Pros And Cons Of Zero Offlerance For Criminal Activity

In the last three decades, several concepts have been advanced to organize efforts to improve policing. Among them have been team policing, neighborhood policing, community policing, zero-tolerance policing and problem-oriented policing. Herman Goldstein was the first to propose problem-oriented policing in 1979. Problem-oriented policing is a policing strategy that involves the identification and analysis of specific crime and disorder problems, in order to develop effective response strategies in conjunction with ongoing assessment. The emphasis in problem-oriented policing is on directing attention to the broad range of problems the community expects the police to handle–the problems that constitute the business of the police and on

Wilson and Kelling’s key idea is that disorder and the absence of controls leads to crime. Their solution is to crack down on any disorder using a twofold strategy. First an environmental improvement strategy that any broken window must be repaired immediately, otherwise more will follow and the neighbourhood will be on the slide. Secondly the police must adopt a zero tolerance policing strategy. Instead of merely reacting to crime, the must proactively tackle even the slightest sign of disorder, even if it is not criminal. This

A science teacher in Mississippi asked her students to take a picture with their completed DNA Lego model. John Doe took his picture with a smile and a hand gesture in which his thumb, index, and middle finger was raised. This was enough to earn him an indefinite suspension with a recommendation for expulsion because his school administrators believed he flashed a gang sign although he was simply putting up three fingers to represent his football jersey number. (NPR Isensee, 2014). This kind of criminalization of young people contributes to suspension, dropout, and incarceration, and too often pushes students into what is referred to by many education scholars and activists as the “school-to-prison pipeline,” a term that refers to “the

The Broken Windows theory predicts that police can most effectively fight crime by focusing their efforts on targeting disorder, minor crimes and nuisance behaviors. The theory has had a positive impact, but has also raised some challenges. The police can play a key role in disrupting this process. If they focus in on disorder and less serious crime in neighborhoods that have not yet been overtaken by serious crime, they can help reduce fear and resident withdrawal.

​Crime is a very serious issue all over the world, and the United States is among the highest-ranked countries with elevated crime levels. One of the most crime-stricken cities in the United States is New Orleans. Crime affects both the physical and mental aspects of the lives of New Orleanians. Many are afraid to travel to certain parts of the city during the day and night, and those who travel feel the need to do so in groups in order to make criminals think twice before attacking. The NOPD is attempting to increase the number of police officers in the city, but the campaign for more law enforcement is not working as quickly and as effectively as chief law officials had previously hoped.

The same could be said here. Neighborhood canvassing is a long, drawn-out, boring process that everyone would rather avoid. Going from house to house, business to business, talking to people who saw nothing, would rather not be involved, or just don’t want to talk to the police can be a thankless job. However, it is the basic skills that solve crimes. Therefore, I feel an intervention that would help clearance rates would be organized and accountable programs for canvassing. Included in this program would be an educational portion showing how to effectively interview those who are reluctant or those who feel they saw nothing but may know more than they think. Also included in this program would be the reasons why this method is effective and, because who doesn’t like stories, examples where canvassing solved the crime and caught the criminal, as well as examples where canvassing would have solved the crime if only a department would have dedicated the personnel. Once departmental training had occurred, I would ensure that a system of checks and balances is in place. Every contact, or lack thereof, would need a report. These reports would be filed in a central location where everyone involved in the case would have access. This way an officer can see if an area was canvassed or if someone wasn’t home at a location then they could attempt another contact. Additionally, officers would need to continue attempting contact until contact with someone at the location was made. There would be a ranking officer ultimately responsible for the canvassing section, both ensuring that reports were correctly filled out and filed and that any incomplete reports were followed up on.

Submitted to the Coordinating Group of: _X Crime and Justice __ Education __ Social Welfare __ Other Plans to co-register: _X No __ Yes __ Cochrane __ Other __ Maybe TITLE OF THE REVIEW Broken Windows Policing to Reduce Crime in Neighborhoods BACKGROUND Briefly describe and define the problem Crime policy scholars, primarily James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, and practitioners, such as Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton, have argued for years that when police pay attention to minor offenses—such as aggressive panhandling, prostitution, and graffiti—they can reduce fear, strengthen communities, and prevent serious crime (Bratton

What is Zero Tolerance law? In all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, it is illegal for people under the age of 21 years old to purchase or have possession of alcohol. It is illegal for anybody who is under the influence of alcohol (normally 0.08 percent or higher blood – alcohol concentration) to operate any motor vehicles especially a car, that’s why all the 50 states have adopted a law that can punish those individuals who decide to drive under the influence of alcohol or DUI (driving under the influence) offenses to justice and that law is Zero Tolerance Law. However, the Zero Tolerance Law fuses more on individuals who are under the age of 21 who might operate motor vehicles under the influence of alcohol with even a small amount

Gun violence is a problem that has been growing in many cities across the United States. It is important for Federal and local Law Enforcement agencies to work together to enforce the Project Safe Neighborhoods and other projects similar in cities and communities where the homicide and gun violence rates are crucially high. It is each officer’s duty to make sure we do our duty as Law Enforcement to provide safe neighborhoods and save lives every day. By placing Project Safe Neighborhoods in high crime areas, the project will put in place and enforce new programs and policies for those who have committed gun crimes and are reoccurring felons. Through the use

