# Any evidence "broken windows" policing is effective? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 21, 2014, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806 "2014-12-21T05:13:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/41 "2014-12-23T15:57:00Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > So using that logic then the solution becomes more obvious. Change the arresting procedure. > > In the case of Garner they had at least 3 officers there. New procedure, 2 officers handcuff themselves to the person resisting arrest to keep him from swinging on them or grab their guns. the 3rd officer duct tapes his feet together. He’s done. One officer reaches behind the guy’s knees with a nightstick while the other grabs it and they lift forward pulling him off stride into a sitting position. Call up a truck with a lift gate and haul him away with a bill for the extra the truck tacked on to the event as part of court costs. All this can be explained calmly to give the person resisting arrest an incentive to go peacefully. You’re suggesting that officers actually handcuff themselves to a person resisting arrest. That seems very tactically bad. At the heart of it, they are using brute strength to subdue a person. Why would police resort to that when there are much better tools available? Injuries to police and suspects go way down when officers don’t have to go hands on. I can’t tell if this is serious or I’m being wooshed. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/42 "2014-12-23T16:32:17Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > You’re suggesting that officers actually handcuff themselves to a person resisting arrest. That seems very tactically bad. It is also not much easier or more efficient than handcuffing the subject. The hard part (IME) is getting the first cuff on - after that you have a handle and some leverage on his arm. IANAPoliceOfficer, but I have trained with them. The guy who showed me cuffing and restraint techniques was the chief of police in a small town near me, and he was also very good at groundwork. He taught the principle of getting control of the guy’s centerline before trying to cuff him, which usually means getting head control. You then turn him face-down, pin him in place with a knee, and then worry about getting an arm and cuffing it, pin that arm in place, and go after the other. Three on one is not always automatically better, either, unless they are trained in cooperating with each other so they don’t get in each other’s way. It’s messy, like the real world usually is. It is _hard_ to subdue someone without hurting them too much. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![MikeF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@MikeF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MikeF)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/43 "2014-12-23T20:22:23Z")
There is a false premise often mentioned in the anti-cop posts. I’ll paraphrase it as “Cops are killing people for minor offenses” When you start your argument with such an inaccurate statement it hard to take the rest of what you say seriously. If the powers that be tell the cops on the street “Zero tolerance for (insert your favorite minor offense here)”, the cops are duty-bound to enforce it. I’m talking about lawful orders here so don’t throw Nazis in my face, please. If you or the person accused of committing the said offense doesn’t like it, you are not permitted to resist just because you feel you are being hassled. If you resist arrest that resistance will be met with some level of force. The cops are under no obligation to “baby” you into submission by handcuffing themselves to you (really?) or duct taping your feet. They are permitted to use reasonable force based on the circumstances as THEY reasonably believed them to be at the time. Not Al Sharpton or any other talking head with 20/20 goggles. It is impossible to overestimate the number of people who have absolutely no idea what the realities of these violent encounters are. “Shoot him in the leg!” “Taser the guy coming at you with a knife!” “Just let him go!” Its really quite simple. Don’t resist or fight with the cops and the chances of getting hurt become incredibly small. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/44 "2014-12-23T20:29:06Z")
Have to agree. And cops can’t go easy on someone just because they appear to be in poor health. If you are a dude who doesn’t exercise, smokes cigarettes and has eaten too many Twinkies in your life, you might want to consider cooperating even if you believe you are in the right. The way to fight police isn’t to actually fight police. The real issue is ordering cops to enforce stupid laws. Eric Garner was hurting absolutely no one. Rather, he was messing with the revenue department’s money. In a world of rogue government, it’s actually not surprising at all that the government would prioritize its own interests so high. What happened to Eric Garner wasn’t the actions of one police officer, it was the actions of a Mafia-like organization not wanting anyone cutting in on their revenue stream. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/45 "2014-12-23T20:33:33Z")
