with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD) to implement various security improvements. One of the key findings was that the presence of attendants (security guards) greatly reduced the risks of theft. Decks with attendants had significantly lower rates of theft compared to those without.
The Clarke and Goldstein paper highlights the importance of having security personnel present in parking facilities to deter potential offenders.
Welsh's Paper on Security Guards in Car Parks
Welsh et al. (2010) conducted a systematic review of the effects of security guards, place managers, and defensible space on crime in public places. The paper included five evaluations of security guards, three of which were carried out in car parks experiencing high rates of vehicle crimes.
The authors of the Welsh paper conducted extensive searches for eligible evaluation studies from all over the world. The primary focus was on evaluating the effects of security guards, place managers, and defensible space on crime in public places. They searched databases such as Criminal Justice Abstracts, National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Educational Resources Information Clearinghouse, Social, Psychological, Educational, and Criminological Trials Register, Google Scholar, and Medline. They reviewed key literature on the effectiveness of the interventions in preventing crime. And they reached out to leading researchers in the field for additional studies.
The studies found that security guards were effective in reducing crime in public places. For example, in Basingstoke, UK, the implementation of security guards in a parking lot, along with fencing and defensible space measures, resulted in a significant reduction in vehicle thefts. Similarly, in Vancouver, Canada, bicycle-mounted security guard patrols were introduced in a commuter car park, leading to a substantial decrease in vehicle thefts.
Like the Clarke and Goldstein paper, the Welsh paper also highlights the effectiveness of security guards in preventing crime in public parking areas.
Mechanisms of Crime Prevention
Both papers discuss that the presence of security guards in public parking areas can prevent crime through several mechanisms.
First, the visible presence of security guards can deter potential offenders by increasing the perceived risk of being caught. Second, security guards provide continuous surveillance of the parking area, which can help identify and respond to suspicious activities promptly. This was evident in the Charlotte case study, where focused patrolling by police and security personnel contributed to the decline in thefts. Third, security guards can assist victims of crime by providing immediate help and reporting incidents to the police. This can enhance the overall sense of safety and security in the parking areas. Finally, security guards can work closely with local police to address crime issues in parking areas. In the Charlotte case study, the collaboration between the project team and the CMPD was crucial in implementing effective security measures.
Legal Recourse for Attack Victims
Parking lots are the third most common place where crimes occur, with nearly 1,400 violent crimes committed each day. They also note that 7.3% of all violent crimes occur in parking facilities, and of those crimes, 16% are violent crimes and assaults.
In North Carolina, property owners are obligated to ensure their parking lots are maintained in a manner to present foreseeable criminal activity. For example, in the case of Foster v. Winston-Salem Joint Venture, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that the foreseeability of criminal acts in a shopping mall parking lot could impose a duty on the mall owners to provide adequate protection for their customers (Foster v. Winston-Salem Joint Venture, 303 N.C. 636, 1981). Nearly two decades later, the North Carolina Court of Appeals reaffirmed this principle in Vera v. Five Crow Promotions, Inc., noting that property owners have a duty to protect business invitees from foreseeable criminal activity and may breach this duty by failing to provide adequate lighting or security personnel (Vera v. Five Crow Promotions, Inc., 130 N.C. App. 645, 1998).
Victims of crimes that could have been prevented by adequate lighting may hold property owners accountable for negligence and seek compensation for past and future medical expenses, lost wages, future loss of earning capacity, and past and future pain and suffering.
It is crucial to consult an attorney experienced in handling these types of claims. Throughout my career, I have dedicated myself to helping victims of negligent security hold property owners and managers accountable for the harm caused.
Conclusion
The presence of security guards in public parking areas can significantly reduce crime, particularly thefts from vehicles. The findings from Clarke and Goldstein's case study in Charlotte, NC, and Welsh et al.'s systematic review provide strong evidence of the effectiveness of security guards in preventing crime in these settings. By deterring potential offenders, providing continuous surveillance, assisting victims, and collaborating with local police, security guards play a crucial role in enhancing the safety and security of public parking areas. By implementing these strategies, public parking areas can become safer and more secure, ultimately contributing to the overall well-being of the community.
I am sorry if you are reading this if you or someone you love has been the victim of a crime and seriously injured or killed. Over my career, I have handled many negligent security claims and I am licensed to practice law in Florida and North Carolina. If you would like a free consultation, click here.
1. Clarke, Ronald V., and Herman Goldstein. "Thefts from Cars in Center-City Parking Facilities: A Case Study in Implementing Problem-Oriented Policing." Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 15, 2003, pp. 257-298.
2. Welsh, Brandon C., Mark E. Mudge, and David P. Farrington. "Reconceptualizing Public Area Surveillance and Crime Prevention: Security Guards, Place Managers and Defensible Space." Security Journal, vol. 23, no. 4, 2010, pp. 299-319.
3. LotGuard USA. "Common Parking Lot Crimes." LotGuard USA, 14 Feb. 2022, www.lot-guard.com/resources/blog/common-parking-lot-crimes/. Accessed 11 Apr. 2025.
4. MotorBiscuit. "The Most Dangerous Things You Should Never Do in Parking Garages and Lots." MotorBiscuit, www.motorbiscuit.com/most-dangerous-things-should-never-do-parking-garages-lots/. Accessed 11 Apr. 2025.
