P3 - C.P. - Crime Prevention (SOC) Flashcards
how the features of neighbourhoods and the zero tolerance policy impact crime, Wilson & Kelling is KR
Examples of Council Houses and how they link to Debates
- IND vs SIT
- Socially Sensitive
Features of Council Hosung like Aylesbury estate London & Red Road Glasgow
- Densly Populated
- Little Green space
- Lack of Percieved ownership in surrounding area
Impact of Features of Council House Features
- Anonymous - lots of ppl who won’t know you in densly populated areas
- Easier to get away with crime
*
- Easier to get away with crime
- Lots of outdoor space, Security Measures (e.g. cameras)
- Green Space
- Big Windows (potential criminals can be seen easily)
- Path shows clear ownership
Broken Windows Theory
In Lower Class areas:
* Less likely to be fixed quickly
* People will think it’s a house nobody cares about
In Upper Class areas:
* Will be fixed quickly
* Shows people care
In both cases, ppl may care the same, but diff. impressions
Soc. Sens.
ZIMBARDO (Car Study)
- Wanted to see what would happen to a car left in The Bronx (NYC) and Palo Alto (California)
- In The Bronx, it was smashed up; people are deviating towards crime
- In Palo Alto, nobody vandalised it.
- 1 week later, Zimbardo vandalised the car and it was then vandalised by others
- Suggests Crime should be dealt with to prevent more crime (a domino effect)
NEWMAN -
Less likely to have High Crime Rate
* Territorality and Subdivision - visible territory
* Natural Survaillance - e.g. big windows
* Nice Image; avoid stigma of social housing - e.g. colour, Green Space)
* Placement - nice view, e.g. beach or field etc., not a dark alley etc.
Zero Tolerance Policy; ‘nipping things in the butt’
William Bratton
* Police Commissioner of NYC
* Brought about Zero Tolerance Policy
* Crime decreased in NYC
* Groups felt like they were being marginalised
* ethnic and religeous minorities
*
WILSON & KELLING - Aim
To test the impact of New Jersey’s “Safe & Clean Neighbourhoods Program”, designed to improve the quality of community life in 28 cities by increasing the number of foot patrols.
WILSON & KELLING - Method
This was an Article published in The Atlantic Online in March 1982, & is made up of 3 Main Sections: safe neighbourhoods, the changing role of the police &maintaining order.
WILSON & KELLING - Part 1: Safe Neighbourhoods
- Most ppl are primarily Frightened by Crime, especially a sudden, violent attack
by a stranger. - Also a fear of being bothered by ppl who are not violent/criminals, strangers who ask for money, drunks, addicts & even rowdy teenagers.
- The purpose of the foot-patrol officers in the Safe & Clean Neighbourhoods Program was to reduce this fear & increase the level of public order in these areas.
- Kelling walked the streets with the beat officers; they had ‘regulars’ that were known to them & that they knew. Their job was to ensure that these disreputable regulars observed some informal but widely understood rules, such as alcohol bottles having to be in paper bags and begging from people at the bus stop was forbidden.
- If they broke these informal rules they knew they’d be arrested for Vagrancy. Noisy teenagers were told to keep quiet; non-regulars and strangers were kept an eye on.
WILSON & KELLING - Part 2: Changing Role of the Police
Two decades prior to Wilson and Kelling’s research, the role of the police shifted from order-maintenance to law enforcement.
The role of the police as watchmen whose main objective was to maintain order had changed to one of detecting and apprehending criminals.
* This led to discussions about whether this was the true role of police, and how the police should deploy their limited forces.
* Wilson and Kelling suggest the following possibilities:
* Try further variations of the Safe and Clean Neighbourhood Programme
* Have minimal police involvement and use informal methods of social control such as community rules and agreements
* Employ citizen patrols, such as the Guardian Angels who patrol the NYC streets
WILSON & KELLING - Part 3: Maintaining Order
Wilson and Kelling also suggest some strategies that could help communities increase
security and maintain order, including employing private security guards and the hiring
of off-duty police officers for patrol work in residential buildings. Wilson and Kelling
suggest these arrangements are probably more successful than hiring private
watchmen, as patrol officers can go to and from stations on public transportation. They
can then enforce rules about smoking, drinking and disorderly conduct by ejecting the
offenders. They also believe that police should protect communities as well as
individuals - the police should recognise the importance of maintaining, intact,
communities without broken windows.
WILSON & KELLING - Conclusions
Features of neighbourhoods influence crime rates. The role of the police
has changed over recent years and policing strategies are constantly changing. Police
foot patrols do enhance the community’s feelings of safety.
ZIMBARDO & Broken Window Theory
The broken-window theory suggests that if a window in a building is broken and is left
unrepaired, all the rest of the windows will soon be broken. This is true in all areas and
is supported by research by Zimbardo (1969). Zimbardo arranged for a car without
license plates to be parked with its bonnet up on a street in the Bronx, New York (an area of high crime rates) and also in Palo Alto, California (a low crime area). In the Bronx
the car was vandalised quickly, followed by random destructive acts such as parts being
torn off and upholstery being ripped. In Palo Alto the car was untouched for more than
a week. Zimbardo then intervened by smashing it with a sledgehammer; within a few
hours the car was vandalized, He concluded that all areas are vulnerable to ‘criminal
invasion’ where there is a breakdown of community controls. Wilson and Kelling suggest
that the citizen who fears the drunk and the rowdy teenager is not just expressing their
distaste for this behaviour but is concerned that serious street crime flourishes in areas
in which disorderly behaviour goes unchecked. The drunks and the rowdy teenagers
being unchallenged are the first broken window. The foot patrol officer can prevent this
from happening.
APPLICATIONS - Fix broken property as soon as possible
- Using broken windows metaphor, fix things if they’re broken
- ZIMBARDO - found this would make crime less likely to happen
APPLICATIONS - Alley-Gating in Liverpool
- Hotspot for Crime; an evnironmental feature conductive of crime: poor lighting, limited survailance opportunities, lack of percieved ownership
- “Alley-Gates are durable(shows care), lockable gates that restrict non-resident and unauthorised access to the alleyway
- Installation problematic; required resident permission
- 3K Alley-Gates installed, protecting thousands of houses
-
Bower found in Gated areas, burglary rates were reduced by 37% compared to control area w/out
- however, resulted in slightly increased rates in surrounding neighbourhoods (ethical issues?)
APPLICATIONS - Target Hardening
- Altering the cost benifit of comitting a crime
- Harder and Less Attractive to potential offeders
- Removing cash targets by paying wages digitally
- Although criminals change targets to Identity Fraud; ‘displacement’ of crime, a key critisism of situational crime development
- Dye Tagging, Car-Immobilisation Systems, Bike Locks
