A recent slowdown by New York Police Department officers has ignited a debate over what the role of police officers should be and to what extent policing should focus on minor crimes.

According to the New York Post,

There were just 1,191 parking summonses handed out between Dec. 29 and Jan. 4 — down nearly 93 percent from the same period last year, when 16,008 of the dreaded orange envelopes were slapped on windshields

The NYPD slowdown involved a nearly complete abandonment of enforcement for low-level crimes like parking tickets and public order offenses. While slowdowns can have many different causes, it appears that the recent one in New York is a result of the rising tension between police officers and Mayor Bill de Blasio.

The New York Post also reported that the slowdown will cost the city roughly $10 million per week in lost ticket revenue. Doug Turetsky, of New York’s Independent Budget Office, put that number in context by comparing it to the city’s $77 billion annual budget; however, if losses continued over a long period of time the effects would be notable.

The Associated Press further noted that only one arrest was made and zero tickets were issued for low-level offenses on New Years Eve, a day when roughly one million people flock to the city. Despite this dramatic decrease in enforcement, there was actually a modest decrease in the number of reported serious crimes over a two-week period when compared to the same time span one year earlier.

Recent activity suggests that the NYPD slowdown is coming to an end and may have even stopped completely. Commissioner Bratton threatened to take away sick days and vacation time until ticket and arrest numbers returned to normal levels. While the slowdown may be over, it renewed the debate over the underlying policing theory present in many American cities.

Broken Windows Policing

Although the NYPD slowdown can have important implications for the NYPD and New York City, it has also called the Broken Windows style of policing into question. Behind the Broken Windows theory is the idea that disorder leads to both fear and more crime. The theory was first established by professors George L. Kelling and George Q. Wilson in an article they wrote back in 1982. They argued that the proactive enforcement of laws pertaining to lower level and often very visible crimes, like breaking windows, will restore order to public places and prevent additional crimes.

Put in their words:

The unchecked panhandler is, in effect, the first broken window. Muggers and robbers, whether opportunistic or professional, believe they reduce their chances of being caught or even identified if they operate on streets where potential victims are already intimidated by prevailing conditions. If the neighborhood cannot keep a bothersome panhandler from annoying passersby, the thief may reason, it is even less likely to call the police to identify a potential mugger or to interfere if the mugging actually takes place.

New York City was actually a primary testing ground for the Broken Windows style of policing. The strategy came to New York in 1993 under the tenure of Commissioner Bill Bratton, first  appointed by Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Bratton later returned to New York to once again act as Commissioner under de Blasio in 2014. Broken Windows is frequently attributed to the city’s dramatic decline in crime during the 1990s.

Kelling stands with his theory in light of the recent debate. In an interview with the New York Daily News he argued that while it is unlikely that one week-long slowdown will have a meaningful impact on crime numbers, he did caution about long-term effects. Kelling continued to argue that maintaining order will meaningfully constrain the crime levels in the city, but also acknowledged that the maintenance of order is not intended to punish people. Kelling argued that the underlying principle of Broken Windows remains strong, but policing methods may still be updated to fit the present circumstances.

New York’s Crime Decline

Between 1990 and 2012 New York City’s violent crime rate per 100,000 people has decreased by nearly 75 percent and the total number of murders went from 2,245 in 1990 to 335 in 2013. While most cities in the United States experienced significant decreases in their violent crime rates since the 1990s as well, New York has far outpaced the national average and has continued that downward trend in recent years.

Before you ask, there was also a decrease in the actual number of broken windows over the past several years (and yes, there is data on that).

Although it is impossible to determine whether or not Broken Windows policing caused this decrease–many factors typically impact a city’s crime level–it is likely that policing played a role. Despite this correlation, many are calling for the end to Broken Windows as a modern policing philosophy. It has long been criticized for its effects on minorities, which tend to be the target of many ‘order-related’ arrests, but the recent death of the unarmed Eric Gardner at the hands of the NYPD has sparked further protest.

