Benchmark: Broken Windows Essay

Since its emergence in the early 1980s, broken windows policing has been met with
much acclaim and uproar and has been applied extensively and enthusiastically throughout
the United States and abroad in such places as the Netherlands. However, broken windows
policing has also been the target of criticism, mainly because of its adverse effects on the
poor and racial minorities. This essay starts with a discussion of these negative effects and
how proactive policing might be achieved without negative impacts on some population
groups. It also explores alternatives to broken windows policing, including problem-based
policing and targeted deterrence, and appropriateness of quality-of-life policing, another
alternative to broken windows policing. Finally, the main points of the essay are recapped.
The Negative Impacts of the Broken Windows Style of Policing
I agree with the arguments that have been made that, in places where it is
implemented, the broken windows style of policing results in negative outcomes for the poor
and racial minorities. This is so because this style of policing degenerates into racial and class
bias and morphs into stop-and-frisk (Ruhl, 2021). A major criticism of the broken windows
theory to policing is that it often leads to racial and class discrimination. By affording the
police too much discretion to determine what amounts to disorder and who is involved in
disorderly acts, this approach to policing enables them to wilfully criminalize the groups of
people they perceive to be more likely than others to engage in crime without any
consequences for their actions. Usually, these groups include the socio-economically
disadvantaged and people of color. In one experiment involving two neighborhoods with the
same amounts of litter and graffiti, people ‘saw’ more disorder in the neighborhood dominated
by African Americans. The implication is that people, including the police, associate Black
Americans and other racial minorities with more crime and disorder than Whites.

3
Closely related to the issue of police bias against racial minorities and the poor is the
police practice of stop-and-frisk. Under this already controversial practice (even without
applying the broken windows theory), a police officer can stop any suspect for a brief, non-
intrusive check. However, critics of the broken windows theory argue that the theory has long
found its way into the stop-and-frisk practice. The police will often abuse the too much
discretion accorded them by the broken windows theory to stop and search people, especially
African Americans, for weapons and drugs, even without probable cause, even though
statistics have shown that this practice is highly ineffective in detecting and preventing crime.
For example, in 2008, the police in New York City stopped and frisked close to 250,000
people, but only 0.2% of the searches resulted in a gun being found (Ruhl, 2021). Three years
later, in 2011, the number of police stops in the city almost tripled to 685,000. Of those, 90%
the people were completely innocent.

A Proactive Police Effort without Negative Outcomes

Despite these criticisms of the broken windows theory and the broken windows
approach to policing, I believe it is still possible to have an assertive and proactive police
effort that would not generate these negative outcomes. For that to happen, police
departments will need to do at least two things. First, the police will need to shift their focus
from misdemeanor arrests instead of building stable, trusting relationships with their
communities, to become more aware of and responsive to community concerns (Rand
Corporation, n.d.). Such an approach would be especially suited to poor urban communities
of color where mutual distrust between citizens and the police is highest and the need for
cooperation greatest. The approach is also likely to yield significant reductions in incivility
and crime. Secondly, police departments should revisit the origins of broken windows
policing and focus on improving the environment by actually fixing broken windows. The
original article on broken windows policing, published by George Kelling and James Wilson

4
in 1982, advised police departments to crack down on indicators that crime may be welcome
in an area. Such signs include graffiti, damaged or abandoned cars, and broken windows.

Alternatives to a Broken Windows Style of Policing

I envision three alternatives to broken windows policing: dealing with fear-generating
behavior, addressing violence-enabling behavior, and imposing sanctions on those who
engage in violence (focused deterrence). The first two alternatives may be described as
problem-oriented policing. The original article on broken windows policing is often
misinterpreted as requiring sweeping crackdowns on anything that could be interpreted as
disorder (Rand Corporation, n.d.). However, a keener review of the article reveals that it
recommends crackdowns on specified fear-inducing behaviors, including intimidation
(including juveniles who accost pedestrians), panhandling, and intoxication. Also included on
the list, though not in the original article, would be subway turnstile jumpers and squeegee
artists. The fact that enforcement against these types of behavior would be highly targeted
would result in a problem-oriented style of policing.
Closely related to enforcement against fear-inducing behaviors are crackdowns on
forms of disorder that could directly lead to lethal violence. A notable example is the Kansas
City Gun Experiment, a crackdown on people possessing and carrying around unlicensed
guns (Rand Corporation, n.d.). The Kansas City police department had a unit dedicated to
searching guns. The unit’s officers were stationed in targeted areas of the city. The officers
would contact pedestrians and drivers and search for guns where probable cause existed,
using a combination of methods, including safety frisks and plain-view identification of guns.
Following this intervention, there was a 49% drop in gun crimes in parts of the city subjected
to the experiment compared to those not. Finally, under the focused deterrence approach to
policing, the police would carry out disorder crackdowns alongside traditional suppression
specifically targeted at known gang members.

5
The Appropriateness of the Quality of Life (QOL) Approach to Policing
While the QOL approach to policing could be one of the alternatives to broken
windows policing, its appropriateness, especially in urban areas, is questionable because of
its implementation so far. First used in New York City in the early 1990s, QOL policing
refers to the act of heavily policing a few, usually non-criminal activities like people
congregating in public spaces (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine,
2018). In addition, minor offenses like unlicensed street vending, littering, panhandling,
public urination, and graffiti are likely to be subjected to greater police scrutiny through
“order maintenance policing.” The argument is that, if unchecked, these activities could lead
to serious crime.
Unfortunately, just like broken windows policing, this style of policing has
degenerated into something else. When combined with the zero-tolerance style of policing,
this approach to policing prioritizes arrests over service and other less drastic police actions
like conflict resolution and the issuance of citations or warnings (Incite, n.d.) . The result is
rising numbers of arrests, mostly of people of color, and rising incidences of police brutality.
More importantly, QOL policing disproportionately impacts some of the most vulnerable
populations, including street-based sex workers, people with drug addiction, people with
mental illnesses, the homeless, and those who provide essential outreach services to these
populations. Because QOL and “order maintenance policing” increase police presence on the
streets, these types of policing increase the likelihood and frequency of members of these
populations running into and engaging with the police. Increased police encounters increase
the possibility of being subjected to police violence.
Conclusion

The negative effects of broken windows policing – including racial and class bias and
the police practice of stop-and-frisk – can be overcome using a proactive policing effort that

6
privileges the building of long-term, trusting relationships over arrests while repairing broken
windows, that is, things that might invite crime into an area. Meanwhile, alternatives to
broken windows policing exist, including problem-based and targeted deterrence policing.
Finally, the appropriateness of QOL policing is questionable because it suffers the same
weaknesses as broken windows policing.

7

References

Incite. (n.d.). Quality of life policing. Incite: https://incite-national.org/quality-of-life-
policing/
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). Proactive policing:
Effects on crime and communities. Washington, D. C.: The National Academies Press.
Rand Corporation. (n.d.). Zero tolerance and aggressive policing (and why to avoid it) in
depth. RAND Corporation: https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TL261/better-policing-
toolkit/all-strategies/zero-tolerance/in-depth.html
Ruhl, C. (2021, July 26). The broken windows theory. Simply Psychology:
https://www.simplypsychology.org/broken-windows-theory.html