What started two decades ago as a New York, Chicago and other large city ‘theory’ to guide police policy and procedures in crime suppression and crime prevention is, according to recent researchers and writers, a faulty theory. Proponents told us that neighborhood decay, community disorder and even small offences inevitably lead to big crimes and more social disorder. Thanks to the well done Advocate ‘on line’ archives, you can read more on the original theory in two early 2007 VJJA Advocate issues. We now review only recent commentaries on the Broken Windows Theory (BWT).
In recent years most support of the BWT theory has eroded. Researchers say to stop arresting everyone and allow diversion and commonsense policing rather than zero tolerance and prosecution for all who transgress. Little empirical evidence has emerged to support the idea that disorder, left unchecked, causes crime. The NET Widening (low intake diversion) or zero tolerance approach of some communities is not efficacious. But, why was the theory flawed? Was it not a good idea to sternly deal with misdemeanor ffenses and offenders to prevent a drift to more community disorder and more serious transgressions? Scholars have now concluded that the decline in crime rates was more likely related to changing use of drugs (crack epidemic ended), more favorable recent economic conditions, increased number of police officers on the streets and other factors that produced more public order, not Broken Windows policing. In Illusion of Order: the False Promise of Broken Windows Policing, Bernard Harcourt takes over 300 pages to question the order maintenance approach, an “approach without empirical foundation” that had “become so popular.” The author finds no support for BWT. In a 2003 Univ of Chicago Law Review article (BWT, New Evidence from New York City and Five Cities) the author and a colleague state that “there appears to be no good evidence that broken windows policing reduces crime.” In 2001 Ralph Taylor wrote a 386 page data heavy study of crime in Baltimore and the Maryland experience with BWT driven policing. This book, Breaking Away from Broken Windows, is not an easy read and will only be appreciated by those with an appreciation of politics and personalities of Baltimore.
In Carrots, Sticks, and Broken Windows, Corman and Mocan offer more commentary on the faulty theory and the ‘get tough’ policing that became so common. The recent literature points to many abuses of power and to a harmful ‘we-they’ atmosphere that is corrosive to a community. Harcourt and others claim that the zero tolerance or quality of life infractions enforcement action has overburdened municipal courts, lead to more incarceration than in other nations and the subsequent construction of massive and perhaps uncalled for new prisons. The pendulum has gone back and forth. Perhaps restorative justice (New Zealand RJ is often initiated by the police officer in lieu of prosecution) is an example of a reasonable intervention for jaywalking, public urination, alcohol possession, fare evasion and other infractions that put many in jail just a decade or two ago. And, it is up to each community and each jurisdiction to decide how zealously to enforce the city codes, state laws and reasonable standards of community order. Knowledge of the more than twenty years of Broken Windows debate will enable professionals to better make day to day decisions for today. And, ordering teen clients to write essays on the BWT is a reasonable soft sanction for court or CSU imposition and a good catalyst for victim awareness or other client group discussion.
VJJA ADVOCATE readers are invited to suggest book review topics or themes for 2008 via comments to the editor.
Eric Assur is employed by the
17th Court Service Unit in Arlington. Suggestions for future book
reviews can be sent to
bookem@vjja.org.
