Blog 5: The Police and the Community

            Throughout history low-income community members have been distrustful of police and their ability to reduce crime. This tension between community members and police is fueled by police misconduct or incidents where police actions are called into question. For example, the 2009 New Year’s Day shooting of an unarmed Oscar Grant by BART police officer Johannes Mehserle sparked an up roar within the low-income communities of Oakland and increased the community’s fear and distrust of police because they saw the incident as unjustified (Tucker, Zito, & Knight, 2009). According to Rahtz author of Citizen Police Academy (2005), when police take extreme or questionable actions the public becomes very skeptical and quickly conclude that the incident was the result of police brutality and incompetence because they do not have a concrete understanding of the incident or the requirements of police work (p. 48).

 To better connect with the community and build relationships with community members many police departments practice community policing. According to Friend and Martinez (2010), community policing is a style of policing which focuses on crime prevention, building community relationships, and creating trust between the police and community members. This is accomplished by assigning police officers to specific communities where they are required to work closely with the community members in an effort to determine what problems are facing the neighborhood (Friend & Martinez, 2010). Then these officers must develop a plan to solve these problems (Friend & Martinez, 2010). Community policing has been proven to be very effective at reducing crime and improving the relationships between police and low-income community members. This is why according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, over 65 percent of police departments with more than 100 officers reported having officers assigned to community policing (as cited in Harris, 2009). However, as the current economic crisis grows and government budgets continue to be reduced many law enforcement agencies are forced to stop practicing community policing.

Law enforcement agencies throughout the country currently have to make tough decisions on what services can be stopped and how many police officers can be laid-off in an effort to keep spending within their lean budgets. A study conducted by the United States Department of Justice found that budget cuts have resulted in fewer officers patrolling the streets which prevent officers from practicing community policing because much of their time is spent handling calls for service (Diamond, 2009).  The reduced number of police officers has married officers to the radio. This prevents officers from developing any sort of relationship with community members because they must process the call as fast as possible since there is a constant backlog of calls (Diamond, 2009). A  Lieutenant in the Contra Costa County Sheriff Department stated in a personal interview, that budget cuts have virtually eliminated the opportunity for community policing because street patrols have been reduced to only three two man cars for the entire county during slow nights. The department has been forced to lay-off or reassign officers who once filled resident deputy positions. These positions were established to provide low-income communities with a deputy who works closely with the community and has intimate knowledge of the problems facing the community. This allowed community members to build relationships with the officers and feel more comfortable reporting incidents which resulted in a reduced crime rate (personal interview, 2010).

The elimination of these community policing officers or resident deputies is not as cost effective as it may appear. This is because patrol officers only deal with calls for service and do not attempt to solve the root cause of the crimes. Officers assigned to community policing are required to be problem solvers and search out the root cause of the problem while developing a plan to remedy the problem (Harris, 2009). This results in reduced calls for service, crime, and an overall reduction in cost associated with prosecutions (Harris, 2009). In addition, these officers transform the image of the department in the minds of community members through their close interaction which builds trust and establishes a sense of safety among the involved community members (Friend & Martinez, 2010). According to Carroll the Chief of Police for the West Goshen Township Police Department in Pennsylvania (2010), the consequences of eliminating community police officers is an overall increase in crime and less secure communities. Community members do not feel as comfortable reporting a crime when they know street patrol officers will handle the case in the most time effective manner (Carroll, 2010).

Due to the value, importance, and success of community policing practices local governments and the federal government have made a collective effort to fund the programs. Some local police departments have developed creative ways to fund community policing for example in Pomona, California, the city council allowed the police department to use over $111,000 in funds from its overtime account to pay the salaries of two community policing officers (Harris, 2010). On the federal level the passage of the Recovery Act provided over $1 billion to the United States Department of Justice which must use the money to fund community policing programs on the local law enforcement level (Friend & Martinez, 2010). The Recovery Act funds are intended to be used to hire new officers and prevent lay-offs due to budget cuts (Friend & Martinez, 2010). Overall, community policing is a very effective tool for police departments because it helps to improve community relations which leads to more confidence in the police and reduction of crime within low-income communities.

References

Carroll, M. (2010). Police Chiefs Lead in Challenging Times. The Police Chief, 77(1), 6. Retrieved November 29, 2010, from ProQuest Database. (1967874611).

