Partners to Reduce Gun Violence

Partners to Reduce Gun Violence

Operation Ceasefire- Boston set the example of this program.  This was created to combat an increasing amount of violence related to guns.  Much of this violence was gang related.  The city collaborated with prosecutors and others to combat this issue.  The police and prosecutors set up meetings with known gang members.  The gang members were apprised of the law and threatened with prosecution if the city did not see a decline in gang related gun violence.  Gang members were forced to sign a pact that the violence would cease and they would “forswear the possession of guns and ammunition (Worrall, J, 2008).”  According to statistics this operation was a success.



Federal State Partnerships

Project Exile -As a result of enhanced gun-related homicide in Richmond, VA in 1994 a team coordinated effort was put in place by contributions from individuals to create a three-pronged approach to gun violence. The first prong consisted on a federal approach to gun violence.  The federal laws allowed for tougher penalties and sentences for those convicted of gun related crimes.  The second prong consisted of a coordinated effort from local, state and federal law enforcement and prosecutors to combat the homicide rates.  The third prong consisted out involving the community and promoting a media campaign to get the message out to criminals that the gun violence was not going to be tolerated.  According to statistical data the homicide rates dropped 57% so the program was a success.  The rates of conviction also rose 75%.  The police were also able to seize and take approximately 1000 guns off the street.

Texas Exile- Texas followed suit and put into place Virginia’s Project Exile Model during the year 2000.The high levels of re-offenders and incidences of violent crime prompted Texas to initiate this strategy.  The Texas Exile strategy consisted of creating a collaboration between” the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office, district and county attorneys, the local U.S. Attorney’s office, local and state law enforcement agencies and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms(Worrall, J.L., 2008).” They incorporated community outreach and funded a public awareness program.  The campaign had the slogan of “Gun Crime Means Hard Time” which was promoted through advertisements and local media attention. It had a fairly successful rate of lowering crime.  There were 1500 indictments, 1000 convictions, 2000 guns taken off the streets, tougher sentences and more federal prosecutions.



Washington’s Firearm Crime Enforcement Coalition-Program implemented in 1999 to combat the increase in juvenile firearms crimes and an increase in firearms prosecutions seen in Seattle, Washington.  Face operated in collaboration with the” King County Sheriff’s Office, King County Prosecutor’s Office, Washington State Crime Lab, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the Washington Fish and Game and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (Worrall, J. L., 2008).”   The programs two key elements were to have a coordinated prosecution of gun violence and increased supervision and monitoring of repeat offenders.  The goals they had were to speed the processing of firearms cases by law enforcement and prosecutors, to increase effectiveness of criminal prosecutions, to identify armed career criminal cases for federal prosecution, to increase cooperation and the exchange of information between agencies and to improve the quality of police reports and investigations.  There is no concrete evidence that this program has worked but due to the collaborative efforts between various agencies it is hard to say that is has had no effect.



Project Safe Neighborhoods -Designed to promote interagency coordination to find new ways to deal with gun violence.  It uses a five pronged approach to gun violence.  Partnerships (multiagency collaborations), strategic planning (taking a proactive approach by crime mapping, identifying hotspots, tracing and enacting enforcement techniques), training (coordinating training and cross training), outreach (campaigning the message and using various sources to promote the stance) and accountability (measuring the success based upon outcome) along with their elements were used to reduce gun violence.  This was done by networking existing agencies and programs and providing them with additional tools necessary to be successful.

Cross-Designation -permits a local prosecutor to act as an uncompensated U.S Attorney.  This program allows local prosecutors the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the much more punitive federal gun laws.  It is a local-federal approach to reduce gun violence.

Victim Assistance-This is a way for prosecutors to have the victims be involved in the case.  The thinking behind this is that a ‘satisfied victim is a person who is likely to be cooperative in the future and likely to assist authorities in responding to crime (Worrall, J. L., 2008).”  This program allows for victims services.  It also allows for victims to play an integral part of the sentencing phase of a case by being allowed to provide a victim impact statement.  They can also be involved in the parole process of an offender.

Community Prosecution-this is a program similar to community policing.  The goal is to have a working relationship with the individuals and communities in which they serve.  They hope to collaborate and identify immediate and specific crime problems.  It is connected to the broken windows idea that low level offenses should be targeted to discourage more serious crimes.

