Over the decades, law enforcement agencies have worked tirelessly to fight crime and keep the public safe. In order to achieve these goals, they have enforced certain policing tactics. In his book, The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell mentions and explains in depth about the policing strategy known as Broken Windows Policing. This method of policing is derived from the Broken Windows Theory which states that if there is a broken window and no one bothers to fix it, then people will have a mindset that no one is in charge thus resulting in more windows being broken. The Broken Windows Theory regards crime as a result of disorder. In other words, when people see disorder present in the environment, they will be liable to commit more crimes with …show more content…
the belief that they won’t be held accountable for wrongdoings. Therefore, this theory suggests that in order to prevent crime, minor disorders must be gotten rid of. Although Broken Windows Policing has an undeniable intention of decreasing crime and ensuring the wellbeing of society, there has been controversy over whether Broken Windows Policing actually works.
Several critics have written articles or have conducted studies to prove or disprove the usefulness of this policing tactic. These people include Sara Maria Glanowski, Heather MacDonald, Lauren Kirchner, and David Greenberg. Broken Windows Policing is ineffective because it unfairly targets minority groups, does not reduce crime, and is a waste of time and effort.
Broken Windows Policing racially profiles and traumatizes minority groups. Law enforcement agencies are biased when they decide to target African Americans and Hispanics since they have subjective views against these minority groups. Simply put, the policing of misdemeanors and offenders that are responsible for low-level offenses result in prejudicial consequences such as racial profiling or stereotyping individuals that are more likely to be involved in crime. In the article, “Growing Up With Stop-and-Frisk,” Sara Maria Glanowski details the detrimental effects that one Broken Windows Policing strategy, known as the stop-and-frisk policy, had on the predominantly Black community of Brownsville, Brooklyn. Jamal
…show more content…
Richards, a former resident of Brownsville, grew up having to fear the police and their use of the stop-and-frisk policy. Jamal had personally experienced traumatic encounters with the police.
As it states in “Growing Up With Stop-and-Frisk,” “In his early teens, Jamal was stopped four or five times a week” (Glanowski). Similarly, Jamal had been pointlessly stopped when he went to visit the teachers at his former high school with his friend, Nijhawan. Jamal and Naujawan were asked for their IDs by a NYPD school security officer then had to send their belongings through an X-Ray even though one teacher told the cop that they were good students (Glanowski). Glanowski explains that “It took three phone calls to the security office before Jamal and Naujawan were finally allowed to go through the metal detector.” These examples prove the injustice of Broken Windows Policing. Law enforcement agencies racial profile when they utilize Broken Windows Policing strategies. Racial profiling is wrong because it causes law enforcement agencies to target minorities without a valid reason. Additionally, it goes against the Fourth Amendment which declares that people have the right to be safe and secure as well as free from unreasonable search and seizure (US Const. amend. IV). The job of the cops is to protect citizens and work for the community. Instead, the
actions of law enforcement agencies have caused citizens to despise them and have torn the trust between officers and citizens. Additionally, Glanowski mentions that, “The stop and frisk program expanded 500 percent, stopping 533,042 people in 2012 compared to 97,296 in 2002. Of more than five million people stopped in New York City during that decade, 4.3 million were black or Hispanic…” She further details an unfair stop the police had made when they unfairly targeted Jamal and his friends one summer. The situation was unbelievable: Jamal and his friends were playing basketball in the park when an officer confronted the group of friends and insisted that they leave immediately even though the park still was open for another hour. The officer’s remark provoked one of Jamal’s friends to hit the officer with his basketball. Consequently, Jamal’s friend was arrested for assaulting a police officer (Glanowski). This further proves how law enforcement’s futile policing strategies can negatively influence the lives of minorities. The police’s actions towards Jamal and his friends was disrespectful and unfair. The way the police treat minorities goes against the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment which requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction (US Const. amend. XIV, sec. 1). All in all, Broken Windows Policing is ineffective because it allows police to use their own discretion when dealing with a situation. This is a problem because cops tend to be racist and biased when using their own discretions and view things in a subjective rather than an objective manner. Therefore, Broken Windows