Theft by Any Other Name is Still Theft: Examining “Looting” During the COVID-19 Pandemic

ABSTRACT

The current study examines newspaper reports of looting to answer two questions: (1) how was looting framed by U.S. newspapers during the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) did any looting actually occur? Looting after natural disasters, particularly hurricanes, has recently received increased attention in scholarly research. The crisis caused by the pandemic of SARS-CoV2 (hereafter COVID-19), while not a natural disaster, has provided many of the same opportunities for looting that have been previously observed following natural disasters. Our findings suggest looting charges were widely used, particularly in California, but that little actual looting took place. In fact, most of those situations referred to as “looting” were traditional property crimes that were treated as looting to enhance the penalty for the action. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for researchers and policymakers.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

¹ For illustrative purposes, we provide one possible explanation: Routine Activities Theory (RAT) argues that, in order for crime to occur, there must be convergence of three elements (suitable targets, motivated offenders, and a lack of capable guardians- Cohen and Felson 1979). It is clear that all elements necessary for crime to occur were present during the lockdowns that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic. First, during the lockdowns, large numbers of businesses were left unoccupied for long periods of time. This is similar to what happens in areas that must evacuate during natural disasters. Perpetually unoccupied (but not unstocked) businesses make for suitable targets. Second, people were ordered to stay in their homes and only go out for essentials. Under normal circumstances, people shopping, milling about, and generally being out of their homes help prevent crime by both their presence and their status as potential witnesses. If everyone is ordered to stay inside, then there is a general lack of capable guardianship about (or, at the least, a significantly reduced number of capable guardians). Finally, a shortage of certain supplies (e.g., toilet paper, food, hand sanitizer) may have left some people desperate and willing to do whatever it took to obtain “essential” items. This would lead to an increase in motivated offenders. Some argue, however, that no special motivation is required for crime to occur during the lockdowns because humans’ natural tendency is to engage in deviant behaviors; individuals simply need the opportunity to engage in behavior that comes naturally (Felson and Clarke 1998; Hirschi 1969). Therefore, whether motivated offenders were created by COVID-19 or were already present, the third requirement of RAT was met.

² A separate Google search was conducted to check for results not captured using the search term “looting.” The second search used the term “looters” in the this exact word or phrase box with “looting” in the none of these words box. No relevant results were produced using this method.

³ The arrest took place in Alaska, which is not one of the eight states with looting-specific laws. This case also fits the pattern discussed in subsequent sections – ordinary crimes being called “looting.”

⁴ Any search results with the term “video games” were omitted from the results..

Additional information

Funding

Funds for this research were provided by the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development, and Engineering Center Award G0004088 to Mississippi State University. Any opinions offered in this article represent those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funding agency.

Notes on contributors

Raymond E. Barranco

Raymond E. Barranco is an Associate Professor in Department of Sociology at Mississippi State University. His research broadly focuses on violence, race/ethnicity, and immigration. His published work has appeared in Social Forces, The Sociological Quarterly, Social Science Research, and other venues.

David C. May

David C. May is a Professor in the Department of Sociology at Mississippi State University. He has authored or coauthored six books and over 100 scholarly articles and book chapters around his research interests of fear of crime, school safety, cybercrime, policing, corrections, military sociology, and human robot interaction. In addition to those works, Dr. May is currently a co-PI on research projects funded by the National Science Foundation, the United States Army Engineer Research and Development Center, the Henry Family Foundation, and the Department of Defense. He is active in research and service in (1) community crime prevention and school safety work, (2) work dealing with reentry and other correctional issues for both officers and inmates, and (3) cybercrime research. He is currently coauthoring books on school safety, bullying, and the school to prison pipeline and writing a variety of articles about corrections, school resource officers, and cybercrime issues.