Between 2014 and 2016, the FBI reported a 7% increase of violent crimes and a staggering 20% increase in the murder rate within the United States (Pew). It is the primary responsibility of the government to protect its people, including finding and implementing solutions to reduce crime. To find the solutions, it is imperative to find the causes. Broken Windows Theory attempts to explain both the cause and the solution to rising criminal activity. Kelling and Wilson’s research tells the story of urban decay, or the degrading social infrastructure of the modern community. The ultimate blame of urban decay is rested upon disorderly behaviors such as graffiti, homelessness, and public drunkenness. As disorderly behaviors are observed in a community and left unfixed, Broken Windows suggests that those behaviors risk attracting higher degrees of crime. As neighbors perceive the disorderly behaviors as a risk, they stay off the streets and become less involved. This can lead to vacant homes and lots, as well as other socioeconomic losses. “Such an area is vulnerable to criminal invasion” (Kelling and Wilson). The solution is the idea of controlling disorderly behaviors and misdemeanors in order to prevent mores serious crimes.
The previous theory is not wrong, but incomplete at best in both its causal reasoning behind criminal behavior and the solution to prevent it. The policies born of Broken Windows Theory can be compared to a lumberjack chopping away at branches with the intention of completely removing the tree. Policy makers must install solutions that aim at the real causes. Some research suggests that Broken Windows policies only worked in New York City but has failed to see results throughout the rest of the nation (Stern). One study demonstrates that misdemeanor policing does not correlate with the serious crime of murder (Chauhan). Alternative research suggests that alcohol availability is a legitimate and largely neglected cause of violent crime and proposes strict policies on alcohol consumption (Dilulio). Other studies suggest that minor mental health issues from environmental factors are overlooked causes of criminal behavior and requires policies of environmental cleansing(Drum). Finally, this brief’s recommended alternative policy is the idea of Busy Streets, strong social support and programs within the community that guide individuals away from criminal behavior and toward responsible lives (Aiyer).
People want to feel safe in their homes and in their neighborhoods. They don’t want to worry about being mugged on the way to the bus stop or getting caught in the crossfire of a gang war. Nobody wants to lose sleep over anxiety of having their car stolen or house burglarized. Parents want to avoid exposing their children to drugs and other bad influences. Women don’t want to feel powerless to evil men that may or may not overcome them. These are feelings of insecurity. When these risks are perceived, those with the capacity to move to a better community will do so in search of better quality of life. “In the scientific ideal, analysts recognize that perfect security is unachievable, but they use all available knowledge to maximize security and minimize harms” (Stone 133).
It wasn’t until 1990 that New York City began implementing policies influenced by Kelling and Wilson’s theory of Broken Windows. Some of these policies included “ejecting loiterers, arresting aggressive panhandlers, and continuing a campaign against graffiti” (Nifong). The theory dictates that by policing disorderly behaviors and conditions, more serious crimes will be prevented. It is no coincidence that within just a few months of implementing these new policies the overall crime rate in New York City dropped 75% (Nifong). Broken Windows obviously found some success which means there is some merit to its thought process.
A more detailed study of Queens shows that between 1995 and 2000, Marijuana arrest rates increased by 773% and the total crime rate decreased by 49% (McCabe). This was largely due to a strong effort to attack illegal sales of drugs led by then Mayor Giuliani. It’s apparent that there is a significant negative correlation between marijuana arrests and overall crime rate. However, the strength of the relationship is questionable. In his study, McCabe noted that marijuana is traditionally a shared drug among several friends at the same time with presumably just one buyer. It is very likely that groups of friends were arrested at the same time potentially inflating the numbers. Broken Windows Theory seems to have had success in New York City, but the rest of the nation has not seen the same results.
Seth Stern’s study indicates that while New York City was implementing these zero tolerance policing policies, places like Chicago enacted similar ordinances without seeing much change in crime rates (Stern). Not only do the results vary across major cities, but certain policies have varying consequences depending on race and ethnicity. A study done on New York City gun and drug policing in 1990 showed that “Black homicide decline was associated with a decrease in cocaine consumption while Hispanic homicide decline was associated with a decrease in firearm availability…For White homicides, there were no significant predictors” (Chauhan). The study confirmed that “drug arrests, cocaine consumption, alcohol consumption, fire-arm availability, and incarceration rates does not appear to be equivalent across race/ethnicity” (Chauhan). It also concluded that misdemeanor policing was not directly related to homicide.
As previously insinuated, Broken Windows Theory asserts that disorderly behaviors within communities create fear and insecurity for the residents. Research by Temple University in Philadelphia, questions the order of the cause and effect. In reversing Broken Windows, the study argues “that risk perceptions drive incivilities,” or in other words, fear and insecurity create disorderly behaviors (Link). There is merit in this argument due to the various definitions individuals have of disorderly behaviors and crime. Temple University found in a survey that many residents in Baltimore City have a hard time separating disorderly behavior and crime. This leads to higher reports of crime which in reality is likely something harmless, such as a group of teenagers standing on the corner of the street. Bernard Harcourt, a proponent against Broken Windows Theory, suggests that policies derived from Broken Windows is too harsh and promotes unnecessary punishment on so called criminals (Stern). If this is true, then it is reasonable to doubt the validity of the numerous policing policies derived from Broken Windows Theory.