The Policing Debate

While it is unfair to claim that Broken Windows policing caused the death of Eric Gardner, such a policing strategy will increase the number of times minorities are stopped by the police. Arresting people for committing crimes like selling loose cigarettes, the act which precipitated Gardner’s encounter with police officers, will simply increase the likelihood that altercations occur in the future.

Supporters of Broken Windows argue that it is not the underlying theory that causes tragedies like Gardner’s death, but rather it is the training and tactics that officers employ that lead to abuse. As a result, people call for police reforms that would improve tactics and training; however, evidence may also suggest that police reform may not adequately address problem. Last summer the NYPD ended its controversial stop-and-frisk policy due to complaints that it disproportionately violated the rights of the poor and minority populations, yet problems persist.

Despite the removal of stop-and-frisk as an important policing tactic, situations Gardner’s encounter with the police still occur and continue to disproportionately affect minorities. The Broken Windows theory sought to reduce public fear by bringing order to public places; however, it has also helped create a different kind of fear among minority populations, which is developing into increasingly more hostile attitudes toward the police. In a series of polls asking people whether or not they believe the police treat blacks and whites equally, a significant gap between white and black perception emerges. The most recent poll suggests that a majority (52 percent) of white respondents have a “great deal of confidence” that both races are treated equally; among black respondents that number dipped to just 12 percent.

Distrust and fear toward the police has led to hostile interactions between minority populations and law enforcement officers. Supporters of the Broken Windows theory of policing may be right when they argue that enforcing order can reduce crime rates and fear among the general public; however, attention must also be paid to the additional implications that aggressive policing of low-level crimes may have.

What is the role of Broken Windows policing when many of the broken windows have been fixed? Crime in New York City has experienced massive declines over the last two-and-a-half decades, and according to its crime statistics is now a pretty safe city relative to its population size. Creating order may serve an important role in reducing crime, but when crime has already decreased by such an extent should it be enforced as aggressively as it was in the 1990s?

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NYPD Slowdown Ignites Debate Over Broken Windows Policing appeared first on Law Street.

Before this week, I had never heard of Ferguson, Missouri. It’s a relatively small city–it has a population of about 21,000. But after the events of the last few nights, it’s pretty much the only thing anyone can talk about. It all started when a young black man named Michael Brown was shot and killed by a police officer. Apparently the officer had started shooting at them for some unknown reason, the two young men had run in panic, and then while trying to explain their status to the cop, Brown was shot. According to Dorian Johnson, a friend of Brown who was with him during the shooting, Brown tried to notify the officer that he was unarmed just before he was shot. Johnson claims he never once heard the officer tell them to stop, freeze, or anything of the sort. Bystanders corroborated Johnson’s claims, saying that Brown had his hands up, in a form of surrender, when he was shot.

The people of Ferguson are fed up, and they want answers. There’s a lot going on, but here are the top three things you need to know about what’s happening in Ferguson, and why they should be upsetting all of us.

Police Militarization 

The issue of police militarization is one that’s kind of flown under the radar, but it’s time we start talking about it. If you’re interested in the topic, we did an in-depth look in two parts: here and here. Here are the spark notes though–the 1997 National Defense Authorization Act included a program called “1033” which authorized the donation of extra military equipment to local police departments. The argument is that the police need these weapons because the citizens that they are supposed to deal with have access to increasingly more dangerous arms. Police are being trained and armed like soldiers to deal with their own citizens. Among the police departments enrolled in this program is the Ferguson Police Department. There’s a line between providing better technology to our officers, and creating military culture within our local police forces. The Ferguson police just showed us how shaky that line is.

Race Relations in Ferguson

Michael Brown was a young black man. At the risk of oversimplifying a very, very complicated issue, there is a storied history of race relations in Ferguson. Ferguson is 65 percent African-American, but the police force of 53 contains only three black officers. Elijah Anderson of the Washington Post points out that this phenomenon is by no means uncommon:

Ferguson’s story isn’t uncommon in the United States. Authorities often see fit to heavily police towns with growing black and poor populations, to surveil them, and occasionally to harass them in the name of a “broken windows theory” of policing, banking on such methods to control crime. 