Policing is unjust because it not only targets and traumatizes minorities but also racial profiles which is against the Constitution. Broken Windows Policing strategies do not have a correlation to the rate of crime. There is no indubitable or confirmed evidence that accurately or precisely proves this policing tactic to be an effective method of reducing crime. David Greenberg, a sociologist at New York University, conducted a study in which he found that enforced policing of misdemeanor offenses and the use of CompStat (a computer program used to identify and respond to criminal activity) did not necessarily decrease the crime rate. As it states in “1990s Drop In NYC Crime Not Due To CompStat, Misdemeanor Arrests, Study Finds,” “The study, which appears in the journal Justice Quarterly did not find a link between arrests on misdemeanor charges and drops in felonies… the analysis showed that violent crime rates (homicide, aggravated assault, forcible rape, and robbery) and property crime rates did not significantly decrease after the implementation of CompStat-- in fact, both continued on a consistent downward slope beginning in the early 1990s.” This proves that Broken Windows Policing has no correlation with the decrease in the rate of crime. Crime has been decreasing even before the use of Broken Windows Policing and CompStat. This evidence justifies that Broken Windows Policing strategies didn’t really influence the rate of crime, therefore, officers should think twice before using this policing strategy. Greenberg explains that although it is clear that there was a drop in crime in the 1900s the cause of the drop in crime remains a mystery. Similarly, according to “Breaking Down the Broken Windows Theory,” “Many critics of broken windows have pointed out that violent crime fell in New York at the same period of time as unemployment dropped and the economy strengthened ---surely factors at least as important as the disappearance of squeegee guys” (Kirchner). People that are getting arrested for misdemeanors will have a difficult time obtaining employment which may even lead them to commit more crime. Therefore, outside factors such as social and economic factors are indeed important in determining the rate of crime and disorder. If the economy is prospering and many people have jobs, then crime will consequently decrease since people won’t have a reason to steal when they are doing well on their own. This could be the case for why crime decreased during the period of time the economy improved. With crime decreasing on its own, there is no need to use Broken Windows Policing tactics or CompStat to fight crime. Thus, implementing Broken Windows Policing tactics did not necessarily cause the decline in crime rates since crime has already been plummeting on its own. Although critics claim that Broken Windows Policing is needed in high crime areas to protect and save the lives of people, it is a waste of time and energy because it unnecessarily preys on people that look furtive and does not result in many arrests. In her essay, “Saving Minority Lives,” Heather MacDonald claims that it is necessary for the police to make “disparate” and “disproportionate” stops in order to protect its citizens and prevent crimes from occurring. She comments that, “....an identical ratio of stops of whites, blacks and Hispanics result in arrests and recovered weapons ---suggesting that the police are using the same degree of reasonable suspicion in making a stop.” Even though MacDonald argues that the police are equally targeting people of all race with fairness, she fails to mention how law enforcement agencies can be racist in their stops. Justin Peters states in “Broken Windows Policing Doesn’t Work” that “Under the Bloomberg administration, hundreds of thousands of people were detained by police each year via the department’s stop-and-frisk program. Close to 90 percent of those people were released without charges after the stopping officers found nothing illegal.” In addition, Glanowski also mentions in “Growing Up With Stop-and-Frisk” that, “The stop and frisk program expanded 500 percent, stopping 533,042 people in 2012 compared to 97,296 in 2002. Of more than five million people stopped in New York City during that decade, 4.3 million were black or Hispanic…” With so many innocent people being stopped for no valid reason other than suspicion, the question that comes to mind is what type of action or behavior qualifies as “suspicious” activity. For instance, if an adolescent shifts his eyes rapidly and is perspiring heavily around a crowd, this does not mean he has committed a crime or is about to. Rather, he may have social anxiety or anthropophobia which is a fear of people. There is no definite definition of suspicious, therefore, law enforcement agencies should not use this as a reason to stop innocent people. To sum up, Broken Windows Policing takes up time and energy because it targets innocent people that look suspicious and does not lead to many arrests or summons. Broken Windows Policing is an unproductive method of solving crime and keeping communities safe. This form of policing unfairly profiles people based on race bringing fear to minorities, it is not associated with the drop in crime rates, and