As the New York City Police Department continues its standoff with Mayor Bill de Blasio over his perceived lack of support, the conversation caused by the police slowdown is providing strong ammunition for critics of overly aggressive law-enforcement tactics within urban communities.
At this point, there has been no significant impact to public safety because of the slowdown—during which tickets and summons for minor offenses have dropped more than 90 percent—and we’ve seen anything but the doomsday crime spree that Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch seemed to hope might cause widespread fear among New Yorkers.
Lynch, who leads the NYPD’s largest and most influential union, has been very critical of de Blasio in past weeks, accusing him of expressing anti-policing sentiments in his remarks after the Staten Island grand jury’s nonindictment in the Eric Garner choke hold case.
Lynch’s inflammatory sentiments have intensified in the wake of the slaying of two NYPD officers in late December while they were on duty in Brooklyn. According to the New York Post, leaders of the five police unions have orchestrated what amounts to a work stoppage of NYPD officers (the PBA denies that the work stoppage is orchestrated). Still, the effect on the crime rate has been minimal. This strongly suggests that the NYPD’s typical over-policing—particularly within communities of color—is hardly as necessary as many have previously suggested.
In many ways, the slowdown is backfiring terribly and should force a bigger discussion about not only the need to revisit the “broken windows” approach to law enforcement in urban communities but also the age-old trend of funding America’s cities on the backs of the poor.
The broken-windows approach to law enforcement, which de Blasio endorsed during the early days of his tenure, is essentially Reaganomics’ trickle-down theory of policing. (Remember how well that worked out?) The idea is essentially that focusing on strict policing of smaller offenses will deter larger crimes from happening. However, the notion that police, by cracking down on low-level crimes like selling loose cigarettes and open containers, are going to deter hardened criminals is a dubious theory at best. This is, in part, because economics drives most real crime more than any other factor.
As a former prosecutor, I found the most common reasons people committed crimes to be connected to their own finances and/or rooted in the economic constraints of their surrounding environment. The threat of a summons for riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is hardly a deterrent for larger crimes when those crimes might help make ends meet for unemployed or underemployed people. This is the problem with broken-windows policing: The theory fails because it attributes the cause of crime to the “tolerance” and escalation of lesser crimes rather than acknowledging that crime rates are higher in poorer communities primarily because people do not like being poor.
Beyond failed theory, broken-windows policing in New York City has failed miserably in its practice. Eric Garner is now dead because of excessively aggressive police tactics stemming from a broken-windows approach. In a state where it is illegal to smoke almost anywhere, there was hardly a threat to public safety or quality of life that necessitated applying a choke hold to arrest someone suspected of selling untaxed cigarettes.
This is just an example of the disaster that results when flawed criminal theory is misapplied by overzealous police officers. It is not to suggest that lawlessness is the answer, but one of the ironic revelations coming out of the NYPD’s slowdown is that dialing back the aggressive approach of over-policing will not make the sky over Brooklyn start to fall.
In the NYPD’s misapplication of broken-windows policing, there is also the undeniable racial element that makes it even further problematic. Between 2001 and 2013, more than 80 percent of the summonses for minor violations in New York City were issued to blacks and Hispanics. For years, black and Hispanic residents in New York City as well as criminal-justice advocates have cried foul over Police Department tactics like stop and frisk that are indicative of a mindset that condones harsher treatment of communities of color.