Why Is Arson Considered a Low Priority Crime?

Imagine a fire raging through a building or a forest, causing immense destruction. The images are terrifying, yet when it comes to law enforcement priorities, arson doesn’t always rank as high as other crimes like murder, drug trafficking, or armed robbery. This may seem baffling, especially given the potential for property loss, injury, or even death. However, several key factors explain why arson tends to get deprioritized in many law enforcement agencies across the world.

1. Resource Allocation and the Underfunding of Fire Investigation Units

One of the most pressing reasons for arson’s lower priority is the allocation of resources. Arson investigations require specialized knowledge, including fire behavior, accelerants, and the ability to distinguish accidental fires from intentional ones. Fire investigation units are often underfunded, leading to fewer specialized investigators available to pursue arson cases.

In many municipalities, fire investigators are often cross-trained police officers or firefighters who do arson investigations as a secondary responsibility. With limited funding and personnel, these units are forced to prioritize larger fires with fatalities or large-scale property damage. As a result, smaller or less dramatic cases of arson can go unsolved, or worse, uninvestigated.

While law enforcement agencies place a heavy emphasis on high-profile crimes such as homicide, sexual assault, and human trafficking, crimes like arson — which often have fewer immediate victims or visible assailants — may fall to the bottom of the investigative pile. This misallocation of resources reflects broader systemic issues, particularly how societies prioritize crime according to its perceived impact.

2. The Elusive Nature of Arsonists

The nature of arson makes it an exceptionally difficult crime to solve. Arsonists often plan meticulously, leaving little to no trace behind. Unlike other crimes, where witnesses or physical evidence can be more readily available, arson typically destroys the evidence. By the time the fire is extinguished, much of the physical proof needed to catch the perpetrator has often been burned to ash.

Furthermore, the psychological profiles of arsonists vary widely, making it difficult to predict or profile a typical offender. Some may set fires for financial gain, while others do so out of anger or even enjoyment. This unpredictability complicates the work of investigators, making it harder to prioritize this type of crime when compared to more straightforward offenses.

3. Arson as a “Victimless” Crime

Another factor contributing to arson’s low priority is the perception that it is, in some cases, a “victimless” crime. While it may seem ludicrous to suggest that a fire destroying someone’s home or business is victimless, in the eyes of the criminal justice system, property crimes (even devastating ones like arson) tend to be deprioritized compared to violent crimes.

In fact, property crimes overall, including theft, burglary, and vandalism, are often placed on the backburner when compared to crimes that directly involve bodily harm. The general public and law enforcement agencies alike often view crimes involving injury or loss of life as more urgent and more deserving of attention. Thus, unless the arson results in significant human casualties, it is not viewed with the same level of urgency.

4. Difficulty in Proving Intent

One of the most significant legal hurdles when prosecuting arson is proving intent. For an individual to be charged with arson, the prosecution must show that the fire was set intentionally. This is often challenging due to the destructive nature of fire, which can obliterate key evidence. While some cases of arson may involve clear-cut motives (such as insurance fraud or revenge), many others are far more ambiguous, complicating the process of establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Additionally, some fires may be started by individuals who are mentally ill or have diminished capacity, further complicating the legal process. These complexities make arson cases harder to prosecute and, therefore, less attractive to overburdened prosecutors who may prefer to pursue cases with clearer evidence of criminal intent.

5. Public Perception and Media Attention

The way the public perceives arson can also influence its priority within the legal system. Crimes like terrorism, mass shootings, and human trafficking dominate headlines and shape public discourse. Arson, unless it leads to widespread devastation like the 2019 Notre Dame fire or major wildfires in places like California or Australia, rarely captures the same level of attention.

Media attention plays a significant role in shaping public concern and, by extension, law enforcement priorities. When a crime is heavily covered by the media, there is a corresponding push for quick justice and action. Since arson doesn’t often generate the same type of public outcry as violent crime, it’s easier for law enforcement agencies to justify focusing on other issues.

6. The Role of Insurance Companies

One peculiar aspect of arson cases is the involvement of insurance companies. Many arson cases are financially motivated, with the perpetrator setting fire to their property in hopes of collecting an insurance payout. In these cases, it’s often the insurance companies, rather than law enforcement, that take the lead in investigating the fire’s cause.

Insurance companies have their own investigators who work to determine whether a fire was accidental or intentionally set for financial gain. As a result, many arson cases that might otherwise be investigated by police are instead pursued by private insurance investigators, leading to the perception that arson is not a law enforcement priority.

7. Comparative Crime Statistics: Where Does Arson Stand?

When examining crime statistics, arson typically ranks lower in comparison to violent crimes and drug-related offenses. Data from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, for example, shows that while arson cases do occur, they are far less frequent than other major crimes. In 2020, for instance, there were approximately 33,000 reported arson incidents in the United States, compared to over 1.2 million cases of violent crime.

This statistical disparity can reinforce the notion that arson is a lower priority crime. Law enforcement agencies, especially in cities with high crime rates, are often stretched thin, and they must allocate their resources to the crimes that occur with the greatest frequency and pose the most immediate threat to public safety. In this context, arson is often seen as a lower priority compared to the overwhelming number of violent offenses.

Conclusion: A Multi-Faceted Issue

Ultimately, arson is considered a low-priority crime due to a combination of factors: the resource-intensive nature of investigations, the difficulty in solving and prosecuting cases, the perception of arson as a property crime with fewer direct victims, and the overall lower frequency of arson cases compared to other types of crime. While this doesn’t mean that arson is not a serious offense, it does explain why it often gets less attention from law enforcement agencies and the judicial system.

This prioritization is not necessarily permanent, however. As climate change increases the risk of wildfires, or as public awareness grows around the devastating financial and emotional impact of arson, it’s possible that we may see a shift in how this crime is viewed and addressed in the future.

In the meantime, the complexities surrounding arson, from the difficulty of investigating it to the challenges in proving intent, ensure that it will remain a perplexing issue for law enforcement and the public alike.