finally, it takes up time and effort. Law enforcement agencies should review their methods of policing and attempt to be less racist and biased in their discretions. The police should have better relationships with their citizens. Cops should protect their citizens rather than becoming alienated from the communities they serve. If there is something suspicious or illegal going on, then citizens shouldn’t have to hesitate to ask an officer for help. Law enforcement agencies should address problems in a nonviolent approach no matter what type of situation they are in. Using lethal force or stopping and searching innocent people certainly won’t help bring back the trust people have in the police. It will only make the public’s hatred of the police rise. One way to help reduce crime is if there are more policemen placed in areas of high crime than areas where there are fewer crimes committed. This way, those living in the community with high crime rates will be cautious of their actions and may be tempted to follow the law. Additionally, there needs to be more minority officers because white officers are mostly the ones who are biased in their discretions and racially profile people. One suggestion of a better policing strategy is if there is an equal number of white officers and minority officers placed in communities. The race of a police officer may need to be accounted for when deciding which community they will serve. Perhaps more minority officers can be placed in predominantly minority neighborhoods. Fixing this policing system is one step closer to a utopian society.
The Stop and Frisk program, set by Terry vs. Ohio, is presently being implemented by the New York Police Department. It grants police officers the ability to stop a person, ask them questions and frisk if necessary. The ruling has been a NYPD instrument for a long time. However, recently it has produced a lot of controversy regarding the exasperating rate in which minorities, who regularly fall under assault and are irritated by the police. The Stop, Question and Frisk ruling should be implemented correctly by following Terry’s vs. Ohio guidelines which include: reasonable suspicion that a crime is about to be committed, identifying himself as a police officer, and making reasonable inquiries.
People of color are being pursued on the highways in the land of the free. In Bob Herbert’s “Hounding the innocent” acts of racial profiling are displayed flagrantly. Racial profiling should be illegal, since it is unfair to its victims, demoralizing, and it breaks the trust between the public and the police.
The justice system is in place in America to protect its citizens, however in the case of blacks and some other minorities there are some practices that promote unfairness or wrongful doing towards these groups. Racial profiling is amongst these practices. In cases such as drug trafficking and other criminal acts, minorities have been picked out as the main culprits based off of skin color. In the article “Counterpoint: The Case Against Profiling” it recognizes racial profiling as a problem in America and states, “[In order to maintain national security] law-enforcement officers have detained members of minority groups in vehicles more than whites”…. “these officers assume that minorities commit more drug offenses, which is not the case” (Fauchon). In relationship to law enforcement there has also been many cases of police brutality leaving young blacks brutally injured, and even dead in recent years, cases such as Michael Brown, Dontre Hamilton, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and Freddy Gray just to name a few. Many of these young men were unarmed, and the police involved had no good justification for such excess force. They were seen as threats primarily because of their skin color. Despite the fact this nation is trying to attain security, inversely they are weakening bonds between many of its
Stop and Frisk is a procedure put into use by the New York Police Department that allows an officer to stop and search a “suspicious character” if they consider her or him to be. The NYPD don’t need a warrant, or see you commit a crime. Officers solely need to regard you as “suspicious” to violate your fourth amendment rights without consequences. Since its Beginning, New York City’s stop and frisk program has brought in much controversy originating from the excessive rate of arrest. While the argument that Stop and Frisk violates an individual’s fourth amendment rights of protection from unreasonable search and seizure could definitely be said, that argument it’s similar to the argument of discrimination. An unfair number of Hispanics and
While the stop and frisk program ultimately seems like a great idea and that it will help residents of New York City feel safer while on the streets, there has been much controversy with this program. The issue of racial profiling is largely discussed when talking about NYPD’s stop and frisk program. Besides police officers targeting lower income neighborhoods, more stops are of African Americans or Latinos than of whites. These stops often end up with a higher arrest rate. Of the 685,784 stopped last year, 92% were male and 87% were African American or Latino (Devereaux, 2012).
