Chapter 6: The Practice of Policing Notes

Learning Objectives

Summarize styles of policing: Reactive, preventive, and proactive styles of policing.
Identify problems with reactive style: Evaluate the effectiveness of reactive policing.
Describe three-R's strategy: Components and effectiveness of the three-R strategy in policing.
Differentiate policing types: Understand differences between problem-oriented policing and community policing.
Explain broken windows model: Popularity and implications for policing strategies.
Differentiate intelligence-led vs predictive policing: Understand their distinctions and applications.
Explain focused deterrence: Structure and differences from traditional deterrence approaches.

Historical Context: Examines practices used by police to control crime since the 1970s.
Integration of Technology: Continues to use technology like forensics in conjunction with traditional methods.
Dominance of Patrols: Police patrols, both preventive and reactive, are central to policing.

Preventive Patrols: Uniformed officers patrol by foot or in vehicles to deter criminal activity.
Reactive Patrols (1920s): Responding to crimes after they occur. Evaluated based on rapid response times.
- Historically effective but faced criticisms in late 20th century.

Middle vs. Lower-Class Concerns: Middle-class areas typically had fewer issues with police responsiveness, contrasting with working-class or marginalized communities.
Community Trust Issues: Perceived unresponsiveness led to decreased crime reporting and increased feelings of alienation.

Public Demand: Growing issues with the reactive model led to calls for improved crime control strategies.
Proactive Practices Introduced: Collection and analysis of information, partnerships with community and justice agencies.
Targeting Specific Criminals: Focused strategies addressing particular criminals in specific locations.

Reactive Approach: Known as incident-based policing focusing on rapid response.
- Assumptions: Speed and mobility enhance public safety and efficacy of patrols.
- However, diminished proactivity and community interaction.
- Emphasizes evaluation through response times and arrest rates.

Common Activities: Visible crime deterrence, maintaining public order, responding to emergencies, community assistance, and investigations.
Policing Styles Identified:
- Social Agent: Problem-solving with community focus.
- Watchman: Emphasis on public order and minimal law enforcement.
- Law Enforcer: Strict adherence to law enforcement with minimal discretion.
- Crime Fighter: Strong focus on serious crime, rejecting social service roles.

Local Knowledge Deficit: Vehicle patrols inhibit relationships with local communities.
Fear of Crime: Increase in visible police presence not translating to feelings of safety.
Stereotyping Problems: Decreased personal contact led to broad assumptions about neighborhoods.

Questioning Effectiveness: Critiques emerged due to limited crime reporting and rising crime rates despite increasing police budgets.
Management of Demand: Concepts of differentiating response for emergency versus non-emergency calls.

Foot Patrol Resurgence: Quick response and community relations restoration in pedestrian form.
- Flint, Michigan revealed mixed effectiveness in reducing crime but improved community relations.
Directed Patrols: Officers given specific orders based on analytical data to target crime hotspots.
Technological Advancements: Use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for crime pattern analysis.

Definition: Informed by crime patterns to engage in preventive practices.
Community Impact: Building relationships to establish public trust and reduce crime perceptions.

Understanding Legitimacy: Based on fairness perceived in police actions by citizens.
Four Elements of Procedural Justice: Participation, neutrality, trustworthiness, and respectful treatment crucial for maintaining legitimacy.

Goldstein (1979) Proposal: Directed toward the long-term modification of crime causes, emphasizing community engagement.
SARA Model: Scanning, analysis, response, and assessment focused on community-centered policing.

Community Partnership Focus: Build trust and reduce fear through active engagement.
Organizational Change Necessary: Shift from centralized decision-making to collaborative community partnerships.

Cultural Resistance: Police organizational culture emphasizes conventional coercive methods over innovative practices.
Struggle for Effective Implementation: Many initiatives do not shift resources adequately from traditional crime control to broader community health and safety measures.

Concept Origin: Early detection of neighborhood decline can prevent serious crime.
Operationalization: Tackle minor offenses to deter greater criminal activity through community engagement.

Defined: Aggressive approach to minor violations, rooted in the broken windows strategy.
Operational Example: NYPD's strategies in the 1990s under Giuliani's leadership, using CompStat for accountability and crime management.

Hot Spots Conceptualization: Crime clustering in particular areas warranting focused action can reduce overall crime.
Intelligence Sharing: Key to effectively utilizing crime data for proactive measures and inter-agency cooperation.
Predictive Policing: Use of technology to analyze crime patterns for preemptive law enforcement.

Definition: Select high-risk offenders for concentrated intervention, coupled with social support services.
Operational Example: Boston's Operation Ceasefire targeting gang violence, emphasizing multi-agency commitment.

Overall shift from traditional reactive policing towards proactive, community-focused policing strategies.
Emphasis on restoring public trust through improved engagement and crime management strategies.

Use of Predictive Technologies: Algorithmic data analysis poses ethical dilemmas regarding surveillance, privacy, and operational transparency.
Evaluation of Technologies: Continual assessment essential to ensure compliance with legal and ethical considerations in policing.