There are two different ideas that go under the name “broken windows policing.” One holds that visible signs of low-level disorder *cause* more serious crimes. The evidence base for this is very shaky. slowboring.com/p/what-does-br…
But a better and related idea is that enforcing rules against easy-to-detect crimes is a good way to catch people who are guilty of more serious offenses. This one I think is true.
But a better and related idea is that enforcing rules against easy-to-detect crimes is a good way to catch people who are guilty of more serious offenses. This one I think is true.
That much more than the money is the reason for strictness about things like fare evasion, which can be easily enforced without violating people’s fourth amendment rights. You can see who is jumping the gates and stop them. slowboring.com/p/dc-is-right-…
@mattyglesias Worst comes to worst is that we help fund the MTA with greater fare enforcement
@mattyglesias Hence the old Mafia saying "Don't break the little laws."
@mattyglesias dragnets might temporarily reduce crime but isn't it tradeoff against state legitimacy? If enforcement is perceived as unjust, it's relied on less engendering self-help. okay, self-critique, I'm invoking second and third order effects...
@mattyglesias It's a form of stop and frisk that ends up targeting annoying yuppie pseudo-leftists, so I'm in favor.
@mattyglesias Yeah. The former may be important just for it's own sake, but the latter, catching repeat violent offenders, is something else. "Broken Windows" is simply a legal tool to stop people .
@mattyglesias I'm confused...isn't this basically what broken windows policing is?
@mattyglesias This is (among reasons..) by the way why I'm mad at cops using algorithms to go after financial crimes. They find the low hanging fruit, people also guilty of other crimes. Because what you say is true. But it puts an ever bigger barrier to catching white collar crime.
@mattyglesias This is really a distinction without an operational difference in your premise.