Study Notes on Police Legitimacy and Disrupting Overt Drug Markets

Police Legitimacy and Disrupting Overt Drug Markets

Authors: Jessica Saunders, Allsion Ober, Dionne Barnes-Proby, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, USA; Rod K. Brunson, Rutgers School of Criminal Justice, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Abstract

  • Purpose:

    • Address challenges faced in disrupting overt drug markets through traditional law enforcement.

    • Emphasize the necessity of community cooperation in closing these markets.

    • Explore theoretical mechanisms that contribute to immediate and sustained disruption in these markets, focusing on police-community relations and police legitimacy.

  • Design/methodology/approach:

    • Analyze data from focus groups with community residents at three different sites following a drug market intervention over 15 months.

    • Utilize a repeated cross-sectional design for in-depth participant views on change mechanisms over time.

  • Findings:

    • Participants expressed ambivalence towards police legitimacy.

    • Appreciation for local police efforts contrasted with negative feelings about the broader profession.

    • Concerns about increased police presence potentially leading to harassment.

    • Despite concerns, findings indicated increased police cooperation and some improvements in police legitimacy components.

  • Practical implications:

    • Mixed support for mechanisms indicating changes over time.

    • Participants noted focused police responses led to market disruption and neighborhood condition improvements.

  • Originality/value:

    • This study contributes to literature on police legitimacy in problem-solving interventions.

Keywords

  • Legitimacy

  • Problem-oriented policing

  • Evaluations

  • Community relations

  • Deterrence

  • Drug markets

Introduction

  • Overt drug markets:

    • Defined as areas where drug buyers and sellers congregate outdoors.

    • Challenging to eliminate via traditional law enforcement tactics alone.

  • Need for Community Cooperation:

    • Effective control often requires community partnership (Mazerolle et al., 2006; Kennedy, 2009).

  • Problem-oriented strategies:

    • Support community engagement as a way to achieve long-term change (Weisburd et al., 2010; Greene, 2000).

    • The drug market intervention (DMI) includes community participation as a potential disruptor.

  • Literature on DMI efficacy:

    • Supported through research in High Point, NC, showing reduced crime and disorder (Corsaro et al., 2012; Saunders et al., 2015).

Mechanisms Supporting Market Disruption

  • Immediate disruption:

    • Resulting from the removal or incapacitation of active dealers or credible threats of punishment.

  • Intermediate phase:

    • Enhanced police presence and improved relationships with communities encourage residents to report drug activity, aiding in market suppression.

  • Long-term mechanisms:

    • Sustained change relies on enhanced police legitimacy, cooperation, and informal social control exercised by the community (collective efficacy).

    • Police legitimacy crucial in areas marked by racial minorities and structural disadvantage (Tyler and Wakslak, 2004; Meares, 2008).

Current Study

  • Focus:

    • Investigate mechanisms supporting the closure of overt drug markets and community perceptions over time concerning these mechanisms.

  • Methodology:

    • Conduct focus groups at three communities at three, six, and 15 months following the DMI call-in.

  • Sites:

    • Damascus Gardens:

    • Public housing complex in Montgomery County; residents on public assistance.

    • Hurt Park:

    • Historically African-American neighborhood with ongoing drug issues.

    • Lakeview:

    • Predominantly African-American area with problematic police relations due to racial bias and class action lawsuits.

  • Training and implementation:

    • Teams trained by Michigan State University with call-ins occurring in December 2011.

    • Reported 23% drop in overall crime in Hurt Park post-DMI.

Procedures and Protocols

  • Conducted 11 focus groups with recruitment through flyers and personal outreach.

  • Utilized a semi-structured guide based on the study's mechanisms for change.

  • Used the “bounded recall” method to minimize bias in participant responses regarding time perceptions before and after intervention.

Results

Baseline Measures Pre-DMI and Immediate Period (3 months post-call-in)

  • Community Characterization:

    • Active drug markets led to crime and disorder (loitering, harassment).

    • Residents exhibited low confidence in police response times, experiencing discrimination and disrespect.

  • Immediate changes:

    • Notable reductions in loitering and visible drugs/dealers.

    • Enhanced police presence led to perceived safety; skepticism remained regarding sustainability of improvements.

Intermediate Period (6 months post-call-in)

  • Sustained Changes:

    • Continued reductions in visible drug activity; concerns about remnants of drug presence persisted.

    • Mixed views on police harassment; some perceived improvements, while others did not perceive change.

Long-Term Period (15 months post-call-in)

  • Perceptions:

    • General agreement that drug market closure was maintained; improvements in safety noted.

    • Evidence of enhanced police effectiveness and minor improvements in community cooperation.

Discussion

  • DMI Effectiveness:

    • Generally perceived as successful in suppressing drug market activity.

    • Police presence resulted in positive changes in community dynamics.

  • Community Sentiment:

    • Residents can recognize police effectiveness while maintaining mistrust.

    • Indicates complexity of police-community relationships and challenges in fully repairing these dynamics.

Conclusions

  • Key Findings:

    • Sustained disruption of the overt drug market occurred despite ongoing tensions in police-community relations.

    • Future research should include quantitative methods combined with qualitative insights to hone in on community perceptions of police legitimacy and efficacy.

References

  • Comprehensive list of references covering key studies, theories, and contexts relevant to the study, including works by Mazerolle, Tyler, Kennedy, and others as cited throughout the study.

About the Authors

  • Jessica Saunders, PhD, Senior Criminologist at RAND Corporation.

  • Allsion Ober, PhD, Policy Researcher at RAND Corporation.

  • Dionne Barnes-Proby, MA, Senior Project Associate at RAND Corporation.

  • Rod K. Brunson, PhD, Professor at the Rutgers School of Criminal Justice.