This study is aimed to investigate zero tolerance policing and the implementation of its policies into society. By focusing on the pros and cons of this type of policing it will answer the overall question on whether or not zero tolerance policing is efficient and effective within society. The theories behind zero tolerance policing can provide specific reasons for why or why not policing needs more or less discretion when performing certain functions. There are certain legal aspects that back up decisions made by officers and targeting the statistical data provides the rates of effectiveness with zero tolerance policing. Zero tolerance policing is data based upon implementation, the needs of the people backed with the results of implementation decide which statistical method of policing is best for society. Based on the finding from the data of societal measurement and effectiveness the decision on whether or not to continue pursuing zero tolerance policing or revert to other methods can be completely valid to specific fact based results.

Oppression and discrimination has plagued our society since early times. As a collective society one would think that over time oppression and discrimination would turn into acceptance and equality. Conversely, our society has taken sluggish steps towards diversity, acceptance and equality. Our society is focused on labeling people and putting them into limiting boxes. Oppression occurs across various groups of people based on gender, sex, race, religion, and disability. Members of these diverse groups are discriminated among work places, schools, and other places. Work places and schools promote diversity and non-discrimination, however little seems to be practiced. Oppression across generation leaves damaging consequences hindering society in the growth towards a more accepting environment.

Discrimination, while highly troubling and disruptive to social progress, has been in practice for centuries. From biblical eras, when at one point Jews were held as prisoners under the law of the Pharaoh, to more modern times concerning issues with race and other differences such as today’s fight for same-sex marriage approval, there have always been issues presented in society resulting from the many dissimilarities found amongst the appearances, behavior, beliefs, et cetera of the public. As history has shown time and time again, it is simply not acceptable for discrimination to have a role in the happenings of current times. Gone now are the days where minorities would sit back and accept the unfair treatment that society would press their way. The public is much more aware of the rights that are afforded to them from birth by the terms of the Declaration and Constitution. Rather than accept any injustices thrown its way, society has grown to rely on the government as a figurehead to step in and prevent any unfair treatment geared towards the People. It has become an expected happening that concerning any major issues on the grounds of discrimination, whether on a local, state, or federal level, the government is responsible for creating and enforcing policies that protect those affected from unfair treatment. Before implementing or changing a policy onto the public, officials are expected to weigh each idea thoroughly as to identify the consequences of its placement,

In 1982, James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling presented an article that called for a change in police tactics to enhance neighborhood safety entitled simply “Broken Windows”. This article was hailed as the godsend that everyone was waiting for because at the time crime rates were extremely high and murder had peaked just two years prior to the release of this article. Wilson and Kelling declare that a return to “order-maintenance” police function is the key to providing safe neighborhoods (Kelling and Wilson 104). This is achieved through foot patrol officers that enact regulations for their patrol areas which keep individuals in their place and “strengthen the informal social control mechanisms of natural communities” (Kelling and Wilson

“Zero-Tolerance Policy” is the leading cause of most disobedient students, the reason why most students drop out of school and the cause of insubordination among students. The Zero-Tolerance Policy is a policy that, like the name states, has zero-tolerance for anything. Anything seen as a threat or anything that sends an inappropriate message towards the community is considered bad and the student could get arrested, suspended and/or expelled. The Zero-Tolerance policy applies to any student, regardless if a student has any health problems and falls to any student between the ages of 4-18. It could also apply to a student who could have the lowest amount of infractions possible. They say that removing students is necessary for learning, but, in doing that, they hurt the student as well. Some places don’t provide alternative places for students to learn at, really taking away their education. If it really ensures a safe and orderly environment for children, then there should be proof. There is no actual proof that it makes students feel safer (Wahl, "School Zero Tolerance Policies Do Harm" par. 1). It alienates the student and makes the student feel as if they are the “odd-one out”. Due to the injustices that this creates, the Zero-Tolerance Policy is ineffective, because it teaches students injustice, lowers students academic rates and minor offences are punished.

The Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) is an excellent course structured on reducing crime by adding light to dark areas where foot traffic frequents, reducing blind spots within parking structures to assist with avoiding ambushes, as well as encouraging communities to place a special focus on dilapidated structures with their communities. This course was hosted at University of Tennessee a few years ago, I was blessed to have the opportunity to attend. There are is a real connection between dilapidated structures to crime rates, the broken window theory is something we have all learned about throughout of careers in law enforcement. The role of law enforcement is key in these areas, they assist with identifying structures creating a hazard, lowing the safety of the residents, as well as locations where criminals tend to gather (George Mason University, n.d.). The disorder of a neighborhood can cause residents to be fearful forcing them to retreat from their home conversely lock themselves in not watching the areas around them creating an environment for more serious crime to move in. A community-based approach would need to be taken by law enforcement in conjunction with other city officials to remedy these situation. Speaking from personal knowledge, this approach is assisting with crime rates within