Foot patrol leads to less crime
In boston the police commissioner decided that bringing back the old police beat way would lower crime rate in certain neighborhoods and he has proven to be correct. According to Jame Wilson and George Kelling implementing the new police beat to sustain order was a good idea and i agree. In class we came across the topic of “roughing up” strangers to the neighborhood or giving them a hard time. Yes in some cases it can seem biased to take one individual and treat him as if he did something wrong just because you are unfamiliar with him. Not saying that i agree with these methods but i do understand where it comes from. Notice how friendly the cops are in that boston neighborhood with the citizens as if they have grown a trust liking for each other. In order to keep “order” things need to stay “normal” in a sense. The local drunks are ok in the eyes of the foot patrol police because they know them and know what to expect. When you insert an unknown variable (a stranger) you put a little fear in everyone around. Who is this stranger? What do they want? What will they do? In order for the police to maintain order they need to ask the same question. Once the people of the neighborhood become doubtful and scared things start to become difficult for the officer to control so the way to keep the order is to find out what this stranger is doing here and if they are safe to be around your neighborhood. Not to be biased but to reassure the citizens of the neighborhood everything is ok.
I understand that the police of a small town are familiar with everyone and sometimes form a sense of trust with the people but I feel that they should stay professional. They are there to protect the town, if a familiar face is walking around drunk, they should not look at it as something that’s okay. If a stranger comes into town, they should not treat them any different as well. A town should welcome other people in yet they’re kind of scaring people away because they’re being more rough on the unfamiliar faces. Also, the people of the town may even take advantage of the the cop’s friendliness. They would commit a crime thinking that they may get away with it or the cops would be more lenient on them. They can even put the blame on a stranger since they’re the ones that are already being roughed up. There should definitely be more equality.
Communication between neighbors and cops brings trust and security. I personally live near a precinct and don’t recognize many cop faces. Foot patrolling brings officials closer to criminal activities than car patrolling. There are corrupted officials that car patrol who have deals with or rob drug dealers, who’s to say that officials who will be closer to neighbors won’t make such a deal? Honestly corruption can be anywhere and could be done though any police method. Although I do agree with café owner Saki Freeman that foot patrol is a confidence builder between officials and neighbors. Citizens do need to gain their trust in officials but its hard when someone hears officials corrupting the system and getting away with it. Whenever there are officials foot patrolling a neighborhood, potential criminals will be aware not to commit crimes in that specific neighborhood. Will that disperse and spread potential criminals to another neighborhood? A gang may not hang out in a neighborhood where police are walking but can hang out in another neighborhood. Can foot patrol decrease crimes in one neighborhood and increase crimes in another?
The combination of foot patrol and car patrol can in fact decrease crime. Just like scientists have experiments to find the best possible result, the police department might have to experiment different methods to see which one is best suitable to decrease crime the most. It seems like a balance of trust between officials and neighbors, as well as an effective method is needed to decrease crime.