Posted on Mar 5, 2015
Broken Windows Theory; Should it be applied to the Military? Is it? Can it reduce things like SHARP violations?
14.9K
98
33
6
6
0
Broken Windows policing is a theory that was highlighted during the police officer choking out the guy selling cigarettes who died at the scene. The idea is that enforcing the "minor" (broken window) crimes prevents major ones, while letting them go leads to further disorder.
Applying this to military in the manner of enforcing the basic standards like wear and appearance of uniform, proper courtesy, parade rest, etc. Because these things aren't enforced as they should be, does it inherently foster an environment where things like SHARP violations or other major crimes can thrive? Or are they enforced and these major crimes have nothing to do with those who commit these minor offenses.
I encourage you to read this article to have a better understanding of the theory, but please post your thoughts on the matter.
http://cebcp.org/evidence-based-policing/what-works-in-policing/research-evidence-review/broken-windows-policing/
Applying this to military in the manner of enforcing the basic standards like wear and appearance of uniform, proper courtesy, parade rest, etc. Because these things aren't enforced as they should be, does it inherently foster an environment where things like SHARP violations or other major crimes can thrive? Or are they enforced and these major crimes have nothing to do with those who commit these minor offenses.
I encourage you to read this article to have a better understanding of the theory, but please post your thoughts on the matter.
http://cebcp.org/evidence-based-policing/what-works-in-policing/research-evidence-review/broken-windows-policing/
SHARP
Standards
UCMJ
Leadership
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 15
8
8
0
I think the military word for the broken windows crimes enforcement is "discipline," and I would say that if we enforce discipline in the seemingly minor things, it has a good chance of remaining in place when it comes to the major things. Discipline is the key to it, in my opinion.
(8)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Yes, sexual harassment and sexual assault still occurs. And you're correct, MAJ Stanton, in several very high-profile instances, the very leaders charged with command oversight and supervision of SHARP activities have themselves been implicated and even charged and convicted of the very crimes they were supposed to help prevent. Your point would be? In law enforcement agencies, there is always a certain percentage of the force who are corrupt and involved in criminal activity. Do those agencies throw in the towel? Do their respective cities and states call for their disbandment because fighting crime is fruitless as it can never be completely prevented? That is precisely the argument I'm hearing you make when it comes to the enforcement of standards and discipline. "Except we already try to enforce strict standards and it still happens." Sure it does. And it always will. We are humans, and humans fail. Some will even commit crimes; more will violate standards. But the vast majority of us will do the right thing, so long as we see that those in charge give a damn that we are doing the right thing and bring justice to those who choose not to.
(6)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
MAJ (Join to see) my point is that we already police the service with high standards. Saying that we need to do more is not looking at the real crux of the problem. As for police departments in certain jurisdictions they don't have the man power. Yes they do throw in the towel I'm afraid at least in Albuquerque New Mexico. They don't have the resources to always to enforce small misdemeanor except traffic violations which bring in money. The problem is also the judicial. You can make more rules a harsher environment, but unless the judges are willing to enforce those standards.
As for the military we don't need to add more rules we just need the proper follow with the enforcement after the person is being prosecuted. We need to apply the law equally to all ranks so there is not the discrepancy that one gets away with what the other does not. A General should face the same penalty for the same crime that a captain gets prosecuted for. The way I look at it we have standards on place as the service has for many years. In some cases we are more strict on the lower level enforcement. What I am saying is that one is not necessarily a detractor to the other.
As for the military we don't need to add more rules we just need the proper follow with the enforcement after the person is being prosecuted. We need to apply the law equally to all ranks so there is not the discrepancy that one gets away with what the other does not. A General should face the same penalty for the same crime that a captain gets prosecuted for. The way I look at it we have standards on place as the service has for many years. In some cases we are more strict on the lower level enforcement. What I am saying is that one is not necessarily a detractor to the other.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I am not convinced it works that well. We have implemented this in the AOR. Strict uniform and general order enforcement. We still have sexual assaults at contingency bases.
Even the model applied to New York City. Yes it probably lowers crime on paper especially in specific areas where there is more police concentration. But does it really lower crime overall, or is it that people are less likely to get caught committing more major crimes because the police are busy attending to lesser offenses.
Take a drug dealer or a kingpin. He might find the fact that the police spend time on smaller crimes that he can use this to his advantage by doing a drug deal when he knows the cops busy and the eyes will be off of them. I'm some cases in certain cities the drug dealers have people commit misdemeanors on purpose to create a distraction. If all the cops are dealing with small crimes then he just goes somewhere where the police are not present to do his drug push.