Diamond, D. (2009). Community Policing: Looking to Tomorrow. U.S. Department of Justice: Department of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved November 28, 2010.

Friend, Z. & Martinez, R. (2010). Preserving Community-Oriented Policing in a Recession. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 79(11), 10. Retrieved December 1, 2010 from ProQuest Database. (2187090401).

Harris, P. (2009). What’s a Crime Prevention Officer Worth?. Sheriff 61(6), 18. Retrieved November 23, 2010 from ProQuest Database. (1871741921).

Rahtz, H. (2005). Citizens Police Academy. Law and Order, 53(4), 47-51. Retrieved November 28, 2010, from ProQuest (835664071).

Tucker, J., Zito, K., & Knight, H. (2009, January 2). Deadly BART Brawl. SF Gate. Retrieved November 28, 2010, from  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/01/BAB9152I2Q.DTL

Blog 4: Foreclosure and Crime

           

          Low-income communities have always been plagued by neighborhood deterioration in the form of rundown or abandoned buildings, graffiti, and broken windows. This deterioration is said to be a major factor leading to increased crime within low-income communities. According to the Broken Windows Theory created by Wilson and Kelling (1982), when neighborhoods have physical signs of deterioration community members are less likely to make improvements to the neighborhood resulting in increased crime because of the appearance of the neighborhood (as citied in Tuthill, 2008). This relationship between higher crime rates and neighborhood deterioration has become more evident with the current economic crisis and the massive spike in residential foreclosures. At the peak of the crisis in 2007, one in every 196 homes in America was foreclosed (Whitworth, 2008). The numbers of foreclosures were much higher in low-income neighborhoods because residents within these communities obtained more subprime loans due to their lack of credit, low-income, and job status (Tuthill, 2008).

Foreclosures left low-income streets lined with houses where the lawns are overgrown, trash is left piled, and they are vacant. This attracts all sorts of criminal behavior. Vacant properties are very attractive to drug dealers and users, prostitutes, and burglars because they serve as the perfect place to commit illegal acts while providing shelter.  In Modesto, California, police state that drug dealers have taken over many vacant homes and are using the yards to grow marijuana (Mummolo & Brubaker, 2008).  Atlanta police state that drug users, prostitutes, and squatters have taken over a vast majority of the foreclosed homes inside low-income communities (Mummolo & Brubaker, 2008).  According to Immergluck and Smith, for every one percent raise in the foreclosure rate the crime rate within Chicago rose 2.3 percent (as cited in Dalton, Gradeck, &Mercaldo, 2008). In a more alarming study researchers in Austin, Texas, claim that 83 percent of abandoned and foreclosed properties in Austin’s low-income neighborhoods show signs of illegal activities (Dalton, Gradeck, &Mercaldo, 2008). These studies show that there is a strong correlation between vacant properties and criminal activity.

When foreclosed and vacant properties are used for criminal activity they are often severely damaged and fall into a state of disrepair. Squatters will accidently set fire to the homes because they use candles and fires to light and heat the houses since there is no electricity. These fires often get out of control and end up burning the entire house down or causing massive structural damage (Dalton, Gradeck, &Mercaldo, 2008). Burglars will come into foreclosed properties and rip the walls apart in order to steal the copper water lines and electrical cables. This causes the values of the properties to be drastically reduced since they need so much repair. The decreased property value of foreclosed houses also causes the values of non-foreclosures to drop since there are so many houses for sale within the neighborhood and they have a negative impact on the appearance of the neighborhood. According to a study conducted by Temple University an abandoned house reduces the property values of adjacent homes by an average of $6,720 (as cited in Dalton, Gradeck, &Mercaldo, 2008).

