CNN) – Conservative talk-show host Glenn Beck apologized Friday after appearing to mo

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes I do but I don't really use google for that. I use academic database because it's where I can find their publications or perhaps even better... a scholarly peer-reviewed paper.

so I'd like to know which theories and experts you are talking about so I can look it up. :ty:

Then google.... :lol:

Or feel free to stick with your single bullet theory
 
AARRR the book is on backorder. The local libraries only have one copy of it. Looks like It will be about 3 weeks before I can get it

just something to read. found from my academic database -

In 1982, criminologist George L. Kelling and political scientist James Q. Wilson co-authored the now-famous "Broken Windows" article in the Atlantic Monthly. They argued that crime and public disorder were closely connected. "If a window in a building is broken and left unrepaired," they wrote, "all the rest of the windows will soon be broken.... One unrepaired broken window is a signal that no one cares," and once that signal is widely broadcast, law-abiding citizens will avoid areas with broken windows, criminals will move in, and a heretofore orderly neighborhood will quickly deteriorate into a crime-ridden slum.

In this book, Kelling and his co-author, social anthropologist Catherine M. Coles, have made the idea of public order maintenance--"fixing broken windows"--the cornerstone of a new, community-based approach to law enforcement. Taking issue with the conventional crime-fighting approach that seeks to apprehend predators after they have committed their crimes, Kelling and Coles advocate a preventive strategy of combating public disorder such as "aggressive panhandling, street prostitution, drunkenness and public drinking, menacing behavior, harassment, obstruction of streets and public spaces, vandalism and graffiti, public urination and defecation, unlicensed vending and peddling, unsolicited window washing of cars ('squeegeeing'), and other such acts."

The "crime-prevention" approach to law enforcement was first adopted on a major scale by William Bratton in 1990, when he was appointed to head the New York Transit Police Department and charged with "taking back the subway for the people of New York." Under Bratton, police were encouraged to uphold public order in the subway system first by warning passengers who refused to obey subway rules, then by arresting them if they continued to misbehave. Police soon discovered that many offenders charged with relatively minor public order violations--farebeating, for example--were wanted on serious felony charges, as well. Consequently, the Transit Police's vigorous campaign on behalf of public order caused a major decline in more serious subway crimes.

In 1994, after becoming New York City's police commissioner under Mayor Giuliani, Bratton applied the approach he had pioneered in the subways to the city's streets. Again, the results were dramatic: "A person arrested for urinating in a park, when questioned about other problems, gave police information that resulted in the confiscation of a small cache of weapons; a motorcyclist cited for not wearing a helmet, on closer inspection, was carrying a 9-mm. handgun, had another in his side bag, and had several high-powered weapons in his apartment; a vendor selling hot merchandise, after being questioned, led police to a fence specializing in stolen weapons. These stories made concrete the importance of dealing with minor problems in order to forestall major problems."

Other cities have begun to emulate New York's successful strategy: In Baltimore, local businesses, police, and security firms have collaborated on so-called Business Improvement Districts dedicated to preventing crime through the restoration of public order; in San Francisco, former mayor Frank Jordan initiated an aggressive Operation Matrix that addressed disorder in various neighborhoods; and in Seattle, city officials are awaiting a decision from the Ninth Circuit Court on the legality of their ordinances prohibiting disorderly behavior on sidewalks.

Kelling and Coles are sensitive to the concerns of civil libertarians, who fear that an order-maintenance strategy will deprive the poor and the homeless of their rights. To avoid such an outcome, they believe that the community and the police must enter into a partnership, "fully inclusive of all racial, ethnic, religious and economic groups," to determine standards of public behavior that are acceptable to everyone. By entering into such a pact, they contend, community members will "publicly indicate that they are conferring authority on officials to act on their behalf" to uphold agreed upon standards. Armed with this authority, police will be empowered to restore public order, there by "fixing broken windows" and preventing urban neighborhoods from becoming crime-ridden slums.

Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities by, George L. Kelling and Catherine M. Coles (Free Press).

