Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
What explains the disorder that has plagued New York and other American cities? Science Correspondent Ronald Bailey reports on a new study that may vindicate the broken windows theory, which holds that if people look around and see other people violating social or legal norms, they will tend to violate them as well.
New at Reason: Ron Bailey on the Broken Windows Theory of Crime and Disorder
Comments to "New at Reason: Ron Bailey on the Broken Windows Theory of Crime and Disorder":
Episiarch | November 25, 2008, 3:04pm | #
Ron with The Warriors reference. Nice.Token Anarchist | November 25, 2008, 3:07pm | #
These police statists are crushing my liberties, AARRGHH! *sniffs spray paint from bag*No Name Guy | November 25, 2008, 3:10pm | #
This further confirms my sense that we as a society need to stop over-criminalizing petty actions.When everything is against the law, no one respects the law, since there's so much BS contained therein. Too bad the nanny staters on the left and the fundies on the right don't get this.
Neu Mejican | November 25, 2008, 3:14pm | #
No name guy's hypothesis is not directly related, but should be examined to flesh out the contours of this effect.Clearly we learn our behavioral boundaries from our experiences in the world. And clearly those boundaries are context dependent and fleeting.
This seems directly related to mob violence, riots, looting, etc.
Lord Jubjub | November 25, 2008, 3:16pm | #
My sense is that there are diminishing returns the more rigorous the enforcement of petty crimes and misdemeanors. It also depends on the value society places on uniformity and group loyalty.I think that value reached a peak in the United States in the 1940s and 50s. While crime has gone down in the U.S. over the last 30 years, I don't think it signals a return to the uniformity that existed in the 50s.
Episiarch | November 25, 2008, 3:18pm | #
All of the tests--except the stealing--dealt with the tragedy of the commons. Littering and walking through a public fence are both signs of people seeing others not respect the commons and therefore don't respect it themselves.This is very different from crime. While I can certainly see where a mugger might feel more confident in a graffiti-covered alley because it seems like no one cares what goes on in it, that is very different from people dropping flyers that they didn't ask be put on their property in the first place.
joe | November 25, 2008, 3:18pm | #
Fortunately, my apartment building was on the marijuana blockBraggart.
fyodor | November 25, 2008, 3:19pm | #
"violating social or legal norms"Makes one wonder how activities that are legal but socially taboo fit in.
Seems the studies focused on situations where either laws or clearly stated rules were being broken.
I would think this might suggest a transitional stage for currently illegal drugs were they to be legalized. At first their presence might create the feeling that rules were, and therefore could be, broken, but eventually their use and presence would likely be considered more normal and more no big deal and thus no problemo. I would think...
Miggs | November 25, 2008, 3:26pm | #
The final episode of The Shield tonight. Anyone else watching?fyodor | November 25, 2008, 3:28pm | #
Good points, Episiarch.The experiments also don't measure the costs of the actual enforcement measures that are advocated to keep the "windows" from getting "broken" in the real world. In the experiments, they just aren't.
* | November 25, 2008, 3:28pm | #
I think that value reached a peak in the United States in the 1940s and 50s. While crime has gone down in the U.S. over the last 30 years, I don't think it signals a return to the uniformity that existed in the 50s.It doesn't. Why do you think Reason always uses the 1970's as the baseline when quantifying social ills, instead of a date that precedes the hedonist's Great Leap Forward, the 1960's? Because they know damn well that if you were to compare the present to any time before the 1960's, we'd still look bloody awful, regardless of how much we've improved since the 1970's.
Shit, dbcooper! The chicks are packed! The chicks are packed!
Hit-and-Run Arriviste | November 25, 2008, 3:38pm | #
if people look around and see other people violating social or legal norms, they will tend to violate them as wellFuckity-fuckity fuck fuck! Poo-poo! CA-CA!
Mister DNA | November 25, 2008, 3:39pm | #
They need a new name for their theory... I'm getting it confused with The Broken Window Fallacy.How about Dogshit on the Sidewalk Theory?
Guy Montag | November 25, 2008, 3:44pm | #
[elitist Leftist voice]But should we really blame individuals for the failures of society?
[/elitist Leftist voice]
egosumabbas | November 25, 2008, 3:45pm | #
"Do only visual cues trigger disorder? In the Netherlands, very strict laws forbid setting off fireworks in the weeks before New Year's Eve. So the researchers lit fire crackers out of view of people picking up their bikes from a busy parking shed near a train station. Once again, the bikes had those flyers attached to them. When no fire crackers were set off, 52 percent littered, but 80 percent did when they heard the bangs."Wohoo!!! Let's ban everything fun and we'll live in a perfect, sanitized world lined with coffee shops and upscale boutiques!