In order to reduce the crime rates local governments need to develop plans that are tailored specifically to the neighborhood. Local governments need to work at improving the local economy by attracting businesses which will create jobs within the community (Tuthill, 2008). This will provide community members with an income that will aid them in paying their mortgage and reducing the potential for foreclosures. By improving the economy, community members will have more money to make improvements to their residents. Additionally, local governments will be able to collect more tax money that could be used to improve the community’s infrastructure (Tuthill, 2008). There is also evidence that shows the use of geographic information system is helpful. These systems  compile data on foreclosures and crimes within a certain neighborhood, in order to aid in the creation of public policy and law enforcement efforts to reduce the crime rates. Many of these systems use maps to show where crimes occur and where foreclosed and abandoned homes are located, which allows law enforcement to increase patrols where needed (Dalton, Gradeck, & Mercaldo, 2008). Overall, the increased number of foreclosed homes in low-income communities has resulted in higher crime rates because the properties are not maintained. Community members, local governments, and the banks who own these properties all need to work together to improve the community environment in an effort to reduce crime.

           

References

Dalton, E., Gradeck, R., & Mercaldo, A. (2008). Using Maps of Home Foreclosures to Understand National and Local Problems. National Institute of Justice: Geography and Public Safety, 1(3). Retrieved November 20, 2010 from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/topics/GPSNewsletter.pdf

Munnolo, J. & Brubaker, B. (2008). As Foreclosed Homes Empty, Crime Arrives. The Washington Post. Retrieved November 10, 2010 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/26/AR2008042601288.html

Tuthill, L. (2008). Breaking New Windows – Examining the Subprime Mortgage Crisis Using the Broken Windows Theory. National Institute of Justice: Geography and Public Safety, 1(3). Retrieved November 20, 2010 from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/topics/GPSNewsletter.pdf

Whitworth, A. (2008). High Rates of Foreclosures Lead to Crime Increases Nationwide. National Institute of Justice: Geography and Public Safety, 1(3). Retrieved November 20, 2010 from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/topics/GPSNewsletter.pdf

Blog Post 3: The Code of Silence

     Every community throughout America is affected by some level of crime however low-income communities experience significantly more crime that goes unreported to police then more affluent communities. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey, in 2009 only about 49% of violent crimes and about 40% of non-violent crimes were reported to police (BJS, 2010). In low-income communities this lack of crime reporting is due to a strong cultural “code of silence,” that considers reporting a crime or aiding police culturally wrong. Community residents also have a strong fear of being victimized if they report a crime. According to Assistant U.S. Attorney Ben Friedman (2009), in almost every case it is a challenge to get witnesses to cooperate and overcoming witnesses’ fears  are the most difficult part of prosecuting a case and reducing crime (Smith, 2008).

     In low-income communities the “code of silence,” is deeply ingrained in the socialization process. Children are often taught to never cooperate with the police at a very young age by peers, criminals, and family members (Smith, 2008). From my own personal experience of growing up in the low-income community of Richmond, California I remember being constantly reminded by older peers and my older brothers that it was wrong to “snitch,” or report someone to the authorities and just mind your own business. According to Volkan Tapalli a Georgia State University criminal justice professor, within low-income communities “the ethics are that you’re supposed to mind your own business and not get into the affairs of others (Cook, 2010).” This strong ethical belief is reinforced within the community by fear and intimidation.

     Many community members remain loyal to the code of silence because they fear becoming a victim. In the low-income communities of Philadelphia 13 witnesses have been killed over the last decade because of their willingness to  testify (Phillips, McCoy, & Purcell, 2009). In one case a 16 year old witness was shot in the head five times while waiting for the bus just days before he was scheduled to testify in an arson case (Phillips et al., 2009). Acts like this send a clear message to community members that breaking the “code of silence,” will result in injury or death. Criminal justice officials in Philadelphia say that frightened witnesses have become a common theme in every case and it is normal for witnesses to recant their statements or not appear in court because of this fear and intimidation making it extremely hard to successfully prosecute a case (Phillips et al., 2009). The prevalence of this witness intimidation is evident in the fact that between 2006 and 2008 over 1,000 people have been arrested in Philadelphia for witness intimidation (Phillips et al., 2009). This is a common trend throughout low-income communities across the United States however, many communities are attempting to reduce this intimidation and protect witnesses.

     A growing trend in many communities is the adoption of state run witness protection programs and increase penalties for witness intimidation in the hope of breaking down the “code of silence.” For example, Maryland’s legislature made witness intimidation a felony that carries a possible sentence of 20 years in prison and Washington D.C. has created a witness protection program which now provides varying levels of protection to 400-500 witnesses per year (Smith, 2008). However, programs like these are still in their beginning stages and it is unclear how they will affect the deeply rooted “code of silence,” and sense of fear associated with reporting a witnessed crime.  In order to reduce the crime within low-income communities the “code of silence,” needs to be broken and the culture within these communities need to encourage reporting crimes in order to make their neighborhood a better place.

