Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on broken windows theory
Essay on broken windows theory
Crime control model problems
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
(Witkin 2) From there, Witkin begins to analyze the connection between the crime decrease and harsher prison sentencing and smarter policing (Witkin 2) As stated by Witkin, “Imprisonment...seems to be important, but not the underlying cause of the crime drop…” and while “...smarter policing was spectacularly decisive in some cities… it probably was not the key factor nationwide.” (Witkin 3-4).
1. The article showcases how the “broken windows” theory was popularized, and proven to work, thus Mayor Giuliani of New York City applied the theory to lower crime rates throughout the city. However, it was later proven that the theory had faulty logic, and statistical backing thus losing momentum.
It had a major impact during that time and still remains influential today. One of the most notable applications of this theory was in New York City under the supervision of the Police Commissioner William Bratton (“Broken Windows”). Bratton and others were fully convinced that the uses of the broken window theory, such as aggressive order-maintenance practices in the New York City Police Department impacted the dramatic decrease of crime rate in the city during the 1990s. Bratton used the broken windows theory with the New York City’s transit police force from 1990-1992. Squads of plain clothed officers were assigned to catch turnstile jumpers.
In the wake of rising protests and criticism of police after the deaths of Eric Garner, and Akai Gurley, George L. Kelling, a criminologist and professor, and William J. Bratton, former police commissioner of the New York City Police, come together to present their argument for Broken Windows Policing (BWP). This article they collaborated on mainly focuses on topics that certain “police critics” have brought up against BWP and attempts to prove that BWP is something that should continue to be both practiced, and invested in. Most of these topics are actually not attacking the efficacy of BWP but its consequences, such as Search Question and Frisk (this method of BWP is known as SQF) and counterproductive, BWP leads to over incarceration, BWP
The Broken Windows Theory is effective at preventing crime by cracking down on urban disorder. Broken Windows policing has reduced the number of shootings, murders and other violent crimes in New York City. Through the implementation of Broken Windows policing in New York City, businesses were able to grow because they no longer had to fear having their money or goods stolen by delinquents. Broken Windows policing in New York City encouraged the growth of tourism; by cleaning up the streets and removing criminals, outsiders felt safe visiting. This reinvigoration on New York City also helped cause the influx of new residents because people were able to take the subway and walk down the streets without fear of being mugged or assaulted.
Between the mid-late 1970s and the early 1980s, Dennis Nilsen began mass murdering young men in Great Britain that had at least 15 men through strangulation (Crime Investigation, 2014). In analyzing his life, many of contributions throughout his life could have influenced his criminal behaviour when committing his crimes. Many theories such as broken home hypothesis and schema therapy theory use psychological explanations that determine how the individual resulted into committing their crimes. With schema therapy theory, not only does it discuss the justification for criminal behaviour, but suggests how to reduce the relapse of criminal acts by identifying the cause or the trigger of the individual’s criminal behaviour (Vos et al., 2016). In Dennis Nilsen’s life, there are several indications such as the abandonment of his family members, the termination of a past relationship, and the reclusiveness from society that could have resulted
The broken-windows theory was enforced before zero-tolerance policy and the Mayor transitioned into a more strict policy for reducing crime. Broken windows policing was effective in reducing crime rates within the United States. The transition into zero-tolerance policy made the police look at small offenses more seriously because these small offenses and low-level crimes could lead to higher offenses. Zero-tolerance was implemented because the Mayor realized all criminal offenses needed to be taken
1. Explain why no single factor can be considered the cause of the crime decline in the 1990s. Advocates who are in favor of their individual crime fighting polies argue that it was their approaches such as, increased incarceration, decline use of crack, community policing and many more that truly resulted in the great American crime drop. However, there is no single explaination as to why crime fell in the United States, rather it was the cause of different and new policing strategies working together at the same time. The dramatic decline in the use of crack cocaine and the recent innovations such as, deterrence policing all provides tangible evidence that they are some of many plausible explanations that contributed in the great American
The broken windows theory, had positive effects on their communities, might be useful. After the police followed the theory, the outcomes of theory got miracle achievement. The crime between 1990 and 2001 decreased by 67% arrest for minor crimes, so the policy got quickly widespread the entire of New York. On the other hand, the theory was doubted. This is because Harcourt say “ Crime was starting to go down in New York prior to the Giuliani election and prior to the implementation of broken windows policing ”( Veclanton, 2016).
This is the “broken window” policing strategy introduced by Police Commissioner Bratton under the administration of Mayor Giuliana (Francis). In turn, the broken window policy is based on an interesting sociological experiment. In 1969 Philip Zimbardo, a Stanford University Sociologist, took a car with some sminor damage, torn license plate, left the doors open, and left it in the Bronx, at that time a very crime infested section of New York. Within 10 minutes it was being robbed and in three days it was a hulk on cinder blocks. Zimbardo then took a similar car to Palo Alto, California, an upscale area, but this time there was no damaged license plate and the doors were closed and locked.
The concept of the Broken Windows theory in the terms of policing is arresting people for small crimes so big crimes do not happen. This type of policing is supposed to benefit the people but the officers are the ones benefiting. The first time the broken window theory was used in policing it only worked for the police. Now in present day America it is not working for anyone. The idea behind quality of life policing is to give people a good life.
I understand that the practice of the broken window theory may not actually reduce crime, but I do believe there is a benefit. The benefit is the perception of safety. Although statistical, there may be little to no impact on crime, for citizen to feel safer and to have a better relationship with their law enforcement officers, is definitely beneficial. Looking at this from my perspective, I believe if I was to feel safer and have more confidence in the officers patrolling my neighborhood, that would be a great improvement from having the same crime rate, but feeling unsafe and not having confidence in the officers patrolling my neighborhood.
The theory is very pro-active and requires law enforcement officers to recognize, not ignore, offense and deal with it. Offenses such as graffiti, loitering, soliciting, parking violation, traffic driving, truancy, and abandoned property are minor offenses that grow into larger problems that can transform a good neighborhood into a chaotic neighborhood within the span of 10 years. However, there are a lot of disadvantages to the broken window theory. The first disadvantages to the broken windows theory is the zero-tolerance policy. Zero tolerance policing relies on the premise that the more arrests made by officers for minor crimes contributing to community disorder, the less severe crime that community will have to
It is also called as “zero tolerance” policing. Sousa and Kelling (2006) states that the broken windows policing focuses on strict enforcement of law against disorderly behaviour and minor offenses like prostitution, public urination, and aggressive panhandling. This step is vital as it is to prevent more serious crime from happening. Skogan (1990, 1992) failed to find proof that the enforcement of broken windows policing reduced additional disorder or more serious crimes to occur. Weisburd and Eck (2004) also states that New York City uses this type of policing in 1990s and many NYC officials admitted that the crime rate dropped because of broken windows policing but many people also say that there are some other reasons for the reduction of crime rates in New York City.
There are also criticism to how the police will regulate anti-gang loiter laws without having to fall into racial profiling. The police without anti-gang loitering laws are already demonized in some communities; this ordinance will definitely not make their relationship better. The relationship between the police and lower income communities is a basis of concern for the development of anti-gang ordinances. The role of the police is to be authoritative to follow the “broken window theory” and manage to have full control of both small crimes to control larger crime. The broken window theory played a role in the Chicago anti-gang loiter laws as stated in Dorothy E. Roberts article, “Foreword: Race, Vagueness, and the Social Meaning of Order-Maintenance Policing” she states, “The city cited this theory [broken window theory]…because when