Racial profiling is the tactic of stopping someone because of the color of his or her skin and a fleeting suspicion that the person is engaging in criminal behavior (Meeks, p. 4-5). This practice can be conducted with routine traffic stops, or can be completely random based on the car that is driven, the number of people in the car and the race of the driver and passengers. The practice of racial profiling may seem more prevalent in today’s society, but in reality has been a part of American culture since the days of slavery. According to Tracey Maclin, a professor at the Boston University School of Law, racial profiling is an old concept. The historical roots “can be traced to a time in early American society when court officials permitted constables and ordinary citizens the right to ‘take up’ all black persons seen ‘gadding abroad’ without their master’s permission” (Meeks, p. 5). Although slavery is long since gone, the frequency in which racial profiling takes place remains the same. However, because of our advanced electronic media, this issue has been brought to the American public’s attention.
“From 2005 to mid-2008, approximately eighty percent of total stops made were of Blacks and Latinos, who comprise twenty-five percent and twenty-eight percent of New York City’s total population, respectively. During this same time period, only about ten percent of stops were of Whites, who comprise forty-four percent of the city’s population” (“Restoring a National Consensus”). Ray Kelly, appointed Police Commissioner by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, of New York in 2013, has not only accepted stop-and-frisk, a program that allows law enforcers to stop individuals and search them, but has multiplied its use. Kelly argued that New Yorkers of color, who have been unevenly targeted un...
At the core of the stop and frisk policy as utilized by the New York Police Department is racial profiling. Racial profiling has a significant and often controversial place in the history of policing in the United States. Racial profiling can be loosely defined as the use of race as a key determinant in law enforcement decisions to stop, interrogate, and/or detain citizens (Weitzer & Tuch, 2002). Laws in the United States have helped to procure and ensure race based decisions in law enforcement. Historically, the Supreme Court has handed down decisions which increase the scope of discretion of a law enforcement officer. For example, traffic stops can be used to look for evidence even though the officer has not observed any criminal violation (Harris, 2003). Proponent's for racial profiling reason that racial profiling is a crime fighting tool that does treat racial/ethnic groups as potential criminal suspects based on the assumption that by doing so increases the chances of catching criminals (Harris, 2003). Also, it is important to note, law enforcement officers only need reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk, probable cause is not required as in other circumstances (Harris, 2003). It is because of this assumption that the New York Police Department’s stop and frisk policy is still a relevant issue.
One of the biggest reason stop-and-frisk should be abolished is in hopes to decrease such blatant racial profiling that has been going on under the name of “stop-and-frisk”. In 2007, 55% of the people stopped in New York were blacks and 30% were Hispanic (“Update: Crime and Race”). When checked again in 2011 a total of 685,000 people were stopped by the police of that 685,000, 52.9% were African Americans, 33.7% were Latino, and 9.3% were white (“Racial Profiling”). There is a story of an innocent victim of the stop-and-frisk policy, a man by the name of Robert Taylor. Police in Torrance stopped the elderly man and claimed he fit the description of a suspect that was linked to a robbery. But there was one simple problem; Taylor is a light complexioned, tall, 60 year-old man and the suspect was believed to be a short, dark complexioned, stocky man in his thirties; nothing like Taylor at all (Hutchinson). His shows that the police do not always stop people based on the right reasons, they tend to stop people based on the color of thei...
