Crime is a global issue that everyone must understand and address. The two articles, “Interpreting Crime Statistics in Context” by Sternheimer and “Broken Windows” by Wilson and Kelling, talk about solutions and statistics of crime. The broken windows theory suggests that a more hands-on method, cleaning up in the city, and the more minor crimes you stop, then the less likely people are to commit a crime. Sternheimer talks about how understanding data and numerical information effectively from the criminology perspective can help stop crime. While both articles support fighting crime, they both go about it in separate ways. Sternheimer talks about understanding data to help with crimes, and Wilson urges maintaining and addressing misdemeanors to reduce felonies. Sternheimer is very data-based, looking at …show more content…
Bringing us to think that crimes are worse than they might appear. She also goes on to talk about how if we analyze crime data, we will get a better understanding of what is going on in the world and the ways in which we should address crime. In contrast, Wilson and Kelling are more focused on fixing and cleaning the city, doing small work and nitty gritty stuff; for example, washing away graffiti, cleaning up litter, and fixing broken windows. They suggest that cleaning and improving the city will help the crime rate. Because it leads to a sense of order and people will therefore stop committing crimes and felonies. Despite the differences, the authors have the same goal: to reduce crime. Each of them brings their perspective on tackling this issue. I think both articles are worth considering. I would not like to choose which one I agree with more. Because the authors bring valid points of view. I like the approach of Wilson and Kelling because when you are out there doing things in the eyes of the public, it can bring multiple