Zero Tolerance Policing Policy
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
A Zero Tolerance Policing Policy is a policing policy that is a zero tolerance policy.
- Example(s):
- See: William Bratton, New Jersey, The Atlantic Monthly, James Q. Wilson, George L. Kelling, Broken Windows Theory, Window, Vandalism, Squatters, Sidewalk, Litter, Police.
References
2021
- (Wikipedia, 2021) ⇒ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_tolerance#History Retrieved:2021-4-3.
- … On the historical examples of the application of zero tolerance kind of policies, nearly all the scientific studies conclude that it failed to play the leading role in the reduction of crimes that is claimed by its advocates. On the other hand, large majorities of people who are living in communities in which zero tolerance policing has been followed believe that it has actually played a key, leading role in reducing crime in their communities. It has been alleged that in New York City, the decline of the crime rate had started well before Rudy Giuliani came to power in 1993. None of the decreasing processes had any particular inflection under him, [1] and during the same period, the decrease in crime was the same in the other major US cities, even those with an opposite security policy. However, the experience of the vast majority of New Yorkers led them to precisely the opposite conclusion and allowed a Republican to win and retain the Mayor's office for the first time in decades, in large part because of the perception that zero tolerance policing was playing key to the city's improving crime situation. On the other hand, some argue that in 1984-1987, the city had already experienced a policy similar to Giuliani's but instead faced an increase in the crime rate. Two American specialists, Edward Maguire, a professor at American University, and John Eck from the University of Cincinnati, rigorously evaluated all the scientific work designed to test the effectiveness of the police in the fight against crime. They concluded that "neither the number of policemen engaged in the battle, or internal changes and organizational culture of law enforcement agencies (such as the introduction of community policing) have by themselves any impact on the evolution of offenses." [2] They argue that the crime decrease was caused by not the work of the police and the judiciary but economic and demographic factors: mainly an unprecedented economic growth with jobs for millions of young people and a shift from the use of crack towards other drugs. [3] An alternative argument comes from Kelling and William Bratton, Giuliani's original police chief, who argue that broken windows policing methods contributed to the decrease in crime but they were not a form of zero tolerance: Sheldon Wein has set out a list of six characteristics of a zero tolerance policy: [4]
- Full enforcement (all those for whom there is adequate evidence that they have violated the rule are to be identified)
- Lack of prosecutorial discretion (for every plausibly accused person, it is determined whether the person has in fact violated the policy)
- Strict constructivist interpretation (no room for narrow interpretation of the rule)
- Strict liability (no excuses or justifications)
- Mandatory punishment (not under a mandatory minimum penalty)
- Harsh punishment (mandatory minimum penalty is considered relatively harsh given the nature of the crime).
- Wein sees those points as representing "focal meaning" of the concept. Not all must met literally, but any policy that clearly meets all six of those conditions would definitely be seen as a case of a zero tolerance policy.
- … On the historical examples of the application of zero tolerance kind of policies, nearly all the scientific studies conclude that it failed to play the leading role in the reduction of crimes that is claimed by its advocates. On the other hand, large majorities of people who are living in communities in which zero tolerance policing has been followed believe that it has actually played a key, leading role in reducing crime in their communities. It has been alleged that in New York City, the decline of the crime rate had started well before Rudy Giuliani came to power in 1993. None of the decreasing processes had any particular inflection under him, [1] and during the same period, the decrease in crime was the same in the other major US cities, even those with an opposite security policy. However, the experience of the vast majority of New Yorkers led them to precisely the opposite conclusion and allowed a Republican to win and retain the Mayor's office for the first time in decades, in large part because of the perception that zero tolerance policing was playing key to the city's improving crime situation. On the other hand, some argue that in 1984-1987, the city had already experienced a policy similar to Giuliani's but instead faced an increase in the crime rate. Two American specialists, Edward Maguire, a professor at American University, and John Eck from the University of Cincinnati, rigorously evaluated all the scientific work designed to test the effectiveness of the police in the fight against crime. They concluded that "neither the number of policemen engaged in the battle, or internal changes and organizational culture of law enforcement agencies (such as the introduction of community policing) have by themselves any impact on the evolution of offenses." [2] They argue that the crime decrease was caused by not the work of the police and the judiciary but economic and demographic factors: mainly an unprecedented economic growth with jobs for millions of young people and a shift from the use of crack towards other drugs. [3] An alternative argument comes from Kelling and William Bratton, Giuliani's original police chief, who argue that broken windows policing methods contributed to the decrease in crime but they were not a form of zero tolerance: Sheldon Wein has set out a list of six characteristics of a zero tolerance policy: [4]
1999
- (Greene, 1999) ⇒ Judith A. Greene. (1999). “Zero Tolerance: A Case Study of Police Policies and Practices in New York City.” Crime & Delinquency, 45(2).
- QUOTE: ... Comparison of crime rates, arrest statistics, and citizen complaints in New York with those in San Diego—where a more problem-oriented community policing strategy has been implemented—gives strong evidence that effective crime control can be achieved while producing fewer negative impacts on urban neighborhoods. ...
1998
- (Dixon, 1998) ⇒ David Dixon. (1998). “Broken Windows, Zero Tolerance, and the New York Miracle.” Current issues in criminal justice, 10(1).
- QUOTE: ... The unchecked panhandler is, in effect, the first broken window' (Wilson and Kelling … Wilson and Kelling's 'Broken windows' argued that policing should target neighbourhoods in decline … the like), then zero tolerance constitutes a coherent, albeit highly objectionable, policy … ...