Kansas City Preventive Patrol

I believe if the Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment was conducted today different results would be revealed due to the fact that police strategies and tactics have changed over the years in response to changes in society, public pressures, aren research. Police executives must continually reassess their organizational technology and make adjustments to improve the attainment of the goals of protecting life and property and maintaining order. Today, the knowledge base related to what works in policing is much farther along in it development than even a decade ago, making it possible for police executives to strive toward the objective of evidence-based policing (Cordner, 2016). Moreover, evidence-based policing does not replace

The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment was a landmark experiment carried out between 1972 and 1973 by the Kansas City Police Department of Kansas City, Missouri. It was designed to test the assumption that the presence (or potential presence) of police officers in marked cars reduced the likelihood of a crime being committed. It was the first study to demonstrate that research into the effectiveness of different policing styles could be carried out responsibly and safely. The Kansas City Police Department drew the conclusion that routine preventive patrol in marked police cars has little value in preventing crime or making citizens feel safe and that resources normally allocated to these activities could safely be allocated elsewhere. A significant factor realized was that crime prevention was more highly dependent on the willingness of citizens to report suspicious and/or criminal behavior to Police than the levels or types of patrol.

I feel as if the reason that the different levels of motorized patrol failed to have an impact on crime or public perception because when the police are in large areas patrolling, they may not be able to cover as much area as they think and adding more officers or cars may remove an officer or car from an rea that it is actually needed in which may move crime into another area.

Community Policing took a different perspective on crime than August Vollmer. It shows that even though police officers are trained and respond to crimes on time, it doesn’t effect the crime rates. In the past foot-patrol was in place but it quickly failed due to poor management and not enough funds for the program (Bohm & Haley, 2014, Pg. 147). Community Policing was an idea to form a bond between the police and the citizens. If the police paid more attention to the minor problems in

Since the 70’s police departments like Spokane Washington, I believe have proved that police visibility or presence in the community along with transparency working hand in hand with the community, have had a positive effect on preventing crime and providing communities with a sense of security (The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment. (n.d.).

I believe preventive patrol is effective because of the deterrence theory. People who plan to commit a crime do not want to get caught. I also think that some people will probably get nervous if a police officer keeps passing by when they plan to commit a crime and might wonder if the police noticed them. However, cop cars pass by in seconds, so I am glad other methods of patrol are being used like foot patrol, bicycle patrol, and mounted patrol. Even if preventive patrols weren’t effective, they still make a presence in the community, which is important. Making a presence could familiarize a neighborhood with a police officer. For example, the first day my son learned how to unlock the front door, he did so when i was showering. He went outside

The design of the Kanas City Preventative Patrol Experiment was to test the assumption that marked police units patrolling the streets can prevent individuals from committing crimes. Areas of the city were assigned either- no routine patrols the proper level of patrols and substantially increased patrols. “The concept of preventive patrol postulated the "self-evident truth" that the mere presence of the police or reasonable potential for their presence would deter criminals from committing offenses in the immediate geographic area of the patrol” (Deployment by analysis, 2000).

The city council of Smithville believes that increasing the visibility of its police force will reduce crime and increase the safety of its citizens. However, the memo provides no evidence to support this argument, and the city council may not be taking other variables, alternative solutions, or the citizens’ desires into consideration.

The sample of patrol officers will then be assigned subgroups on the amount of time they have worked in patrol. This research will be comparing the secondary data for the two years prior to body-worn cameras and the two years after body-worn cameras. Because of the time frame being studied, officers with less than four years of patrol experience will not be examined. This allows officers to be assigned to subgroups of years in patrol by four year groupings. For example, 4-8 years, 9-13 years, 14-17 years. These groups will continue to the 30 year retirement standard in North Carolina law enforcement. The officers in the patrol division will be placed in a subgroup. The random sampling drawn from the patrol division will be proportionate to the makeup of the subgroups. This proportional stratified sampling will provide the most accurate depiction of proactive policing of patrol officers equipped with body-worn

Having officers foot patrolling make residents feel safer and it improves the attitudes they have towards police officers. Bicycle patrolling also make police officers more accessible to the public. This allows police officers to interact more with the public rather than being inside the car and only getting out when they must stop someone or when they are being called to a certain location. This increases trust in the police. When people trust in the police they open up, this will solve more cases and people won’t be afraid to speak out on something that happened in their neighborhood. Body worn cameras will also build community trust and relationships among police officers. Police officers duties is to protect the citizens and it is not to make citizens scared of

How did the Kansas City Patrol Study affect routine patrol all across the nation? It affected routine patrol in the fact that It made officers realize that traditional routine patrol in marked police cars did not appear to affect the level of crime. Nor did it affect the public’s feeling of security. The experiment demonstrated that urban police departments can successfully test patrol deployment strategies, and that they can manipulate patrol resources without jeopardizing public safety.

The Philadelphia foot patrol experiment: a randomized controlled trial of police patrol effectiveness in violent crime hotspots is an experiment that had over 200 foot patrol officers during the summer of 2009, in the Philadelphia area (Ratcliffe, 2011). This research covered 60 violent crime hotspots in twelve weeks (Ratcliffe, 2001). There was a noticeable reduction in the violent crimes within those area hotspots. Furthermore, 53% of violent crimes were prevented during the twelve weeks of the experiment (Ratcliffe, 2011). In conjunction the type of patrol that was utilized, was foot patrol in the hotspot areas, which was the independent variable. The dependent variable was the reduction

This program received much ridicule from law enforcement professionals as it decreased, in their eyes, the versatility of their service to the community. It seemed as that in removing officers from their patrol vehicles, it would not allow them to respond quickly to other calls and better protect their patrolled communities. As they came to find, it actually gave the people in those communities a greater sense of security and pride in their home turf.

The disadvantage of this particular program is that it rated and put calls in a category based off of severity so some people requesting service would have addition time for their calls to be answered, some were not even given priority (Fritsch et al., 2009, p 35). Patrolling areas with high crime also limited police interaction with citizens living in low crime areas. This can also lead to animosity and complaints from other citizens. Crime happens hour by hour day by day there is no real way of predicting crime and that is what was realized in Larson’s model. Fear from crimes can make any community feel unstable and produces anger and distrust for the police (Vigoa, 2010, p 18). As criminal activity initiated and reports are made then

This method of crime prevention gave way to the idea that it was better to be proactive than wait until after a crime has been committed. The strategy of using preventative patrol was how law enforcement eventually achieved deterrence.