The prospect of a racially discriminatory process violates the ideals of equal treatment under the law under which the system is premised (Kansal, 2005). Law enforcement, as the frontline of the criminal justice system, has a great deal to do with who ends up being incarcerated. Law enforcement personnel are the initiating beings who start the path to incarceration for individuals they come in contact with. Their decision in terms of making a stop, making a report, making an arrest and so on determines if and how that individual will enter the criminal justice system. One discriminating practice used by police officers is racial profiling.
In the article Road Rage, Williams does a good job trying to make society aware of the racial profiling problem and also trying to make each citizen more conscious about its consequences through communities all over the world. She starts by saying that although the Black Ministers Council has been trying to expose and prevent racial profiling, it still occurs. To identify the problem and to start her argument, she uses a lot of statistics to show that even though most of the individuals convicted of drug related offenses are white, the majority of people that are suspects and stopped in the streets are black. These statistics strengthen her argument once it proves with relevant facts that this unacceptable situation keeps on happening often.
Many people claim that racism no longer exists; however, the minorities’ struggle with injustice is ubiquitous. Since there is a mass incarceration of African Americans, it is believed that African Americans are the cause of the severe increase of crimes. This belief has been sent out implicitly by the ruling class through the media. The media send out coded messages that are framed in abstract neutral language that play on white resentment that targets minorities. Disproportionate arrest is the result of racial disparities in the criminal justice system rather than disproportion in offenders. The disparities in the sentencing procedure are ascribed to racial discrimination. Because police officers are also biased, people of color are more likely to be investigated than whites. Police officers practice racial profiling to arrest African Americans under situations when they would not arrest white suspects, and they are more likely to stop African Americans and see them as suspicious (Alexander 150-176). In the “Anything Can Happen With Police Around”: Urban Youth Evaluate Strategies of Surveillance in Public Places,” Michelle Fine and her comrades were inspired to conduct a survey over one of the major social issues - how authority figures use a person’s racial identity as a key factor in determining how to enforce laws and how the surveillance is problematic in public space. Fine believes it is critical to draw attention to the reality in why African Americans are being arrested at a much higher rate. This article reflects the ongoing racial issue by focusing on the injustice in treatment by police officers and the youth of color who are victims. This article is successful in being persuasive about the ongoing racial iss...
Despite the fact racism has been around for hundreds of years, upcoming generations are becoming more open minded and less likely to publicly berate minorities; racial profiling, however, is the one loophole of racism America overlooks. Police officials often use the practices of racial profiling to discretely single out minority races. A common approach to this is through traffic patrols. According to a statistic based in San Jose, CA, nearly 100,000 drivers were stopped; during the year ending in June 2000; and of these drivers less than 32% were white, the remaining 68% of drivers were a...
In 1982, the political scientist James Q. Wilson and the criminologist George Kelling psychologist, both Americans, published in The Atlantic Monthly in a study that for the first time, established a causal link between disorder and crime. In that study, called The Police and Neighborhood Safety, the authors used the image of broken windows to explain how the disorder and criminality could slowly seep into a community, causing its decline and the consequent drop in quality of life. Wilson and Kelling argued that if a window in a factory or an office was broken and was not repaired immediately, people who pass through there would conclude that no one cared about that locality. In other words, the people would believe that there is no responsible authority for the maintenance of order in that place. a move to mass incarceration or a nationwide clemency policy, a large-scale shift to more targeted policing patterns, etc. ), shifts in the distribution or composition of the population (e.g. immigration trends), disruption of wide-spread illicit drug distribution paths, and events that significantly modify a nation’s perception of its government’s legitimacy”.
There have been many contributors when it came to tackling anti-social behaviour and preventing crime however, the most influential contributors are Wilson and Kelling. They came up with the theory of broken window which will be further explain in this essay. This essay will outline the broken window theory, as well as explain what is meant by broken window. Finally it will give examples that exemplify the broken window theory. (Maguire, Morgan and Reiner, 2012)