Broken?

http://www.citylab.com/crime/2014/12/two-architects-of-broken-windows-policing-go-on-the-defensive/384080/

New York City police officers
nytimes.com

Hello Everyone:

Happy New Year to everyone across the globe. Blogger wishes you a joyous, healthy, and prosperous 2015.  Blogger also wants to thank you for your continued support of this site and looks forward to bringing you more in the coming. Today we open a new year of posts with a timely article by Eric Jaffe for CityLab.  

Eric Jaffe's article, "Two Architects of Broken Windows Policing Go On the Defensive," looks at the current discussion centered around a theory of policing that holds, "stopping petty crimes ultimately deters big ones."  The main supporters of this method of policing are former Los Angeles Police Chief and  current New York City Police Commissioner William Bratton and criminal justice professor George Kelling (together with James Q. Wilson) promoted broken windows in the 1982 issue of The Atlantic.  Commissioner Bratton has used this method for decades in American cities.  Now, critics are arguing that broken windows "...is broken itself; unfairly targeting minorities, destroying community trust in police, and arguably doing more harm to the city than good."  Both Commissioner Bratton and Mr. Kelling have risen to counter the critics, "in hopes of a sharper public discourse..."  In his article, Mr. Mr. Jaffe summarizes some of broken windows key arguments and raises additional issues.

Broken windows crime prevention
wildernessboyz.co.za

The first argument Mr. Jaffe discusses is, "Broken windows is not stop-and-frisk."  Both Commissioner Bratton and Mr. Kelling posit "that these two policing approaches have been wrongly conflated in the public mind."  Stop-and-frisk, the roundly condemned practice that has been scaled in New York City, is based on the concept of reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, leaving what determines reasonable suspicion up to the officer's discretion and open to abuse.  Commissioner Bratton and Mr. Kelling say that broken windows policing directly targets illegal behavior.  However, what constitutes illegal behavior is can still be subject to the officer's discretion.

Next, "Most people want to stop minor offenses."  Commissioner Bratton and Mr. Kelling further put forth, "...based on their experience in 'countless' public meetings, that locals consider it extremely important to stop the types of small-scale disorderly conduct at the heart of broken windows policing (from graffiti to litter to public drug use)."  Both gentlemen cite an August 2014 poll taken following the death of Eric Garner, which revealed "...that a majority of New York voters want to enforce quality-of-life offenses."  This was supported by Caucasian (61-33), African-Americans (56-37), and Hispanics (64-34).  (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/nyc/nyc08272014_c746hawx.pdf)

Eric Garner funeral
slate.com

Numbers do not lie, "The statistics suggest broken windows work."  When broken windows policing went into effect about twenty years ago, when William Bratton was commissioner under former Mayor Rudy Giuliani.  At the time, Commissioner Bratton and Mr. Kelling say, "...the city;s murder rate was 26.5 per 100,000 people, and New York accounted for abut 8 percent of U.S. homicides."(http://www.nber.org/digest/jan03/w9061.html)  Currently, the homicide rate is down to "...4 per 100,000-lower than the national rate of 4.5-and the share of U.S, homicides is 2.4 percent."

If the numbers do not lie, then "So does the science."  Scientific evidence, based on controlled experiments suggests that broken windows does work.  In studies conducted in Jersey City, New Jersey and Lowell, Massachusetts, "...crime declined at a greater rate in areas randomly assigned to receive broken windows policing, compared to those that received routine policing."  Another study, The Spreading of Disorder, by Kees Keizer, Siegwart Lindenberg, and Linda Steg; published on December 12, 2008 in Science, revealed similar results. When researchers placed an envelop with cash near a mailbox surrounded by trash and graffiti, they found that it was stolen more frequently then the same envelop placed near a cleaner mailbox. (http://www.sciencemag.org)

From the Broken Windows field study
Lowell, Massachusetts
boston.com

Finally, "Disorder is not a victimless crime."  Critics of broken windows frequent point out that public disorder is a harmless and should be left alone.  For some people, a homeless person camping out on the street is a modern day tragedy. Yet, it is not just about a homeless person huddled in an out of the way corner, it is about said homeless person pushing a cart, laden with their possessions.  These possession are often infested with vermin and insect that do create a threat public safety and well being.  Defenders of broken windows argue that the offenders are frequently issued summons, not arrested.

