CRIJ 6303 Week Six Reading Summary
In week 6, we discussed things that matter in the criminal justice system. The strategies
of policing and their effectiveness were extremely important and compared in the reading
provided to us. Four readings were provided, each covering a different strategy and how the
strategy ties into different policing, such as the community and federal agencies. Being able to
get a better understanding of policing strategies through these readings will help us think about
the outcomes of the strategies in our lives as well.
The first reading provided is titled Funding Community Policing to Reduce Crime: Have
Cops Grants Made a Difference? This reading goes over how effective the Department of Justice
Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS) is and how this program has helped and enhanced
policing through federal grants. The use of grants in this agency showed that 6,100 law agencies
had been affected by different grant types (Zhao, Scheider, Thurman, 2002).These grant types
include Hiring grants, MORE grants, and innovative grants. The author highlights that the COPS
hiring grants have decreased the number of violent crimes in different areas and had an even
bigger impact on property crimes, allowing officers to take care of areas with high crime rates.
The author also talks about how the use of these grants to help with crime increases the
amount of law enforcement needed. Along with equipment and innovations to represent the
anticrime supplementary investments (Zhao, Scheider, Thurman, 2002). Community policing
also suggested that this helped alongside the grants to reduce crime nationwide. The use of
problem-solving instead of punishment has helped the community trust law enforcement in areas
with high crime. This leads to better relationships with the community, reducing crime to help
law enforcement deal with bigger crimes. The author ends the article with how investments in
community policing have played a crucial role in crime reduction. Allowing this with caution has
also changed the effectiveness of grants provided to these policing strategies (Zhao, Scheider,
Thurman, 2002).
The second reading is titled An Evaluation of Compstat’s Effect on Crime: The
Importance of the Police Organizational Structure. The author explains in this reading that data-
driven management systems with police have developed several things that have impacted
Compstat. Compstat is a type of strategy that was developed by the New York police in order to
gain the attention and performance of management strategies (Jand, Hoover & Joo, 2010). The
author goes over how the creation of Compstat has influenced the crime rate and how the
structures of different police departments have been affected. This is gone over by also including
policing strategies such as community-oriented policing and problem-solving policing. The
author includes data using a national survey that analyzes about 350 police departments in the
U.S. asses rated violent crimes and property crimes through Compstats. This showed that there
was a significant decrease in these types of crimes, and the effect on violent crime became more
limited (Jand, Hoover & Joo, 2010). The author also highlights that flexible management,
decision-making, and communication enhance the strategies used, allowing better coordination
in strategies to reduce crime. As the author comes to an end, it is expressed that Compstat is a
tool that shows change and success depending on how organized a police department is.
CRIJ 6303 Week Six Reading Summary
The third article, titled Problem-Oriented Policing in Violent Crime Places: A
Randomized Controlled Experiment, goes over the evolution and effectiveness of problem-
oriented policing (POP) and how effective it is in reducing crimes. The studies of this type of
strategy are randomized throughout Jersey City. POP is a strategy used to identify certain crimes
while also developing responses that will help law enforcement (Braga, Kennedy, Waring &
Piehl, 1999). The author talks about different crimes in certain communities and how the
perspective of environmental crime is also applied to crime prevention. The author shows
research on different hot spots that received the POP strategy in policing. This showed that
enforcement responded to increased crime prevention and special referral strategies (Braga,
Kennedy, Waring & Piehl, 1999). Another thing the author analyzed was that there was no real
reduction in crime, and all it did was shift it from one place to another. The study in the reading
shows that although effective, place-based strategies demonstrate feasibility when understanding
violence.
The author continues to emphasize how flexibility and addressing issues about resources
and contributing to violence depend on place-based strategies. Demonstrations on how cities
enhance the outcomes of these strategies go beyond arrest but move into understanding the
communities to create sustainable change (Braga, Kennedy, Waring & Piehl, 1999). Overall, the
author provides studies and support for POP and how it combats violent crimes. This is
especially true when there are locations with more crimes than others.
The last reading provided to us was titled Zero Tolerance: A Case Study of Police
Policies and Practices in New York City, which goes over the shift that happened in the New
York Police Department in the late 1900s. The zero-tolerance policy was introduced, a policing
strategy that was influenced by the broken windows theory. That theory was that if smaller
crimes were dealt with, then bigger crimes would not be seen as often (Greene, 1999). The
author introduces the Compstat strategy, which helped reduce crime in New York City more than
any other strategy.
The article also goes over concerns about social costs when addressing aggressive
policing. Complaints from the community about misconduct within the police have increased
with zero-tolerance policing (Greene, 1999). Reports of excessive force, abuse, and targeting
certain communities have been impacted the most, and although many complaints were reported,
nothing was ever really done. This caused mistrust within communities towards policing, making
crimes skyrocket. The author also included how community policing has been taken over by the
zero-tolerance placing, inflicting, and focusing on power rather than partnering with
communities (Greene, 1999). This increased crimes such as drug misdemeanors and arrests by
over 80%. As the article comes to an end, the author emphasizes that although zero-tolerance
policing has helped reduce crime, it has cost the rest of communities and raised several concerns
that cause more harm in the end.
CRIJ 6303 Week Six Reading Summary
Going over all the articles, they had a lot of things similar when it came to discussing the
different types of strategies and how their analysis of has affected the cities in which the research
was conducted. One thing all the articles had in common was the ties to community policing and
how it is more important than most agencies think. This type of strategy allows police officers to
engage in community events, strengthening the bond with different areas of a city. Allowing this
to happen lessens crime because nobody wants to cause trouble and keep these bonds with
people they are supposed to trust. Overall, the articles show that different strategies have had
their ways, and although some have failed, most have succeeded through trial and error.
CRIJ 6303 Week Six Reading Summary
References
Braga, A. A., Kennedy, D. M., Waring, E. J., & Piehl, A. M. (1999). Problem-oriented
policing in violent crime places: A randomized controlled experiment. Criminology, 37(3), 541–
580
Greene, J. A. (1999). Zero tolerance: A case study of police policies and practices in New
York City. Crime & Delinquency, 45(2), 171–187.
Jang, H., Hoover, L. T., & Joo, H. (2010). An Evaluation of Compstat’s effect on crime:
The Importance of Police Organizational Structure. Police Quarterly, 13(4), 387-412
Zhao, J.S., Scheider, M.,C., & Thurman, Q. (2002). Funding Community Policing to
Reduce Crime: Have Cops Grants Made a Difference? Criminology & Public Policy, 2(1).