No Place Like Home
The reason public housing has become a "a world ravaged by fear, mistrust and hopelessness" is that all sense of belonging to a community has broken down and social life has returned to a Hobbesian state of nature. This is the conclusion of writers Flagg Taylor and Robert B. Hawkins Jr. in Owning the Dream: Triumph and Hope in the Projects. Compounding the problem, traditional social-service programs have not encouraged public-housing residents to cooperate in rebuilding a viable community. On the contrary, government-run programs have generated a widespread sense of helplessness by creating a dependent class of clients, "who can only consume the services they are given as professionals continually redefine their 'needs. '"

Fortunately, the growing movement toward tenant management of public housing offers an effective alternative to the failed bureaucratic approach. The first resident management association--Bromley-Heath Tenant Management Corporation in Boston--was formally incorporated in 1971. Initially, it focused on such relatively simple tasks as "coming together to talk about common goals." Gradually, "trust among residents increased and they began making commitments to one another." Eventually, the Tenant Management Corporation was able to break down the sense of isolation and distrust that prevented Bromley-Heath residents from uniting to defeat the drugdealers and violent criminals who preyed on their community. By hiring and supervising its own security patrol--many of whose members were development residents--the corporation "enabled the community to monitor the behavior of its residents and to uphold certain standards of behavior so all residents could enjoy living in a safe neighborhood."

The success of the Bromley Heath experiment in community-building through tenant management encouraged similar efforts in other cities. Eventually, with the help of Robert L. Woodson Sr. of the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise and HUD Secretary Jack Kemp, federal money flowed to tenant management groups around the country and programs like HOPE (Home Ownership and Opportunities for People Everywhere) offered incentives for privatizing public housing. As a result, in many tenant-managed projects today, the rates of crime and teenage pregnancy have fallen while employment has risen.

The key to a successful tenant management corporation is a renewed sense of community. Such community-feeling can be fostered, Taylor and Hawkins argue, only if local public housing authorities recognize the right of residents to self-government, and not insist that they remain clients of the established social-service system. Another condition for successful community formation is that the tenant managers have the power to establish standards of behavior, and to screen prospective tenants according to those standards. Democratically elected tenant managers must also have the right to monitor behavior, and impose penalties--including expulsion from the development--on those who refuse to abide by the rules.
 
Then google.... :lol:

Or feel free to stick with your single bullet theory

We both know what's going on here so we'll just shake on it and be on our way :)
 
AARRR the book is on backorder. The local libraries only have one copy of it. Looks like It will be about 3 weeks before I can get it

aw dang. Well - if you would like to explore more in this related subject... you really need to start with Karl Marx. And no do not confuse Marxism as Communism. Do not confuse Marxism as "gimmi gimmi gimmi". Do not dismiss Karl Marx otherwise... we'd be the biggest hypocrite the world has ever seen.

I don't know any real good books relating to Marxism but I think you could start with The Communist Manifesto.
 
We both know what's going on here so we'll just shake on it and be on our way :)

It was clear 2 pages ago.....You believe Kelling saved New York.... I don't.... :lol: I told you long ago you were entitled to your opinion. :)
 
It was clear 2 pages ago.....You believe Kelling saved New York.... I don't.... :lol: I told you long ago you were entitled to your opinion. :)

You haven't shared your opinion.... yet. All I've got were "many experts" and "other theories".
 
just something to read. found from my academic database -

Interesting read, but I still don't see why those methods were not used in the first place. But ya doing those things will make a difference. Last time I drove through Chicago I had a couple of people come up and "clean" my windows then demand money. Lets just say I haven't gone back because of that 1 thing. At the end of that read there is some stuff that I want to read more about. The public housing areas here in Dayton are full of crack heads and wannabe thugs who have seen too many gang movies.
 
You haven't shared your opinion.... yet. All I've got were "many experts" and "other theories".

Yup.....No need for me to elaborate. I don't claim to know for a fact the cause of the decrease in crime. I merely disagree that Kelling's theory was the sole reason
 
Interesting read, but I still don't see why those methods were not used in the first place. But ya doing those things will make a difference. Last time I drove through Chicago I had a couple of people come up and "clean" my windows then demand money. Lets just say I haven't gone back because of that 1 thing. At the end of that read there is some stuff that I want to read more about. The public housing areas here in Dayton are full of crack heads and wannabe thugs who have seen too many gang movies.

It's interesting that you brought up Chicago. There's actually an article about it in American Journal of Sociology that somewhat disagree with Broken Window Theory.