After Eric Jaffe's clear breakdown of the pro-broken windows argument, he then challenges both Commissioner Bratton and Mr. Kelling on each point, citing studies and statistics to counter the pro-broken windows arguments.  First, while conceding that Commissioner Bratton and Mr. Kelling  are experts on the study of broken windows and make their case very well.  Mr. Jaffe finds the tone of the argument "dismissive," writing, "...at one point they huff at 'Ivory-tower studies...treated with reverence by the media,' a rather odd shot coming from a think tank journal."  Further, Mr. Jaffe feels that their conclusion that broken windows policing is directly responsible for the better quality  of life in New York is a stretch in light of the evidence:

Crime has plummeting for two decades...Tourism is booming.  Public spaces are safe.  Property values have escalated.  It's a good place to live and work.  Lawlessness no longer characterizes the subway system.  These conditions didn't just happen.  They resulted from thousands of police interventions on the street, which restored order and civility across the five boroughs.

Graph showing the drop in violent and property crimes
citylab.com via Justice Quarterly

Eric Jaffe also agrees that the "reduced crime is very high among the reasons why New York City is a great place today."  However, he adds, "...the specific role played by broken windows in that reduction remains in question."

Taking a bit of a dismissive tone himself, Mr. Jaffe writes, "For one thing, crime has fallen everywhere in recent years.  A 2004 study on policing by the National Academy of Sciences failed to find strong evidence that 'enforcement strategies (primarily arrest) applied broadly against committing minor offenses lead to reductions in serious crimes.'" (http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/469_CH_3.pdf)  Mr. Jaffe notes that police strategies aimed at those committing quality of life crimes thus leading to a drop in overall crime is not as straight forward as it sounds.  He cites a  2013 study done by New York University sociologist David Greenberg which re-examined city crime statistics between 1988 and 2001.  Prof. Greenberg revealed a clear downward trajectory that began long before 1994 (the first year of broken windows policing). (http://www.libertyconcepts.com/wp-content/uploads.sites/11/.../Greenberg-2013.pdf)

The broken windows connection
the-pa-in-connection.blogspot.com

 In short, it is not apparent whether or not decline in urban crime is the product of broken windows policing or the restoration of law and order through greater social trends-the waning crack epidemic and the decreased lead exposure, community based policing are some examples.  Despite this stop-and-frisk is, perhaps, separate and more pernicious than broken windows policing, yet remains a logical extension.

Point out the obvious, Mr. Jaffe writes, "Most New Yorkers may approve of public order..., but they also disapprove of the aggression that led to Eric Garner's death, with 68 percent of those polled in August saying there was no excuse for police behavior in that case."  Broken windows policing does not always result in excessive force but the fact that it has happened, aside from the tragic Eric Garner case there have been several incidents that demonstrates that this method of policing is-well-broken.

Eric Garner memorial
bet.com

Even if we assume that broken windows does work, there is enough evidence to suggest that whatever benefits that may be derived from must be measured against the policy's divisive nature.  Slate magazine's Justin Peters argued, in a December 3, 2014 article "Broken Windows Policing Doesn't Work: It also may have killed Eric Garner," that broken windows is based in racism.  Mr. Peters noted that in the original Kelling and Wilson article no answer was given to the question of "how police using the approach can avoid being 'agents of neighborhood bigotry.'" (http://www.slate.com/.../broken_windows_policing-doesn't_work_it also_may_...)  Further, writing in the Boston Globe on December 29, 2014, columnist Derrick Jackson implies "that black people themselves have become the broken windows that a neighborhood must clean up, the very color of their skin a 'primary offense.'" (http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/...broken-windows-broken.../story.html?)

Therefore, even if broken windows is sound and effective policing theory, there are still a lot questions about its application on the city streets.  While Eric Jaffe is not suggesting that broken windows policing be consigned to the dustbin of policing methods not does he encourage criticism of the current approach.  What he does suggest and blogger agrees that there needs to be real changes in the relationship between police and citizens, civic organizations, and communities.