This research has thus far addressed the strengths and weaknesses of Broken Windows theory and its policies. Although New York City witnessed a dramatic drop in serious crime rates in the 1990’s, other major cities have failed to see the same success. It has been demonstrated that misdemeanor policies effect different races and ethnicities in unique ways but does not correlate directly with murder rates. Broken Window’s assumption that residents perceive civil disorder similarly and that disorderly behaviors create fear has been proven to work in its converse. The punishments of unwanted but harmless behavior is sometimes too harsh and can lead to more serious crime. Since Broken Windows Theory doesn’t accurately address the need of security, this study will follow with the theories of mental health issues, alcohol availability, and the recommended policy of Busy Streets.
Kevin Drum, noting that the success of Broken Windows is difficult to prove, gives alternative cause and solution to reducing crime. His study believes that there is a link between lead exposure and disorderly conduct which evolves into violent crimes. Because lead lowers IQ and can create mental health problems, it’s a reasonable connection to make. Between the 1940’s and 70’s, leaded gasoline consumption was at an all-time high. The emissions from vehicles burning leaded gasoline moderately and gradually poisoned young children. “Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leaded gasoline, emissions plummeted. Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the same upside-down U pattern. The only thing different was the time period” (Drum). There was a 20-year discrepancy between the rise and fall of leaded gas and the crime rate.
Drum followed the research of Rick Nevin, an employee of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Nevin concluded that “Toddlers who ingested high levels of lead in the ‘40s and ‘50s really were more likely to become violent criminals in the ‘60s, ‘70s, and ‘80s” (Drum). Research done at the University of Cincinnati found that high concentrated exposure to lead can result in prefrontal cortex deterioration in the brain (Drum). The prefrontal cortex regulates emotions and aggression. The evidence for this causal theory becomes strong as lead and crime data from several countries matched the same upside-down U pattern as noted previously.
There are several ways that the youth are exposed to lead and consequently suffer from mental illnesses which can include ADHD. Even though the United States switched to unleaded gasoline decades ago, the residue from that era has settled into the soil of the most populated communities. Children play in dirt all the time. Older homes often times still have lead paint. Yes, it was a demeaning joke in grade school to say, “did you eat paint chips as a child?” However, there is truth to the underlying idea that ingesting lead paint chips causes damage to the brain. The exposure isn’t limited to poor neighborhoods; it also extends to much of the middle-class (Drum).
To achieve a better quality of life for the general public, the alternative policy includes a massive environmental cleansing. The study estimates that there are 16 million homes still with lead painted windows. Replacing the windows would cost $10 billion a year for 20 years. It’s also calculated that a government sponsored program to rid our soil of lead would cost another $10 billion a year. That’s a total of $20 billion every year for 20 years (Drum).
With the consistent results from various research on this topic, it is difficult to deny that lead is a possible cause of criminal behavior. The comparative statistics between lead gas and crime rates could potentially be coincidental. However, the alternative theory fails to recognize other factors of criminal behavior that Broken Windows has thoroughly delineated. It forces policy analysts to reconsider lead safety and the consequences of its historic misuse, however the suggested solution is unrealistic. The clean-up costs are far too expensive, especially for a country that struggles to agree on a budget. The idea of cleansing the environment of lead will lead to lower crime rates is merely an assumption without much substance. There are no peer evaluated studies that have gone through the scientific process which support the suggested solution’s viability.
John J. Dilulio adds his alternative policy for consideration called Broken Bottles. He asserts that Broken Windows Theory studies do not sufficiently address the connection between alcohol and crime. Dilulio quotes Jeffrey Fagan to summarize the research that has been done on alcohol, “Alcohol use has been associated with assaultive and sex-related crimes, serious youth crime, family violence toward both spouses and children, being both a homicide victim and a perpetrator, and persistent aggression as an adult” (Dilulio). As a “multiplier of crime,” alcohol abuse drives crime rates.
“Sixty percent of convicted homicide offenders drank just before committing the offense. Sixty-three percent of adults jailed for homicide had been drinking before the offense. Sixty percent of prison inmates drank heavily just before committing the violent crime for which they were incarcerated” (Dilulio). Other studies report a strong positive correlation between alcohol and sexual violence. These statistics give a good argument that alcohol could be a major perpetuate of crime, but it is not for certain. It does not take into account how many individuals drink alcohol who have never committed a crime nor misdemeanor violators intoxication status.
Using Milwaukee as a case study, reports show a pattern of crime near liquor stores throughout the city. This same pattern can be found through other inner-city communities across multiple states. It seems as if liquor companies purposely post themselves in poor and minority populated districts. Most states legislation lack alcohol sales regulation. “Numerous first-rate studies have found close links between the geographic density of alcohol outlets and consumption rates” (Dilulio). Based on these facts, logic dictates that alcohol is a major cause for criminal behavior as well as disorderly behaviors.
Broken Bottles recommends development and strong enforcement of alcohol regulations in the pursuit of cutting crime. This alternative policy suggests limiting the number of liquor stores within a square mile radius and creating zones where such outlets are prohibited. Those zones would be areas near parks, public schools, and any family concentrated living districts. Broken Bottles also calls for a regulation on alcohol advertisement. Some studies have revealed a possible relationship between alcoholic beverage ads and excessive drinking.