> [@MikeF](#): > > There is a false premise often mentioned in the anti-cop posts. I’ll paraphrase it as “Cops are killing people for minor offenses” When you start your argument with such an inaccurate statement it hard to take the rest of what you say seriously. How about the false premise that posts criticizing poor policing are “anti-cop?” ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/46 "2014-12-23T21:03:14Z")
> [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](#): > > The _problem is_, that the accelerated levels of cop violence, sometimes **deadly** violence, for utterly minor offenses, seems to be on a steep rise. > > The side effects, in deaths & rioting, seem to be unacceptable. Well, Ok, let us say you have a dude committing a minor crime. You tell him you’re going to give him a ticket. He tears the ticket up or refuses to sign. You then bring out the handcuffs. He refuses to be handcuffed and resists. And so forth. If you are going to have meaningful laws they have to be enforced. If the criminal resists the enforcement, violence will occur. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/47 "2014-12-23T21:06:27Z")
But that’s also an argument for not passing petty little laws. The existence of a black market in cigarettes is a side effect of high taxes, but the correct response to that isn’t to have the police arrest people selling loosies. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/48 "2014-12-23T21:07:26Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > False dichotomy. You can have laws and enforce them without arresting individuals. You can ticket them or give them summons. How do you “ticket them or give them summons” if they refuse to sign the citation or refuse to ID themselves? ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/49 "2014-12-23T21:29:56Z")
In “Freakonomics”, Levitt and Dubner argue that the main cause of the reduction in crime rate was due to Roe v. Wade. (Gee, imagine: unwanted children might be more likely to grow up to be criminals.) That doesn’t mean that “Broken Windows” policies don’t work, but it does mean that they might not be the primary factor in New York’s case. Any policy can be administered well or poorly. IMHO, treating minor crimes “harshly” rather than “appropriately” would indeed increase antipathy. Furthermore, taking minor crimes seriously is only one facet: you also have to FIX THE DAMN WINDOWS. It may be that the latter part is more significant than the former: if people live in a run-down, neglected world, I wouldn’t be surprised if they have less respect for the rules than if everything was nicely kept. ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/50 "2014-12-23T21:35:46Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yep. I submit for evidence New York City during the Dinkins misadministration and how much it changed for the better after Giulianni carried out the policy. Night and day. The city had turned into a shithole. Rudy improved it more than people imagined was even possible. Crime in NYC peaked 4 years before Giuliani was elected. It was already trending downwards when he got into office, just like every other major city in America at the time. So, no. You simply can’t point at any one factor, whether Broken Windows, liberalized abortion, midnight basketball, whatever, as _the_ significant factor in reducing crime (you might be able to point at lead pollution). While it certainly seems true that strictly enforcing laws against vandalism and other petty crime can reduce the incidence of such criminal acts, that’s generally true of any crime. If you’re more likely to get caught, you’re less likely to do it. And I’ve noticed that all kinds of enforcement gets included under the Broken Windows banner, like cracking down on the squeegee men and aggressive panhandlers in NYC. Those guys were committing borderline muggings, which I don’t consider a minor criminal act. So if the police never bothered those guys for years and let them get away with anything, then started cracking down on them, that’s not Broken Windows, that’s just plain law enforcement. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/51 "2014-12-23T21:46:55Z")
The other premise of the “broken windows” idea of policing is not merely that it reduced annoying crimes which signalled that there was a higher level of social control being exerted, but also that major criminals committed a lot of petty crimes in between major crimes. Thus a NY cop would stop someone for turnstile jumping, frisk him incident to his arrest, and find that he was a felon in possession of a firearm (or whatever). Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/52 "2014-12-23T21:54:54Z")
