Zero tolerance policing and problem-oriented policing compared

Criminal Justice

Zero-Tolerance Policing

The purpose of this paper is to introduce and analyze the topic of criminal justice and policing. Specifically it will discuss zero-tolerance policing as compared with problem-oriented policing (POP) programs. Zero-tolerance policing began in New York City in the early 1990s, and seems to have helped reduce crime significantly in the city. Because of this, the approach has spread to other cities and towns across the nation. Zero-tolerance policing involves police polices that hold all crimes at the same level of importance, no matter how petty or severity of the crime. In other words, a petty offense is the same as the worst criminal offense and will be treated as such in the police system. Ultimately, paying attention to all crimes, regardless of severity, indicates policing is serious, and reduces the amount of all crime committed in an area. This is what happened in New York City. Problem-oriented policing, on the other hand, involves identifying problem areas, such as drug-ridden neighborhoods or drug trafficking in general, and hones in one these areas to eliminate the problem.

Zero-tolerance policing comes as a reaction to policing methods changing over time. Three authors who argue for and against zero-tolerance policing write, "For a variety of reasons police got out of the business of minor offenses. These reasons went beyond the utilitarian view that scare police resources should best be concentrated on 'serious' crimes" (Greene, Kelling, & Bratton, 1998, pg. 309). Zero-tolerance policing believes that concentrating on all crimes shows the police are serious about fighting crime, and as a result, crime drops. Zero-tolerance is based on four concepts: "(1) accurate and timely intelligence, (2) rapid deployment of personnel and resources," (3) effective tactics, and (4) relentless follow-up and assessment" (Greene, Kelling, & Bratton, 1998, pg. 319). By targeting all crime, even petty offenses, crime is reduced, but even more importantly; fear of crime is reduced as well, which adds to citizen comfort and security throughout the area. Zero-tolerance is similar to POP concepts in that its final outcome aims to reduce crime and increase community security. It differs from POP in that it targets all crime, regardless of severity, and it relies on more research, follow-up, and assessment.

In New York City, many people believe that zero-tolerance helped reduce the crime rate by over 30%, and led to far greater safety in the city. However, one of the most disturbing outcomes of zero-tolerance in New York City is the marked rise in citizen complaints against the police department. Civil rights claims against police rose 75% during the implementation and expansion of zero-tolerance (Greene, Kelling, & Bratton, 1998, pg. 321). While proponents of the zero-tolerance policy note that most of these claims are never substantiated, it seems the policy has created more animosity between police and citizens in many areas. In addition, proponents point to zero-tolerance as the reason NYC's crime rates dropped so dramatically in the mid- to late-1990s, but other observers note that crime rates were dropping all over the country during this time, not just in New York (Greene, Kelling, & Bratton, 1998, pg. 322).

Community-oriented policing (COP) revolves around the central idea that "police and citizens share responsibility for identifying and solving crime problems and that law enforcement is one important tool for addressing crime, but it is not an end in itself" (Greene, Kelling, & Bratton, 1998, pg. 326). Most people define it as problem-solving and community engagement types of policing. This type of policing helps bring the community and the police department closer together, and supports many community involvement programs, such as neighborhood watch committees, working with neighborhoods and businesses to eliminate problem housing and trafficking locations, and even working with zoning laws to enforce and crack down on drug houses and other criminal properties. In addition, this type of policing involves many citizen volunteers who work in a variety of policing areas, which is not found in zero-tolerance policing. This type of policing was introduced in San Diego, California, and after implementation, the area showed a marked decrease in crime, nearly as much as New York enjoyed during the same time. In addition, research shows that arrests actually dropped in San Diego after implementing COP policies, and even more dramatic, citizen complaints against police officers dropped, as well. Thus, COP activities seem to be more citizen-friendly than zero-tolerance policies, and they seem to bring dramatic drops in crime, as well.

Problem-oriented policing targets specific problem areas of crime, such as drug-trafficking neighborhoods or youth-oriented crimes. This type of policing strives to understand why crimes are occurring, and get to the root of the crime problem in specific areas. In Boston in the 1990s, youth-oriented homicide was a growing problem, and the city developed a POP program to address it. Called the "Boston Gun Project," the project targeted youth aged 24 and under, and it researched why there was a gun problem with youth in Boston, and then developed intervention and evaluating the impact of the intervention. It involved many different law enforcement agencies, and even included local social services agencies and other non-traditional participants in law enforcement. Police targeted the gangs they knew were involved most heavily in gun crimes and homicides, and not only used enforcement techniques, but counseling and other techniques to reduce the use and availability of guns to youth gangs (Braga, et al., 2001, pg. 219). Clearly, this approach is the most far-removed from zero-tolerance policing methods. This method involves heavy research and assessment, and targets very specific criminal activities after they are identified as major problems in the community. It does not ignore other criminal activities, but targets the most dangerous or deadly, first.

Zero-tolerance policing involves little research and assessment, and instead relies on simply police intervention with any type of criminal activity, from urinating on public streets to homicide. The Boston project discovered that most of the gun activity was related to gang activity, and so they targeted gangs, and specific gangs, as the project continued. They responded quickly to gang violence, and soon the gangs realized that gang gun activity was no longer going to be tolerated. The project significantly reduced youth homicide and gun crimes in Boston, and so, like the other policies, POP has seen dramatic results in areas where it has been implemented.