Posted on Mar 5, 2015
Broken Windows Theory; Should it be applied to the Military? Is it? Can it reduce things like SHARP violations?
15.5K
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 11 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)
3
3
0
Absolutely! Â They're called standards, customs, and courtesies, and they exist for many reasons; not the least of which is to continue to reinforce discipline within our ranks.
(3)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I think you are seeing from another perspective that does make it relative. The broken windows here are not tangible. They are the pillars of the our standards and customs. It is the broken windows in the building that houses the Army Values and the warriors Creed. If we could repair how soldiers view these then we would have a better hand on this situation.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I highly disagree with this type of approach.
It is a very slippery slope and reminds me of the thought police in 1984, or Minority Report.
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a manual.
It is a very slippery slope and reminds me of the thought police in 1984, or Minority Report.
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a manual.
(2)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
Interesting response. I'm am glad to see the contrasting opinions in this thread and individuals qualifying their opinions.
(2)
(0)
I think the Broken window policing is great. It is a small portion of Community Policing that came popular in the 90's. It works great. I have seen it in action. But I don't think is would really work here. The basics of it is that you take away places that criminals may gather. If there is little interest in an area then people won't bother them there. It takes away any chance of criminals to find any safe haven. In addition police need to have a greater presence in the community. This came after the findings of the Kansas City preventive patrol experiment. The KCPP experiment found that mere presence or increased patrols had little to no impact. The interaction of the police in the community has the biggest impact of crime. This is what happened when they tried to cite him for a small charge.
With that being said it wouldn't work in the military. The only way it would work would be if you have sentries stand at post were the potential activity would take place. In addition you don't find many areas left in disrepair in the military. The issue we have with SHARP is that it comes from within. We have to police ourselves. I think the SHARP program does a good job in which the way it is currently going. I think they have changed it for the better.
With that being said it wouldn't work in the military. The only way it would work would be if you have sentries stand at post were the potential activity would take place. In addition you don't find many areas left in disrepair in the military. The issue we have with SHARP is that it comes from within. We have to police ourselves. I think the SHARP program does a good job in which the way it is currently going. I think they have changed it for the better.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I think the issue goes to the greater society from which we draw our members and a potential weakening of "the consent of the Goverened".
The societal turning away from previously defined social mores has opened up more questioning of authority and its strictures.
In this questioning many small acts of internal defiance now drive more frequent acts of external defiance and without those prior mores in place there's a weakened response in calling things wrong.
Look at the many scandals in Govt, look at their relative ethical seriousness in comparison to the relatively small matter that brought down the Nixon Administration.
Society needs to revisit the idea that anti-societal elements might need to cease to be encouraged and accepted and popularized thru popular culture.
As to Broken Windows theory, it needs to be a systemic effort if it's going to be applied. This NCO applying it and that NCO not doing so, only serves to weaken further the discipline one presumes we want to shore up.
Those are my thoughts on the question.
The societal turning away from previously defined social mores has opened up more questioning of authority and its strictures.
In this questioning many small acts of internal defiance now drive more frequent acts of external defiance and without those prior mores in place there's a weakened response in calling things wrong.
Look at the many scandals in Govt, look at their relative ethical seriousness in comparison to the relatively small matter that brought down the Nixon Administration.
Society needs to revisit the idea that anti-societal elements might need to cease to be encouraged and accepted and popularized thru popular culture.
As to Broken Windows theory, it needs to be a systemic effort if it's going to be applied. This NCO applying it and that NCO not doing so, only serves to weaken further the discipline one presumes we want to shore up.
Those are my thoughts on the question.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I think the broken window policy is good in the general public because it shows people the police are watching. In the military everyone is (or should be) policing each other. Also, we all know the military teaches respect, responsibility, and how much it will suck if you stray from the military rules and code.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I was a cop for a bit after I separated, "broken windows" can work, but it's the sort of thing where you must have everybody on board. It can be intensive to apply it at first. Especially if you are trying to adapt it as a management style like TQM or apply it to an issue like Sharp.
On the crime side, something similar to a threat and vulnerability assessment could be done identifying, modifying or eliminating those locations where possible.
Since I'm not in anymore I can't attest to the effectiveness of the current training program, but if it's anything like it was during my time, I imagine it's a quarterly mandatory class conducted by the company or battalion rep. Add to that at the squad/platoon level, a follow up to reinforce at a more intimate level. It doesn't have to be a long drawn out process just five minutes here and there, like an on the spot correction, once a week, once a month, from various members of the chain art different times in different ways. Work it into monthly counseling as an area of focus, stop by the DEFAC for lunch or the platoon room, chat for a few minutes with a few troops, roll by the barracks on some pretext other than health and welfare and drop a few hints about the topic. Let the message spread itself that way. The "Windows" in this are the soldiers, if they aren't broken, then you just performed maintenance and strengthened that window, hopefully allowing it to buttress other, weaker panes you haven't been able to reach.
No organisation the size of the military will ever eliminate any crime completely, but, just like my pre 9/11 HMMWV that somehow broke between weekly pmcs sessions, I was able to limit what broke to things I couldn't control.
On the crime side, something similar to a threat and vulnerability assessment could be done identifying, modifying or eliminating those locations where possible.
Since I'm not in anymore I can't attest to the effectiveness of the current training program, but if it's anything like it was during my time, I imagine it's a quarterly mandatory class conducted by the company or battalion rep. Add to that at the squad/platoon level, a follow up to reinforce at a more intimate level. It doesn't have to be a long drawn out process just five minutes here and there, like an on the spot correction, once a week, once a month, from various members of the chain art different times in different ways. Work it into monthly counseling as an area of focus, stop by the DEFAC for lunch or the platoon room, chat for a few minutes with a few troops, roll by the barracks on some pretext other than health and welfare and drop a few hints about the topic. Let the message spread itself that way. The "Windows" in this are the soldiers, if they aren't broken, then you just performed maintenance and strengthened that window, hopefully allowing it to buttress other, weaker panes you haven't been able to reach.
No organisation the size of the military will ever eliminate any crime completely, but, just like my pre 9/11 HMMWV that somehow broke between weekly pmcs sessions, I was able to limit what broke to things I couldn't control.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google