People are commit large crimes regardless. I think the best way is to have more vigilance in policing. Obviously crime is still crime and a cop sees it he needs to act but to spend resources and energy on the minutiae you may miss when something more egregious is going on. The presence of cops is more important than the arrests. If someone is going yo burglarize a house they are less likely to do it in a neighborhood where they see cops patrolling all night. They will most take the path to least resistance and find get area that is not so patrolled. Most people tend to make risk assessment as to what they think they can get away with. And I think this is true even in the military.
I am not sure if the above thesis will work since it has Ben tried in the AOR.
Even the model applied to New York City. Yes it probably lowers crime on paper especially in specific areas where there is more police concentration. But does it really lower crime overall, or is it that people are less likely to get caught committing more major crimes because the police are busy attending to lesser offenses.
Take a drug dealer or a kingpin. He might find the fact that the police spend time on smaller crimes that he can use this to his advantage by doing a drug deal when he knows the cops busy and the eyes will be off of them. I'm some cases in certain cities the drug dealers have people commit misdemeanors on purpose to create a distraction. If all the cops are dealing with small crimes then he just goes somewhere where the police are not present to do his drug push.
People are commit large crimes regardless. I think the best way is to have more vigilance in policing. Obviously crime is still crime and a cop sees it he needs to act but to spend resources and energy on the minutiae you may miss when something more egregious is going on. The presence of cops is more important than the arrests. If someone is going yo burglarize a house they are less likely to do it in a neighborhood where they see cops patrolling all night. They will most take the path to least resistance and find get area that is not so patrolled. Most people tend to make risk assessment as to what they think they can get away with. And I think this is true even in the military.
I am not sure if the above thesis will work since it has Ben tried in the AOR.
(4)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
This is exactly the kind of responses I am looking for. Enough MEMEs already! Let's get back to intelligent conversation.
(2)
(0)
PO2 Skip Kirkwood
Part of the idea of the "broken windows" theory applied in the police world is that if the enforcement of the small standards improves the quality of life and the "ownership" of the majority, then the majority will help the police with preventing other crimes.
Same thing in the military. If seniors "fix stuff" that needs attention, then NCOs and JOs will take better care of stuff that needs THEIR attention. If the seniors send the message that minor violations are ok, then NCOs and JOs will also ignore them.
Same thing in the military. If seniors "fix stuff" that needs attention, then NCOs and JOs will take better care of stuff that needs THEIR attention. If the seniors send the message that minor violations are ok, then NCOs and JOs will also ignore them.
(3)
(0)
SPC David Shaffer
Sir, There should be harsher penalties for any sexual misconduct in the military. I understand what you are saying about big crime. I don't think anything is really going to stop the really big players.
(0)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
SPC David Shaffer I think you hit the on the head. It's the penalty that mat matters. Min both civil crime and military sexual assault issues. In both cases police departments in many do diligently enforce laws, but many times the penalty is weak. My state for example even committing violent felonies the criminal gets a few years in prison and lye go go early. The result is they never change their behavior because it's worth the risk. In the military we already enforce the rules fairly aggressively. But when a sexual assault occurs it depends on whether or not there will be a big penalty. You can read the army/airforce what ever service criminal court of appeals and you generally find only a large penalty in a very high profile egregious case. In cases you see a few years in jail and a dishonorable discharge.
It is the penalty and the maintaining of a consistent standard of justice that will be part of the deterrent.
It is the penalty and the maintaining of a consistent standard of justice that will be part of the deterrent.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
SSG Robert Burns Excellent topic and I enjoyed reading the responses. As others have said the theory is indeed awesome and does work. I think CW5 (Join to see) Scott Montgomery nailed it with the military version of the broken windows policing effort is discipline and I agree. There are many little things that I see today that I may not have seen 20 years ago in how juniors talk to seniors I mean still stand a modified version of attention when speaking with officers that I come into contact on daily basis and some of them I have known for a dozen years or so. However, today I see on limited occasions enlisted talking with officers and not even near attention or parade rest. Another thing I see is hands in pockets these little disciplines may be enforced by some but not all.
MAJ (Join to see) comments under chief's post were spot on as well. However, I also see Lt Col (Join to see) point that even with enforcement it still happens but to rebut that I say it happens in community policing as well.
MAJ (Join to see) comments under chief's post were spot on as well. However, I also see Lt Col (Join to see) point that even with enforcement it still happens but to rebut that I say it happens in community policing as well.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google