Broken Window Policing
Broken window policing is a policing concept that implies that visible signs of disorder and misbehavior in a community encourage further disorder and misbehavior, leading to violent crimes. This means that a sign of disorder in society that goes unattended can fuel such behaviors. The broken window policy has been used to target neighborhoods occupied by minority populations. With this policing, the majority of people arrested and victimized were people of color. Wilson and Kelling (2007) posit “But the police forces of America are losing, not gaining, members” (para 47). This means that the police are not successful in the use of excessive force against suspects. The quote presents the status quo in the current criminal justice system used by the police to maintain social order. Therefore, this essay will define the concept of the broken window policing, explain why it produces racists result, and describe why it is wrong using the concept of deterrence.
Definition of Broken Window Policing
Wilson and Kelling (2007) say, “Social psychologists and police officers tend to agree that if a window in a building is broken and is left unrepaired, all the rest of the windows will soon be broken” (para. 11). This means that a behavior that is not solved in a society can turn into something that cannot be controlled. For instance, if a person with a violent behavior is not tamed early enough, then there is a possibility that the behavior might become a habit that is difficult to control. In other words, an untended problem in society is likely to escalate to the point that it cannot be managed. Through this quote, one can understand the meaning of Broken Window Policy. Now, one can say that a broken window is a policy that majors on the importance of a disorder such as a broken window in creating and sustaining more serious crimes.
According to Wilson and Kelling (2007), “persons who broke the informal rules, especially those who bothered people waiting at bus stops, were arrested for vagrancy” (para. 8). It means that a person would not be spared even when they break unwritten rules but defines acceptable roles and activities in a community. Normally, most people who end up being serial criminals are believed to have started breaking informal rules such as disturbing people in public places, and nothing was being done. This quote is a good illustration of a broken window policy because it majors on taming all manner of crime, whether minor or major. Based on this quote, society understands broken window policy is all about maintaining the social order by attending to any form of unethical behavior.
How Broken Window Produced Racist results
Wilson and Kelling (2007) claim that, “Window-breaking does not necessarily occur on a large scale because determined window-breakers inhabit some areas whereas others are populated by window-lovers” (para. 11). This means that some areas are occupied by individuals who must commit an offense, while some areas are occupied by people who love to obey the law. This quote groups people into two; people who are more likely to offend and the ones who are less likely to offend. As a result, law enforcers have always focused on areas with people who are prone to breaking the law. This quote presents a notion that people living in high crime rates are reported to love breaking the law. Therefore, window-breakers are likely to experience more arrests compared to areas with window-lovers.
Moreover, Wilson and Kelling (2007) suggest, “For some residents, this growing atomization will matter little because the neighborhood is not their home but the place where they live. Their interests are elsewhere; they are cosmopolitans” (para. 15). It means that some people will be unconcerned about the neighborhood’s growing level of social disorder because it is not their home but rather the place where they dwell. They come from other countries, and their interests are diverse. The quote tends to present a view that immigrants are less likely to be bothered by the security issues of the host country because the existing location is not their original home. This quote presents people of color and other immigrants as an enemy to social order. Based on this, the original inhabitants of the host country are more likely to perceive immigrants as the cause of insecurity in the country.
Why Breaking the Window Theory is wrong
Wilson and Kelling (2007) state, “Second, at the community level, disorder and crime are usually inextricably linked in a kind of developmental sequence” (para. 11). Broken Windows is based on the assumption that crime and disorder are interrelated and that establishing order in areas through increased police presence will decrease crime and make residents feel safer. In principle, this technique would allow authorities to repair a neighborhood by enforcing minor infractions. According to CBC (n.d.), “Haworth, who was suspected of theft, was handcuffed at the time of the incident, which left him with a fractured skull and traumatic brain injury” (15th minute). This means that people use excessive force to strike fear in people for breaking the law. Drawing from this quote, breaking the window theory is portrayed as a preventive technique to strike fear among offenders, just like deterrence theory. Breaking the window theory is wrong because it majors on driving fear in people as the main solution to reducing crime.
Breaking the window policy is also wrong because it fails to consider the main reason why people obey the law. The concept of deterrence means that people obey the law because they are afraid of being caught and punished. This indicates that when you create fear around committing an offense, more people are likely to obey the law. On the other, the breaking the window policy focuses on minor crimes committed as a means to prevent the occurrence of major crimes. According to Wilson and Kelling (2007), “But the police forces of America are losing, not gaining, members” (para 47). This means that arresting people with petty offenses is not going to make people obey the law. Therefore, the broken window argument is incorrect because the social disorders do not cause people to breach the law and commit more crimes.
Conclusion
The criminal justice system is supposed to keep everyone safe and make sure there is fair and equal justice. However, the current justice system is far from being fair and just because of introducing concepts such as the broken window policing. The current justice system is saddled with unfairness and ends up draining resources and disrupting communities. Broken window policing is a policing idea that suggests that apparent indicators of disorder and misbehavior in a community inspire further disorder and misbehavior, ultimately leading to violent crimes. This means that an unattended symptom of chaos in society has the potential to feed such acts. The broken window policy has been used to target minority-populated neighborhoods. People of color make up the majority of those detained and victimized as a result of this policing.
References
CBC. n.d. Above the Law. Web.
Wilson James, Q., and L. Kelling George. 2007 “Broken Windows: The police and neighborhood safety.” The Atlantic, retrieved (2007): 09-03.