RIP James Q. Wilson
2/3/12 15:57![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsIf there is someone or something out there toying with humanity out there in the universe, they've made it a pretty interesting week, as we've lost James Q. Wilson today. Wilson, a political scientist, is best known for his policing theory outlined in The Atlantic, "Broken Windows":
This theory is very influential, albeit not universally accepted. In reading various comments about him, his position as a thinker doesn't seem to be in doubt as much as his viewpoints being somewhat destructive on a policing standpoint. Either way, even if we disagree with someone, losing that voice means possibly losing a viewpoint you never got to hear before, and that can be just as tragic as the loss of life when it comes to issues of policy and policing.
Social psychologists and police officers tend to agree that if a window in a building is broken and is left unrepaired, all the rest of the windows will soon be broken. This is as true in nice neighborhoods as in rundown ones. Window-breaking does not necessarily occur on a large scale because some areas are inhabited by determined window-breakers whereas others are populated by window-lovers; rather, one unrepaired broken window is a signal that no one cares, and so breaking more windows costs nothing.
...
We suggest that "untended" behavior also leads to the breakdown of community controls. A stable neighborhood of families who care for their homes, mind each other's children, and confidently frown on unwanted intruders can change, in a few years or even a few months, to an inhospitable and frightening jungle. A piece of property is abandoned, weeds grow up, a window is smashed. Adults stop scolding rowdy children; the children, emboldened, become more rowdy. Families move out, unattached adults move in. Teenagers gather in front of the corner store. The merchant asks them to move; they refuse. Fights occur. Litter accumulates. People start drinking in front of the grocery; in time, an inebriate slumps to the sidewalk and is allowed to sleep it off. Pedestrians are approached by panhandlers.
At this point it is not inevitable that serious crime will flourish or violent attacks on strangers will occur. But many residents will think that crime, especially violent crime, is on the rise, and they will modify their behavior accordingly.
This theory is very influential, albeit not universally accepted. In reading various comments about him, his position as a thinker doesn't seem to be in doubt as much as his viewpoints being somewhat destructive on a policing standpoint. Either way, even if we disagree with someone, losing that voice means possibly losing a viewpoint you never got to hear before, and that can be just as tragic as the loss of life when it comes to issues of policy and policing.
(no subject)
Date: 2/3/12 21:37 (UTC)I'm fortunate enough to live in an area apparently surrounded by a "bubble" of some kind. We have our social and criminal problems, but for the most part those that seem most random and outside of traditional social mores -- like graffiti, property damage, theft -- are not only still frowned upon but actively pursued, for the most part. Sometimes it depends on who was who, which is another side of the coin.
The random killing of a school teacher out west by outsiders has changed things there in a big way.
Compare to states/cities that virtually accept petty crimes and no longer think twice about them. My son moved to the Twin Cities and had his iPhone stolen directly from his hands at a transit stop. Google Latitude told him exactly where the phone was. The city cops said transit police would have to review tapes and handle it. They never bothered. So knowing its exact location still lost him his own property, and the perpetrators have no consequences.
And so they shrug, and so will I. But not here.
(no subject)
Date: 2/3/12 21:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/3/12 22:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 00:47 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 00:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 03:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 15:57 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 18:28 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 4/3/12 00:29 (UTC)For instance, I rarely lock my doors and I have a lawn mower that has been sitting untouched by criminal hands on my driveway for 3 years.
Theft, if treated seriously in an area, will not be a problem.
(no subject)
Date: 4/3/12 00:32 (UTC)Theft, if treated seriously in an area, will not be a problem.
Yea sure, I guess you live in utopia land where laws actually prevent things and criminals learn their lessons and society is simply a matter of getting people to buy in.
(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 09:14 (UTC)It does affect me if I go to places where thievery has no consequences, though.
(no subject)
Date: 4/3/12 00:33 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/3/12 21:37 (UTC)*grimace*
(no subject)
Date: 2/3/12 21:38 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 02:23 (UTC)*whispers* we...can't...
(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 03:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 06:33 (UTC)If you park in an area where all or some of the cars have wheel locks, what does that say about the safety of the area, especially to thieves? They will interpret the locks on the wheels as a sign that theft in this location is common enough to prompt people to get wheel locks. Therefore the unlocked cars will probably be more likely theft targets.
The same goes for barred windows. More security might very well beget less.
(no subject)
Date: 3/3/12 11:12 (UTC)