Anderson explains how this theory goes on to breed resentment, and mistrust between communities and the police officers that are supposed to protect them. He cites a report from the Center for Constitutional Rights that found that,

Blacks and Latinos are treated more harshly than whites, being more likely to be arrested instead of given a summons when compared to white people accused of the same crimes, and are also more likely to have force used against them by police.

The issue of race and policing deserves a lot more than the sparse few hundred words I’m able to write in this article. My point though is this: this isn’t just a problem in one small town in Missouri–this is a systemic issue that can be seen all around the country. Ferguson may be the tip of the iceberg, but it’s a huge iceberg that we need to start thawing. Giving the police stronger firepower, using broken windows policing, and shooting young unarmed men cannot be the answer anymore, and Ferguson is proving that.

First Amendment Rights

There have been multiple incredibly concerning First Amendment rights issues happening in Ferguson since the protests began. At one point the airspace above Ferguson was restricted–while authorities claimed that it was to protect the protesters and police; journalists wondered if it was to prevent aerial shots of the protests. At one point yesterday, an Al-Jazeera America team was tear-gassed, and a St. Louis Alderman was arrested.

Things really came to a head last night though–two rather prominent journalists were arrested for being in a McDonalds. Wesley Lowery of the Washington Post, and Ryan Reilly of the Huffington Post were in a McDonalds charging their phones, when they were approached and told to move along. They had been taking pictures of the cops who had walked into the McDonalds, a pretty normal journalistic move. They were packing up their belongings, but apparently not quickly enough, because they were arrested, and assaulted. The police refused to tell them why they were arrested, or give them any other information.

Here’s a disturbing video of Lowery’s arrest:

Video of my arrest: http://t.co/baiYPQGfc7/s/ZHkX

— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) August 14, 2014

Reilly after the fact pointed out:

I’m fine. But if this is the way these officers treat a white reporter working on a laptop who moved a little too slowly for their liking, I can’t imagine how horribly they treat others. And if anyone thinks that the militarization of our police force isn’t a huge issue in this country, I’ve got a story to tell you.

In some ways, the most horrifying part of the story wasn’t that Reilly and Lowery were arrested, it was the way that the police responded to the news that they had just arrested two reporters. Matt Pierce, an LA Times Reporter tweeted:

I just called Ferguson police chief to ask about @WesleyLowery and @ryanjreilly, told him what I knew. His response: "Oh, God."

— Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) August 14, 2014

To clarify: The "oh, God" was delivered in a tone of shock.

— Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) August 14, 2014

Ferguson chief tells me @WesleyLowery and @ryanjreilly's arresters were "probably somebody who didn't know better."

— Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) August 14, 2014

That’s pretty disturbing. The police chief didn’t care that he arrested two innocent men. He cared that arrested two journalists. His statements indicate that had they just been two men sitting there charging their phones and working on their laptops, it would have been ok that they were detained and assaulted for no good reason. The police chief isn’t sorry that he arrested those men, he’s sorry that he got caught.

I believe strongly in freedom of the press–so what happens in Ferguson worries me deeply. Because here’s the thing, the other two topics I wrote about above–police militarization and race relations–are so much more important than the fact that reporters got arrested. The national discussion should focus on those topics until we’re blue and the face and we hopefully have some sort of solution. But when journalists aren’t allowed to cover what’s happening, and we have to have side discussions about the freedoms that so many of us take for granted, we get derailed. And that’s a big problem.

This is a perfect storm of police militarization, race relations coming to a head, and freedoms being revoked willy-nilly. I’m not going to pretend that I’m on the ground there, or that I have the full story, or even any of the answers, but as an observer I’m outraged. And readers, I hope you are too. Because unless we all stand together to say what is happening in Ferguson is plain wrong, we’re headed down a dangerous path.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post We Should All be Upset About What’s Going on in Ferguson: Here’s Why appeared first on Law Street.