Broken Windows Concept

The administrative and operational consideration of the Broken Windows Theory affects many aspects of the police department and the community. The social disorder of a run-down community can be looked at by a single broken window. The idea affects not only the community but the police force as well. Mayors, politicians, police chiefs, and other administrators want their city to look and feel safe. When small time crime invades the community, it can turn into a bigger crime and the fall of the city. The theory was experimented with in many cities with positive and negative results.Police patrol, emergency and critical incident response, police investigations, and future trends were affected in many communities. Implementations of new laws as well as enforcing existing small time crime laws have had big effects on many cities. The Broken Windows Theory George E. Keeling co-wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly in March, 1982 about the theory about social disorder, and the informal social controls can reduce rebellious behavior, such as vandalism (Keeling, 1982). Small crimes such as public drinking, littering, prostitution, pan-handling, and loitering are targeting in the article.The concept is mainly targeted at low-income cities that increased social disorder and low opinions about police presence and arrests. The concept is that disorder and crime are linked in a developmental sequence. The theory explains that one broken window left unimpaired will solicit other broken windows, and progressively lower the community standards. If that same window is repaired, such as in a beautification program, then crime will be reduced. Also, in an experiment in New Jersey, police began policing on foot instead of cars.The idea was a more personal presence in the city. If criminals saw more police presence they may go elsewhere to commit a crime, and the public would be more inclined to help police in criminal investigations. The testing of the theory involved the coope ration of police agencies, as well as case studies. The police agencies did not like the foot patrol idea because foot patrol was deemed a punishment for officers, and they could not respond to crime as fast as with a patrol car. After five years, the testing was analyzed, and it was discovered that crime was not reduced.After talking with the public, the public seemed to think that crime was reduced, and they felt more secure ND safe in the neighborhood. The theory proved ineffective on lowering crime, but the public praised the police for doing so anyways. The unwritten concept that smaller crimes will lead to bigger crimes could not be proven, but other theories conclude that the Broken Theory is not accurate. Functions of Patrol, Crime Investigation, Emergency and Critical Incident Response Place police officers on foot patrol used to be a punishment, but in the experiment it had an alternative motive.Administrative and operation considerations were evaluated after placing polic e on assassinated foot patrols. Patrol officers on foot had positive and bad negative. The positive outcomes were the intimate relations ship the police acquired with the public. The public got used to a police officer coming into the shops and greeted them informally, compared to Just driving by and only reporting after a crime was committed. The foot patrol officers made a pleasant presence I the community that made the public believe crime was reduced.The negative outcomes with foot patrols were the delayed response to calls and lack of contact with the department. The name was true with emergency and critical incident response (AN, 2012). Criminal investigations seemed to be easier with the public cooperation. Police conduction foot patrols would have an intimate relationship with the public that would aid in criminal investigations. Since crime was not reduced, it was concluded that criminals figured out where police would be and the delayed response time to crime.The connectio n between the criminal, the community, and the police have improved over the years. Future Trends Many cities have tried to explore the Broken Widows Theory into the community over he years. William Britton of New Work's Transit Police by having police enforces petty crime laws and arrest transients, vandals, panhandlers, and fair Jumpers. Rudy Giuliani worked with Britton years later and implemented the Broken Windows Theory and crime was reduced by 65 percent in the mid-ass (Sham, 2007).The theory has been modified for police and the administration with Stop and Frisk Laws and other privacy violation laws. This means that even though the theory was intended to beautify communities and become more community oriented in policing, it went in there directions. Words like community-policing and zero tolerance has the roots of the Broken Windows Theory, but the future may hold more serious punishment for smaller crimes and more police presence in low-income communities.The primary theor y was that if there is one broken window in building, youths, or vandals will break other windows, whereas a building with no broken windows would not receive the attention the latter would. Administrations and operational considerations have improved the idea, and in the future, reconstruct how crime is dealt with and how Alice can protect and serve the community better. Summary The Broken Windows Theory was presented by James Q. Wilson and George L. Keeling in an Atlantic Monthly article.The idea was that crime could be managed with beautification and community assistance. Many experiments proved that crime was not reduced, but the community believed it was because of the police presence. The community also helped the police more who were on foot patrol because of the intimate contact between police and the public. Many mayors and police administrations have tried to use this theory and have had success by not only arresting small time criminals, but finding that many of those cri minals had warrants for larger crimes.