Jennifer | November 25, 2008, 3:49pm | #
Because they know damn well that if you were to compare the present to any time before the 1960's, we'd still look bloody awful, regardless of how much we've improved since the 1970's.True, but the 1950s crime rates were kept artificially low via statistical dodges like "lynching is legal" and "rape victims know better than to complain about it" and "if a man wants to beat his wife and kids that's his business."
Guy Montag | November 25, 2008, 3:51pm | #
My memory is failing me, or maybe not.Isn't the Netherlands where they sell fireworks at the post office and any-old-day is cause for a celebration and weed?
Perhaps it was another old europe country Emmanuel Goldstein was talkign about on Off the Hook a few years ago, or it changed since then.
My Name Is Blue | November 25, 2008, 3:51pm | #
Well, isn't Ronnie so effing smart, with his "scientific method," and "testable hypotheses." I refuse to allow this to impact my consciousness in any way. Thought Shield on!egosumabbas | November 25, 2008, 3:53pm | #
Here's another idea: how about letting property owners maintain their own property as they please, prosecute property violators when you can, and stop socializing the perfect Mr. Clean nanny state.All this utilitarian methodology does is encourage dipshit regulations like the banning of fireworks and requiring people mow their lawns or face property confiscation. Sooner or later you'll wind up with a totalitarian nanny state where freedom has suffered the death of a thousand cuts.
"Oh! Since this study shows 15% increase in reduction in crime if we ban X and enforce Y behavior, let's do it!"
squarooticus | November 25, 2008, 3:55pm | #
I don't think this has to vindicate thuggish over-policing: I think the main value of the broken windows theory (of crime and disorder) is (IMO, the obvious conclusion) that people who live in a community must care for that community like they own it. They may not have title to the park down the street, but they have to somehow keep it looking nice; they may not have badges, but they must keep vagrants from sleeping in gutters; etc.kinnath | November 25, 2008, 3:56pm | #
Wohoo!!! Let's ban everything fun and we'll live in a perfect, sanitized world lined with coffee shops and upscale boutiques!Amsterdam, within easy walking distance of the central train station: Coffee houses where you can buy weed as well as sex shops and hookers in windows.
Also very clean and very safe. You could do a lot worse.
Guy Montag | November 25, 2008, 3:57pm | #
"if a man wants to beat his wife and kids that's his business."Spoil sport!
rana | November 25, 2008, 3:58pm | #
Close to where I live, people feel free to piss by the side of the street in full view of passing cars-- at least they have the decency to turn their backs.Its a pretty normal occurence- in fact, I just saw someone doing it this morning.
This has escalated to the point where I have seen a guy just pull down his pants (right next to a highway road in the middle of the afternoon) and take a diahrrea dump.
I will never forget the unpleasant image.
I'd so prefer to "live in a perfect, sanitized world lined with coffee shops and upscale boutiques!"
I need to move soon. (*sigh)
Shannon Love | November 25, 2008, 4:03pm | #
Jennifer,True, but the 1950s crime rates were kept artificially low via statistical dodges like "lynching is legal" and "rape victims know better than to complain about it" and "if a man wants to beat his wife and kids that's his business."
Such vagaries disappear in the case of murder. It's hard to ignore a body. Murder is therefor the best historical indicator of crime rates.
Murder rates where lower in the 50's than after the "reforms" of the 60's. Clearly, bad policy based on academic theories instead of real world experience led to an explosion of crime that ended only when we returned to more time tested models f crime fighting.
Mick | November 25, 2008, 4:06pm | #
All this chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter boutShmatta, shmatta, shmatta -- I can't give it away on 7th Avenue
This town's wearing tatters
Uh huh
egosumabbas | November 25, 2008, 4:07pm | #
"I'd so prefer to "live in a perfect, sanitized world lined with coffee shops and upscale boutiques!"I need to move soon."
Every upscale neighborhood has its price (in terms of cost and loss of freedom): typically outrageously high rents, onerous taxes, and parking regulations that make you wish you'd never bought a car. It gets old real fast, particularly when you realize that the cute little boutiques never sell anything that you want to buy anyway (unless you make 300 grand a year maybe).