References

Bureau of Justice Statistics (2010). National Crime Victimization Survey: Criminal Victimization 2009. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv09.pdf

Cook, R. (2010). ‘Witnesses’ Won’t Admit to Seeing Fatal Shooting. The Atlanta Journal – Constitution. Retrieved October 6, 2010, from ProQuest database (2133644641).

Phillips, N., McCoy, C., & Purcell, D. (2009). Witnesses Fear Reprisals, and Cases Crumble: Intimidation on the Streets is Changing the Way Trials are Run. “People are Frightened to Death,” the D.A. Says. McClatchy – Tribune Business News. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from ProQuest database (1920681941).

Smith, B. (2008). Keeping a ‘Snitch’ from Being Scratched. ABA Journal, 94(12),20. Retrieved October 6, 2010, from ProQuest database (1608809021).

Blog Post 2: Education in Low-Income Communities

Blog Post 2: Education in Low-Income Communities

One of the largest problems contributing to crime within low-income communities is the lack of quality education. The Alliance for Excellent Education estimated that the graduating class of 2008 had 600,000 students’ dropout (AEE, 2010). A majority of these dropouts came from one of the 16,122 schools considered to be high-poverty in 2008 based on a majority of the student body qualifying for discounted lunch programs (IES, 2010).  There are a number of personal reasons that cause students to dropout such as family responsibilities and peer pressure. However Catherine Cornbleth, a professor specializing in education states, low-income schools are a major contributor to this problem because they lack needed educational resources and have lower expectations for students (Dougherty, 2010). 

 The most important educational resource that low-income schools lack is quality and experienced teachers. School administrators state that teachers are the second most important factor in determining how successful students are, accounting for 25 percent of a student’s achievement (AEE, 2010). Exposing a student to effective teaching for three consecutive years increases the student’s academic performance by at least 50 percent (AEE, 2010). However, this is unlikely to occur in low-income communities where students only have a 15 percent chance of having an effective and motivating teacher for one year (AEE, 2010).

A reason for the lack of quality educators in low-income communities is that more experienced teachers choose to work at nicer suburban schools forcing new teachers to work in low-income schools. According to Martin Haberman, developer of the National Teacher Corps, many new teachers are shocked by the environment these students live in and are not prepared to handle the challenges associated with teaching low-income children which cause the teachers to believe these children are not teachable (Downey, 2010). This leads to high teacher turnover rates within low-income school and does not provide a stable learning environment for students. The turnover rate for teachers in low-income schools in 2004 was 21percent, which is much higher than the national average of 14 percent (IES, 2010).

To reduce this high turnover rate in low-income school districts need to place more emphasis on screening potential teachers to determine if they will be able to handle the challenges associated with teaching impoverished youth. According to Haberman, the most important tool to determine if a teacher will be effective is “an interview process that drills deep into whether teacher candidates believe that students can learn despite lives marred by poverty, violence, gangs, drugs, or fractured families (Downey, 2010).” There is also an importance on recruiting new teachers that have grew up in similar communities because they understand the difficulties the children face and they are able to build stronger relationships with the children (Downey, 2010).

Another problem that results in high dropout rates within low-income schools is  a poor learning environment. Many low-income schools are in a state of disrepair with broken windows, broken desks, and outdated teaching materials. Students also have to worry about crime while in school because over 38 percent of low-income schools reported violent incidences such as a rape, physical attack, or robbery in 2008 (IES, 2010). This unwelcoming environment  does not provide any incentives for students to stay in school and cannot contend with the temptations of the streets and a life of crime and drugs, which  tempt kids with the illusion of money and prosperity.

            Improving the quality of education within low-income communities and reducing the dropout rates by hiring quality teachers and improving the learning environment is critical in reducing the high crime problems in these communities. Jeremiah Byrd, a high school dropout states, “A person who drops out of school locks themselves out of a lot of opportunities (Miller, 2010).” This lack of opportunities for dropouts is a precursor to a life of crime because dropouts feel crime is the only way to survive (Miller, 2010). According to President Obama, “Not long ago you could drop out of high school and reasonably expect to find a blue-collar job that would pay the bills and help support your family.  That's not the case anymore (Miller, S., 2010).”