Systematic Social Observation of Public Spaces: A New Look at Disorder in Urban Neighborhoods
This article assesses the sources and consequences of public disorder. Based on the videotaping and systematic rating of more than 23,000 street segments in Chicago, highly reliable scales of social and physical disorder for 196 neighborhoods are constructed. Census data, police records, and an independent survey of more than 3,500 residents are then integrated to test a theory of collective efficacy and structural constraints. Defined as cohesion among residents combined with shared expectations for the social control of public space, collective efficacy explains lower rates of crime and observed disorder after controlling neighborhood structural characteristics. Collective efficacy is also linked to lower rates of violent crime after accounting for disorder and the reciprocal effects of violence. Contrary to the "broken windows" theory, however, the relationship between public disorder and crime is spurious except perhaps for robbery.

and there's also another article that pointed out flaw in Broken Window Theory

Innovation and Institutionalization: Factors in the Development of “Quality of Life” Policing in New York City
Several scholars have described the development of new policing strategies in New York City over the last ten years that emphasize the elimination of public disorder, consistent with the “broken windows” theory, and sometimes referred to as “quality of life” policing. These works, however, have not dealt with the process of police innovation and in particular have paid little attention to the role of community-based actors in the process. This article will show how any effort to understand the development of new policing styles requires an analysis of the police as a public institution that needs a high level of public legitimacy in order to function effectively. I will utilize four neighbourhood-based case studies to show that the process of innovation in New York City was driven by a loss of public legitimacy combined with specific calls for changes in the values, mission and core strategies of the police by community-based actors. The result was the development of the new “quality of life” style of policing well before the arrival of Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Police Commissioner William Bratton, who are frequently credited with the creation of this new style of policing.
 
Yup.....No need for me to elaborate. I don't claim to know for a fact the cause of the decrease in crime. I merely disagree that Kelling's theory was the sole reason

When you disagree with something... you usually have to present theory/source to disagree with other theory/source.... not one's opinion because.. well - these theory/source is made by somebody with extensive professional background.

So... using your opinion (without any reference to other experts) to disagree with an expert with background and results to prove? well..... feels bad, man.

that's how debate works.
 
aw dang. Well - if you would like to explore more in this related subject... you really need to start with Karl Marx. And no do not confuse Marxism as Communism. Do not confuse Marxism as "gimmi gimmi gimmi". Do not dismiss Karl Marx otherwise... we'd be the biggest hypocrite the world has ever seen.

I don't know any real good books relating to Marxism but I think you could start with The Communist Manifesto.

I don't dismiss Marx but I cannot support someone who said "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". No I don't know all of Marxism but that is just because everytime I read about it I get disgusted.
 
I don't dismiss Marx but I cannot support someone who said "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". No I don't know all of Marxism but that is just because everytime I read about it I get disgusted.

ever wonder why you naturally get disgusted (even me) at the thought of Marxism even though you don't really know about Marxism? :lol:
 
When you disagree with something... you usually have to present theory/source to disagree with other theory/source.... not one's opinion because.. well - these theory/source is made by somebody with extensive professional background.

So... using your opinion (without any reference to other experts) to disagree with an expert with background and results to prove? well..... feels bad, man.

that's how debate works.

Oh well.... :lol:
 
ever wonder why you naturally get disgusted (even me) at the thought of Marxism even though you don't really know about Marxism? :lol:

Tell you what, I will choke down that book and actually read it instead of skim though it just for you.

On another note I hope you don't take my posts as a my way is the best person. You have a lot of views that counter mine and I like to constantly look up new info. I don't really have anyone to debate with here at home since my hearing dropped so low. God I need to get back in college.
 
Tell you what, I will choke down that book and actually read it instead of skim though it just for you.
:lol: I've actually never read that book by Karl Marx.. which is why I said that I don't know any real good book by him or about Marxism but I kept an open mind to hear about it from others. I recognized the importance of Marxism on economic perspective. Other than that.. I'm clueless

oh btw - the answer to my question is.... American propaganda :)

On another note I hope you don't take my posts as a my way is the best person. You have a lot of views that counter mine and I like to constantly look up new info. I don't really have anyone to debate with here at home since my hearing dropped so low. God I need to get back in college.
Plenty of topics here for you to debate :)
 
:lol: I've actually never read that book by Karl Marx.. which is why I said that I don't know any real good book by him or about Marxism but I kept an open mind to hear about it from others. I recognized the importance of Marxism on economic perspective.

oh btw - the answer to my question is.... American propaganda :)

:run: You tricked me :laugh2: Now I got to read that crummy thing. Maybe after I read it I can use it for target practice with my 40 cal smith and wesson.
 
:run: You tricked me :laugh2: Now I got to read that crummy thing. Maybe after I read it I can use it for target practice with my 40 cal smith and wesson.

May I join? I'll bring my 9mm :twisted:
 
Wirelessly posted

I prefer Engels over Marx.

At least Engels understood how class struggle worked. He should know... He was a factory owner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top