Terry | November 25, 2008, 4:10pm | #
The "Warriors" has to be seen again.It is hysterical. I first saw it when it came out, I was like 12, and it really scared me.
I saw it again on DVD in July.(I got the DVD free).
It was a laugh riot. And the gay influence, wow. I mean the "gang" customs look like they were created by the village people with the help of broadway.
I highly, highly recommand it for the laughs and the bad acting.
Hard to believe that this film was pulled from theaters because it started fights.
David Ross | November 25, 2008, 4:11pm | #
Looks like my last attempt didn't go through -But thank you, Ron Bailey. Now, someone please contact NORML, and tell them to stop sneering at the broken-windows theory. (They can continue to sneer at people who think that pot smoking count as a "broken window".)
kinnath | November 25, 2008, 4:11pm | #
Every upscale neighborhood has its price (in terms of cost and loss of freedom): typically outrageously high rents, onerous taxes, and parking regulations that make you wish you'd never bought a car.Or you could leave the cesspools that people call cities and go live in the semi-rural midwest.
rana | November 25, 2008, 4:17pm | #
"rana, I thought you lived in Venezuela, not L.A."LOL Epi.
Actually, my sister lives in L.A. so she knows things can get pretty bad but while she was visiting me last December the "pissing on the street" escalated to a point that not even I could believe:
We were driving through a barrio on a Thursday around 4pm. We were stuck in heavy traffic. There was a "camionetica" (shoddy, makeshift, public transportation bus) ahead of us. Beer bottles were thrown out the windows constantly. Then when traffic came to a standstill, about 6 passengers came out of the bus and started pissing in the brush next to the road, right in front of us! Traffic started to move and the bus almost left behind one guy who took an unusually long time to drain his pipe.
My sister said that she would not have believed this story had she not seen it herself.
But my personal fave "pissing on the street story" was the time I saw a guy pissing FROM the "camionetica" while it was moving! That was quite a sight!
are you saying there's something inherently funny in the idea of a gang that wears top hats called the high hats?
SIV | November 25, 2008, 4:21pm | #
True, but the 1950s crime rates were kept artificially low via statistical dodges like "lynching is legal" and "rape victims know better than to complain about it" and "if a man wants to beat his wife and kids that's his business."Lynching was neither "legal" or common in the 1950s.
Lynching statistics by year in the 1950s:
1st # whites
2nd# Blacks
3rd# Total
1950
1
1
2
1951
0
1
1
1952
0
0
0
1953
0
0
0
1954
0
0
0
1955
0
3
3
1956
0
0
0
1957
1
0
1
1958
0
0
0
1959
0
1
1
If anything crime was exaggerated in the 1950s with the hysteria over juvenile delinquents, hot rodders and switchblades.
SIV | November 25, 2008, 4:22pm | #
That table didn't C&P very well.My apologies.egosumabbas | November 25, 2008, 4:24pm | #
"Or you could leave the cesspools that people call cities and go live in the semi-rural midwest."Funny that you mention that, because it's precisely what I did. Only, I live within biking distance of a downtown that is just as charming as the North Side of Chicago.
Boston | November 25, 2008, 4:30pm | #
Or you could leave the cesspools that people call cities and go live in the semi-rural midwest.pass
joe | November 25, 2008, 4:36pm | #
Guy Montag | November 25, 2008, 3:44pm | #[elitist Leftist voice]
But should we really blame individuals for the failures of society?
[/elitist Leftist voice]
Shannon Love | November 25, 2008, 4:03pm | #
Murder rates where lower in the 50's than after the "reforms" of the 60's. Clearly, bad policy based on academic theories instead of real world experience led to an explosion of crime...
All right, you two. No biting, no gouging, no hits below the belt, best two-of-three falls.
swillfredo pareto | November 25, 2008, 4:38pm | #
Clearly, bad policy based on academic theories instead of real world experience led to an explosion of crime that ended only when we returned to more time tested models f crime fighting.That was the era of large-scale de-institutionalization of the mentally ill.
madmikefisk | November 25, 2008, 4:40pm | #
Look at it from the economist's perspective... if people see that individuals are disobeying the law without any noticeable repercussions, then it sends a signal to the populace that the risks and costs associated with committing a crime are relatively low. By that logic, it follows that if one were of need to seek retribution or send notice to someone or some organization, they would have noticeably less disincentive against going outside of the law to do so.joe | November 25, 2008, 4:42pm | #
swillfredo,The crime rate began tacking up well before the big deinstitutionalization craze of the late 70s and early 80s. I suppose you could attribute the late-80s/early-90s spike to that, but you'd have to ignore crack to do so.