That can be a point in its favor, but only if there’s a backlog in the system and the city or county can devote criminal justice resources to prosecute the backlog. Otherwise, it’s just Stop and Frisk, where you’re harassing people to generate stats. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/53 "2014-12-23T22:10:14Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The other premise of the “broken windows” idea of policing is not merely that it reduced annoying crimes which signalled that there was a higher level of social control being exerted, but also that major criminals committed a lot of petty crimes in between major crimes. Thus a NY cop would stop someone for turnstile jumping, frisk him incident to his arrest, and find that he was a felon in possession of a firearm (or whatever). > > Regards, > Shodan Nice story. edited to add: Got any stats that show that this approach was successful in leading to an increase in serious arrests of that nature? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2014, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/54 "2014-12-23T22:25:42Z")
It is very hard to tell what are the causes of a crime decrease, but I can tell you, having directly seen it in action and read the reports- that cleaning up graffiti does reduce new graffiti placement. ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2014, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/55 "2014-12-24T03:51:06Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > In “Freakonomics”, Levitt and Dubner argue I would argue that Levitt and Dubner don’t “argue” anything in Freakonomics: they just recount a bunch of easy-to-quote anecdotes. But their anecdote about “broken windows” lost me completely. “Look” they said, “the reduction in crime in NYC was not actually caused by increased policing – it was actually caused by increased policing”. That is not an actual quotation. As alluded to above, they used the phrase “broken windows” as a proxy for something else, which concealed the paucity of their incite. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2014, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/56 "2014-12-28T05:57:44Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > somebody painted it. It’s hard to believe but criminals are capable of moving from place to place. The clear claim was > [@](#): > > Clean areas remained clean. So when a criminal moved to a new place that was clean, by this rule he’s magically prevented from graffiting. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/57 "2014-12-28T15:14:17Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > The clear claim was > > So when a criminal moved to a new place that was clean, by this rule he’s magically prevented from graffiting. yes Askance, that’s what happens. The more graffiti that occurs, the more likely it will spread. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2014, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/58 "2014-12-28T18:11:50Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Nice story. > edited to add: Got any stats that show that this approach was successful in leading to an increase in serious arrests of that nature? Well, we could look at the crime stats in New York before 1990 and after, and also look at the overall drop in crime across the country and do a comparison. I don’t have time for the second half, but [here](http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycrime.htm) are the raw stats and seems the drop in crime has been pretty dramatic. Of course, crime dropped not only in New York or even in the US during that period but from what I understand in nearly every western country as well, but you could work out what the average drop is in US big cities who didn’t do ‘broken window’ and do a comparison. > [@](#): > > Year Population Index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Theft > 1980 17,506,690 1,209,984 180,235 1,029,749 2,228 5,405 112,273 60,329 360,925 535,783 133,041 > 1981 17,594,000 1,214,935 188,178 1,026,757 2,166 5,479 120,344 60,189 350,422 539,486 136,849 > 1982 17,659,000 1,142,202 174,833 967,369 2,013 5,159 107,843 59,818 295,245 534,244 137,880 > 1983 17,667,000 1,042,811 161,489 881,322 1,958 5,296 94,783 59,452 249,115 504,346 127,861 > 1984 17,735,000 989,126 162,157 826,969 1,786 5,599 89,900 64,872 222,956 488,621 115,392 > 1985 17,783,000 993,811 165,365 828,446 1,683 5,706 89,706 68,270 219,633 502,276 106,537 > 1986 17,772,000 1,025,037 175,210 849,827 1,907 5,415 91,360 76,528 217,010 519,570 113,247 > 1987 17,825,000 1,061,021 179,691 881,330 2,016 5,537 89,721 82,417 216,826 539,175 125,329 > 1988 17,898,000 1,129,241 196,396 932,845 2,244 5,479 97,434 91,239 218,060 560,887 153,898 > 1989 17,950,000 1,129,638 203,042 926,596 2,246 5,242 103,983 91,571 211,130 544,459 171,007 > Forcible Aggravated Larceny- Vehicle > Year Population Index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Theft > 1990 17,990,455 1,144,874 212,458 932,416 2,605 5,368 112,380 92,105 208,813 536,012 187,591 > 1991 18,058,000 1,127,651 210,184 917,467 2,571 5,085 112,342 90,186 204,499 531,681 181,287 > 1992 18,119,000 1,061,489 203,311 858,178 2,397 5,152 108,154 87,608 193,548 495,708 168,922 > 1993 18,197,000 1,010,176 195,352 814,824 2,420 5,008 102,122 85,802 181,709 481,166 151,949 > 1994 18,169,000 921,278 175,433 745,845 2,016 4,700 86,617 82,100 164,650 452,322 128,873 > 1995 18,136,000 827,025 152,683 674,342 1,550 4,290 72,492 74,351 146,562 425,184 102,596 > 1996 18,185,000 751,456 132,206 619,250 1,353 4,174 61,822 64,857 129,828 399,522 89,900 > 1997 18,137,000 709,328 124,890 584,438 1,093 4,075 56,094 63,628 118,306 386,435 79,697 > 1998 18,175,000 652,202 115,915 536,287 924 3,843 49,125 62,023 104,821 363,295 68,171 > 1999 18,196,601 596,743 107,147 489,596 903 3,563 43,821 58,860 93,217 338,118 58,261 > Forcible Aggravated Larceny- Vehicle > Year Population Index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Theft > 2000 18,976,457 588,189 124,890 483,078 952 3,530 40,539 60,090 87,946 340,901 54,231 > 2001 19,084,350 556,025 98,022 458,003 960 3,546 36,555 56,961 80,400 329,316 48,287 > 2002 19,134,293 537,121 95,030 442,091 909 3,885 36,653 53,583 76,700 318,025 47,366 > 2003 19,212,425 521,565 89,486 432,079 934 3,775 35,790 48,987 75,453 311,422 45,204 > 2004 19,280,727 507,648 84,914 422,734 889 3,608 33,506 46,911 70,696 311,036 41,002 > 2005 19,315,721 491,829 85,839 405,990 874 3,636 35,179 46,150 68,034 302,220 35,736 > 2006 19,306,183 482,270 83,966 396,304 921 3,169 34,489 45,387 68,565 295,605 32,134 > 2007 19,297,729 461,731 79,915 381,816 801 2,926 31,094 45,094 64,857 288,929 28,030 > 2008 19,467,789 466,131 77,546 388,585 836 2,799 31,789 42,122 65,537 297,952 25,096 > 2009 19,541,453 452,647 75,110 377,537 781 2,582 28,141 43,606 62,769 292,897 21,871 > Forcible Aggravated Larceny- Vehicle > Year Population Index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Theft > 2010 19,395,206 456,202 76,492 379,710 868 2,797 28,630 44,197 65,839 293,232 20,639 > 2011 19,501,616 449,300 77,463 371,837 769 2,751 28,405 45,538 65,227 287,361 19,249 > 2012 19,576,125 454,803 79,535 375,268 683 2,837 28,633 47,382 64,389 293,562 17,317 > 2013 19,651,127 435,194 76,596 358,598 648 2,577 27,241 46,130 56,442 286,674 15,482 ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2014, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/59 "2014-12-28T22:17:44Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Well, we could look at the crime stats in New York before 1990 and after, and also look at the overall drop in crime across the country and do a comparison. I don’t have time for the second half, but [here](http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycrime.htm) are the raw stats and seems the drop in crime has been pretty dramatic. Of course, crime dropped not only in New York or even in the US during that period but from what I understand in nearly every western country as well, but you could work out what the average drop is in US big cities who didn’t do ‘broken window’ and do a comparison. Yet even with all of that number crunching you would have zero evidence that draconian police tactics were the causative effect. The hard handed tactics of “broken windows” policing against law abiding citizens tends to reduce the perception of police legitimacy. This is the critical difference between a draconian policy like “broken windows” compared to other options like community policing. And while there is little to no academic evidence that broken windows style policies are more effective in reducing crime than other increased policing policies there is a growing body of evidence that shows that programs which increase the publics perception of police legitimacy also increase compliance with both police and the law. To claim that “broken windows” policing is the reason for the drop has been refuted. Increased policing does work, forcing massive numbers of petty crime cases through the courts does not work better and reduces the publics perception of police legitimacy. Cite as to the lack of increase effectiveness of “broken windows” policing compared to other increased policing efforts: [http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2473&context=journal\_articles](http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2473&context=journal_articles) ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2014, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806/60 "2014-12-29T06:54:24Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > yes Askance, that’s what happens. The more graffiti that occurs, the more likely it will spread. Sigh. How, since no-one can ever create the first piece of graffiti in an area? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-evidence-broken-windows-policing-is-effective/707806.md?page=4)