References

Alliance for Excellent Education (2010). Policy Brief: Call for Action: Transforming Teaching and Learning to Prepare High School Students for College and Careers. Retrieved September 24, 2010, from http://www.all4ed.org/files/TransformingTeachingAndLearning.pdf

Dougherty, N. (2010). Poverty Key in Debate on Schools. Rochester Business Journal,26(2), 1. Retrieved September 27, 2010, from ProQuest database (2019499061).

Downey, M. (2010). Are They Unteachable?. The Atlanta Journal – Constitution. Retrieved September 27, 2010, from ProQuest database (1747155771).

Miller, L. (2010). Quitting School has Consequences on Crime. Philadelphia Tribune,126(33), 1A. September 22, 2010, from ProQuest database (2006638701).

Miller, S. (2010). Obama Tackles Dropout Rates, Targets ‘Chronically Troubled’ Schools. ABC News. Retrieved September 24, 2010, from http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/03/obama-tackles-high-dropout-rates-targets-chronically-troubled-schools-.html

National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Special Analysis 2010 High-Poverty Public Schools. Retrieved September 24, 2010, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2010/analysis/section3a.asp

Low-income Communities and Crime

     The goal of this blog is to explore the issues that link low-income communities with abnormally high crime rates. This has always been a persistent problem in America; however, with the worse economic times since the great depression and soaring unemployment rates more people are being forced into low-income communities with no possibility of obtaining upward mobility. According to Yen and Sidoti (2010), in the article, US Poverty on Track to Post Record Gain in 2009, the projected poverty rate for 2009 are expected to jump from 13.2 percent to 15 percent. This means that more than 45 million Americans will be below the poverty rate of $22,025 for a family of four (Yen & Sidoti, 2010). This increased poverty rate places more emphasis on reducing the level of crime in low-income communities allowing families to have a better quality of life and more upward mobility.

     As more Americans fall below the poverty rate and low-income communities grow, the growing issue of crime needs to be addressed. Detroit Michigan has become one of America’s most dangerous cities with over 306 murders, 6,115 robberies, and 10,677 assaults per 100,000 citizens in 2008 (citydata.com, 2010). The city has an average household income of $28,730 which is just over the poverty rate and an unemployment rate of 13.8 percent (citydata.com, 2010). This average is probably not accurate because a large majority of the city’s population has an income far less than the poverty rate.

     To fix these problems, many different areas of the community need to be addressed. Addressing problems in education is critical to improving low-income communities and reducing crime. According to President Obama, “not long ago you could drop out of high school and reasonably expect to find a blue-collar job that would pay the bills and help support your family.  That's just not the case anymore (Miller, 2010).” For many of these dropouts crime is the only way to survive. Developing more community involvement, such as improving neighborhood watch programs and involving community members with the local government decision making process also needs to be improved. Additionally the quality and type of police services need to be improved in low-income communities.  Police need to be given more resources in order to build stronger connections with the people they serve. In crime ridden Oakland California, 80 police officers over ten percent of the city’s police force were laid off (Collins, 2010). There is no way the police can provide any sort of community policing services with cuts like that.  These and many other issues which are important to improving the crime problems in low-income communities will be explored in-depth with future posts.

References

Yen, H. & Sidoti, L. (2010, September 11). US Poverty on Track to Post Record Gain in 2009. Associated Press. Retrieved September 12, 2010, from http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100911/ap_on_bi_ge/us_poverty_in_america

Detroit Michigan (2010). Review September 12, 2010, from http://www.city-data.com/city/Detroit-Michigan.html

Miller, S. (2010, March 1). Obama Tackles High Dropout Rates Targets ‘Chronically Troubled’ Schools. ABC News. Retrieved September 14, 2010, from http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/03/obama-tackles-high-dropout-rates-targets-chronically-troubled-schools-.html

Collins, T. (2010, July 13). Oakland Cuts Police Force 10%. Daily Breeze. Retrieved September 14, 2010, from http://www.dailybreeze.com/latestnews/ci_15511236