Personally, I think the rise and fall tracks pretty well with with rise an fall of big slum clearance/urban renewal projects. Read some Jane Jacobs - the disruption and anti-human urban design made an increase in crime inevitable.
I, Kahn O'Clast | November 25, 2008, 4:43pm | #
My own experience is that the theory is valid. When I was in college I moved into a "border" neighborhood. A block or so west was "gentrified" and a block to the east was a shithole. My block was mixed: my building had been a burned out shell for many years and I was the first new tenant in my unit and fifth new tenant in all (the rent was amazingly cheap for the quality of the place because of the neighborhoood).I lived there for 8 years and over that time I saw incidents of drug dealing, fights, car burglaries, etc slowly decline as the block improved. In time most of the bars were off the windows and the place was nice and tidy. yet you could walk 2 blocks and step back the 8 year interval. Amazing.
To me it was the theory in reverse: the nicer the area became the less comfortable people were in behaving badly.
Mister DNA | November 25, 2008, 4:43pm | #
Courtesy of the IMDB, a list of all the gangs featured in The Warriors' script, including gangs that didn't make it into the final cut.The Alleycats
The Amsterdam All-Stars
The Baseball Furies
The Black Hands
The Blackjacks
The Big Trains
The Boppers
The Boyle Avenue Runners
The Charlemagnes
The Colt 45's
The Dealers
The Delaney Rovers
The Dingos
The E Street Shufflers
The Easy Aces
The Electric Eliminators
The Eighth Avenue Apaches
The Fastballs
The Fifth Street Bombers
The Filmores
The Firetasters
The Five Points
The Gerrards
The Gladiators
The Go Hards
The Gun Hill Dancers
The Gramercy Riffs
The High Hats
The High Rollers
The Homeboys
The Hoplites
The Howitzers
The Huks
The Hurricanes
The Imps
The Jesters
The Jones Street Boys
The Judas Bunch
The Jupiters
The Knockdowns
The Knuckles
The Lizzies
The Locos
The Magicians
The Meatpackers
The Mongols
The Moonrunners
The Napoleons
The Nickel Steaks
The Nightriders
The Ninth Avenue Razors
The Orphans
The Panzers
The Phillies
The Plainsmen
The Punks
The Queen's Bridge Mutilators
The Real Boys
The Red Hook Shooters
The Roadmasters
The Rogues
The Romans
The Runaways
The Saracens
The Saratogas
The Savage Huns
The Shanghai Sultans
The Southern Cross
The Speedwagons
The Sports
The Stevedores
The Stilletos
The Stonebreakers
The Terriers
The Turks
The Turnbull AC's
The Van Cortlandt Rangers
The Warriors
The Whispers
The Xenophones
The Xylophones
The Yo-Yo's
The Youngbloods
The Zodiacs
The Zulus.
Mike M. | November 25, 2008, 4:43pm | #
Everyone's grandmother knows that courtesy is contagious. It stands to reason that discourtesy is as well. Simple old folk wisdom.I believe that most people have an inherent appreciation and respect for things and places that are aesthetically pleasing. There's no question that a place can easily deteriorate and snowball out of control if it's allowed to, as chaos is more natural than order.
San Francisco is a place that could really stand to learn some of the New York City lessons these days.
swillfredo pareto | November 25, 2008, 4:53pm | #
The crime rate began tacking up well before the big deinstitutionalization craze of the late 70s and early 80s. I suppose you could attribute the late-80s/early-90s spike to that, but you'd have to ignore crack to do so.The first push for deinstitutionalization was in the 1950s. And I am not saying that there is cause and effect, but it is definitely part of the big picture. Crime is far too complex to point at any one indicator. That is what is nice about the theory. It doesn't go after the latest trendy belief about the cause of crime, just creates a modest deterrence/disincentive.
Hogan | November 25, 2008, 4:54pm | #
Agree with squarooticus and joe, the point of broken windows (like jane jacobs' "eyes on the street") is to emphasize the importance of socially enforced standards of public behavior. I think it's pretty common sense. It doesn't have to be associated with Giuliani Time stuff, though when something gets to Death Wish NYC level, maybe stuff that drastic is more justified.My Name is Red | November 25, 2008, 6:47pm | #
Wow. I apologize for my earlier snark. Most of the comments have been supportive, and the criticisms of Ron Bailey have been reasoned and measured in tone.I'm so used to internet forums being a place for people to scream past each other and refuse to engage in intelligent, reasoned debate ... I'm just ... it's so ... I love you guys.
During WW2 tanks were driven from point A to point B on a major street near my house. As a 7-8 year old I threw a snowball at a tank. The tank slammed on the brakes, the hatch opened and a head popped out, the driver, a civilian or PFC , ate my ass unmercifully, told me if the war effort was lost I'd be held personally responsible. I never threw another snowball at a military vehicle again. No way, man that's a helluva burden for a 2nd grader to have to bear. I was happy the day the war was over, I'd been exonerated. Whew !!
Mad Max | November 25, 2008, 7:00pm | #
"Everyone's grandmother knows that courtesy is contagious. It stands to reason that discourtesy is as well. Simple old folk wisdom."Grandma was a sap. She gave away her insights for free, instead of holding out for a federal grant.
Neu Mejican | November 25, 2008, 7:24pm | #
Clearly, bad policy based on academic theories instead of real world experience led to an explosion of crime that ended only when we returned to more time tested models f crime fighting.That was the era of large-scale de-institutionalization of the mentally ill.
Wait, you mean it was Thomas Szasz's fault?
;^)
Dedicated to SIV
Neu Mejican | November 25, 2008, 7:31pm | #
Also for SIVhttp://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingyear.html
The source table on lynchings.
Seems that WWII put a big dent in the lynching problem...
I wonder why.
Could it have been federal action aimed at reducing the crime?
Would this be related to the theory under discussion...seems like lynching is the ultimate broken window-type crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States#World_War_II_to_present
Neu Mejican | November 25, 2008, 7:36pm | #
Re: drop in lynchings.Was it the result of "Strange Fruit,"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Fruit
Did the hit song serve the function of putting a spotlight on the bad behavior, making it stand out like if was happening on a clean street?
Mister DNA | November 25, 2008, 8:40pm | #
NM,In a broader sense, the advent of recorded music probably played a big role in improving race relations.
The fact that the Ink Spots could make the most trite melody seem sublime was probably just as effective as the lyrics to "Strange Fruit".
Brandon Bowers | November 25, 2008, 8:47pm | #
So does this mean that if we all see the government stealing massive amounts of money, we're more likely to steal massive amounts of money?Bailout = Broken Window
Westmiller | November 25, 2008, 9:00pm | #
The are two keys to the studies which seem to me to have been overlooked:1. The setting was apparently "unclaimed" property ... not even a "commons" ... so there was no perceived "infringement" of anyone's rights;
2. The "subjects" in several of the studies were actually "victims" of the study, since their property was violated by "ads" and they had no obligation to dispose of the litter.
Scientists tend to setup scenarios without the least consideration of the real "issues" they arbitrarily introduce ... making them invalid from square one.
anarch | November 25, 2008, 10:20pm | #
So does this mean that if we all see the government stealing massive amounts of money, we're more likely to steal massive amounts of money?Why, yes. Yes, it does.
stubby | November 25, 2008, 11:50pm | #
I remember wanting to see The Warriors and not being allowed to (I was fifteen. Parents were crazy strict about TV and movies, paid no attention to books. I read Go Ask Alice at like, nine, The Last Picture Show at eleven and then discovered bad 60s/70s porn at twelve. No one ever suspected a thing. Anyhoo). Remember Hill Street Blues, which came out a few years later? Didn't they have weird, colorful gangs in big hats? I remember one gang who talked with Irish accents. I thought New York had real gangs like that.My favorite gang ever is the Woola Woola Boys, who jump up and down shouting "woola woola!" to distract victims while other gang members do the robbing and fighting and stuff. From Mark Helprin's Winter's Tale, which is also my favorite novel about New York.
dunphy | November 26, 2008, 2:22am | #
many of the comments here are a perfect example of how cognitive dissonance works.Clearly, many posters here are predisposed to distrust broken windows theory, and enforcement against "petty" offenses.
Thus, the fact that there is actual evidence is ignored, because it's uncomfortable and conflicts with people's biases and preconceptions.
If same study came to the opposite conclusion, you can rest assured that the same naysayers would be trumpeting such "PROOF" that their biases were correct.
Seriously. Many posters here sound like a bunch of creationists "refuting" evolution. Evidence be damned, when it doesn't fit one's bias.
"True, but the 1950s crime rates were kept artificially low via statistical dodges like "lynching is legal" and "rape victims know better than to complain about it" and "if a man wants to beat his wife and kids that's his business.""
Lynching was exceedingly rare (as has been pointed out). Yes, rape has always been underreported, but more so in the 50's (otoh, it is also the most overreported crime (false reports) as even alan dershowitz admits). And sure, domestic violence wasn't taken seriously.
However, there are plenty of crimes that are well reported and offer nice statistical comparison.
Murder, burglary, auto theft, and robbery.
Care to compare the two time frames for these crimes?
Art-P.O.G. | November 26, 2008, 8:28am | #
???what are you talking about, dunphy? There is a lot of good, balanced analysis on here.egosumabbas | November 26, 2008, 9:41am | #
"many of the comments here are a perfect example of how cognitive dissonance works.Clearly, many posters here are predisposed to distrust broken windows theory, and enforcement against "petty" offenses."
If you missed my point, was that the state has no business in forcing private entities to clean up their own properties. If people want a nice neighborhood it is up to themselves to clean it up, not the government. Otherwise you end up with a massive loss of liberty. Also, you cannot make policy based upon utilitarian arguments with wishy-washy social science (doing X reduces Y by 10%!), based on perceived notions of the "common good". Otherwise you end up with a totalitarian state. Is that a good enough summary for you?
Guy Montag | November 26, 2008, 10:24am | #
are you saying there's something inherently funny in the idea of a gang that wears top hats called the high hats?I think he was talking about The Baseball Furies. My suspicion is that "The Band Kiss" might have made the movie unprofitable after litigation, so they used flaiming pinstripes instead of spandex.
Robert Goodman | November 26, 2008, 11:01am | #
I don't see why studies like this even need to be done, it's obvious a priori from introspection.Unfortunately the causes & effects will depend on which side of social norms behaviors lie on, and by definition we can't do much individually about social norms.
John | November 26, 2008, 11:05am | #
The Warriors is just West Side Story for straight people.I don't understand why Libertarians go apeshit over broken windows policing. As pointed out above, the evidence is pretty strong for it. If you don't buy the evidence, go to New York City sometime and try to distrust your lying eyes. They do sound like creationists on this thread.
Beyond that, the Libertarian bitch is what constitutes a "broken window" not that broken windows need to be repaired. Just because drugs should be legal doesn't mean it should be okay from people to jump subway fairs, break stuff and piss on the street.
Robert Goodman | November 26, 2008, 11:06am | #
Reminds me of a study that was presented in my HS science club that different payoffs could increase false positives or false negatives in a hearing test. Well, duh!This is why I disagree with the Reason writers who argue against voting. It's about much more than just the economic equity of the effort or the puny political power of one vote.
TrickyVic | November 26, 2008, 1:25pm | #
"""My own experience is that the theory is valid. """NYC is a prime example as John said. If a career mugger is in jail for jumping the turnstyle, he's not on the street to mug. Reducing crime by limiting the access career criminals have to the population.
Sure we could bitch about arrests for little crimes we think should be a crime, but that a problem with the law.
I'm not a fan, but if it's going to be applied to the citzenry and claimed successful, then why not apply it to LEOs? I'm sure a LEO that likes to abuse people, runs through red lights. The more you can put cops in jail for running red lights, the more you protect the citizenry from police abuse.
TrickyVic | November 26, 2008, 1:26pm | #
"""The Warriors is just West Side Story for straight people. """That's a good one.
mentalslavery | November 27, 2008, 7:01am | #
This does not confirm broken windows theory. Additionally, broken windows theory as well as Wilson's "thinking about crime", are narrow perspectives.They don't have much explanatory value because they tend to reduce crime causation to very simple processes. He takes a "snap shot" of a couple steps the formation of criminal behavior and asserts it as "the answer".
Additionally, and most importantly, he is not qualified to be writing on crime. His academic training is not sufficient. Crime is complex and a comprehensive explanation is multifaceted. We don't do it much, normally we are law abiding in our behaviors. His ideas are dangerously ignorant
the article : nice little piece of conservative-law-and-order trash.
Poppymann | December 1, 2008, 5:01pm | #
I wouldn't put too much stock in this study. The sample size for each experiment was never greater than 71. At that size the significance of the study would be questionable.