My top three strategic approaches would be the ones with proven track records of success that deal with the most serious of crimes and offenders.  I would want to choose them based upon success rates of prosecution, lowered crime statistics and positive outcome for the communities they were enacted in.  As a result of these main criteria I would select to enact the Texas Exile Program, Project Exile and Operation Ceasefire initiatives.

RESOURCES

Worrall, John L. Crime Control in America: What Works? Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon, 2008. Print.

poor area crime

Cordner's four principle dimensions of community policing are:

The philosophical dimension-includes the ideas and beliefs surrounding the new paradigm of policing which include citizen input, enhanced and broadened police function and personal service.

The tactical dimension-translates ideas, philosophies and strategies into concrete programs, practices and behaviors.  Incorporates improving and forming strong relationships with community members, improved relationships and problem solving.  This idea plays off the philosophical and strategic dimensions in that it creates an operational plan.

The strategic dimension-reoriented operations such as foot patrols, geographical permanency which would allow the same officers to become known throughout an assigned area by gaining familiarity with the residents

Organizational dimension-this is vital to community policing.  It emphasizes a sound structure for police agencies, management and information services to accommodate community policing strategies through changes such as decentralization, program planning and strategic planning.

The assumption that community justice agencies cannot accomplish crime control lends to the fact that community participation is vital to creating safe neighborhoods.  Problem orientated policing may have been effective tool in the case of Mark.  The police may have been able to set up community forums to discuss the concerns of those that live in the area.  By doing this they may have been able to institute a buy back gun program that may have led to these young gang members selling their guns to the police, no questions asked in times of financial crisis.  They may have also learned that due to a lack of jobs in the area that maybe there needs to be a city initiative with the mayor to try and bring back jobs or find new investors that would come to the area to revitalize it and create new positive working opportunities for those lacking employment.  By having community policing the officers would be able to get to know those who reside in a neighborhood and form bonds with them that could aid in the help of investigative work.  They would be able to have the citizens reach out and discuss with them the problems in the area and people who could pose a threat to public safety.  People would also feel less threatened by police and be able to offer information about crimes.  I would place foot-patrol during certain hour’s through-out the community so that people can see and talk to the police about things that did not have to necessarily do with emergencies.  The deployment of officers that places them in situations where they can bond with average citizens makes the police-community relationship better.  By having police and community member’s work together they can stamp out crime and try to revitalize the neighborhood.  Removing known prostitutes and drug dealers can help clean up the streets and promote and area that would be good for business for potential investors.  The police departments would have to change their structures.  They would have to create a mission statement that shows they are going to follow through with the new neighborhood policing strategies that will benefit the community.  This can provide people with a hope that their neighborhoods are going to change and become safer.  The public’s attitudes about police and vice versa can change promoting good working relationships between those authority figures and the public.   They can create a police substation in the neighborhood with a victim contact program where Marks girlfriend could have went if she felt threatened by him having a gun in the house.  A neighborhood watch would be enacted to make sure that when there are not police eyes and ears around, even still crimes and offenders can be located and reported.  Citizen contact Patrol would be initiated and in the case of Mark the police may have been able to find out information that he carried a weapon.  Police officers in Schools would be enacted to make sure that they have an eye and ear to the ground when it comes to youthful offenders.  Their presence could potentially help improve police, citizen relationships and may even help keep students on track with attending school and furthering their education by being good role models.

Residency and Collegiate Requirements

Having a police residency requirement for a city can prove beneficial on many fronts.  First they will be adding to the local tax base.  They will be living and shopping in the area which will have financial benefits for the city.  The officers will have a better idea of what the community needs are and be more empathic to those needs.  Having an officer live in a particular area may serve as a deterrent to crime in that location provided through word of mouth that people are aware who their neighbors are. 

Some of the cons of allowing officers to live outside the city are that the city would lose a vital tax base.  The property home values may decrease.  Commuting distances may have a negative impact on police personnel.  Another con would be bypassing a qualified candidate for hire who could potentially be an asset to the city just because they live outside city limits.

Some Police Officers feel that by living within the city they are diminishing their quality of life outside of the job.  They feel that if they are required to live within city limits they may expose their families to harm.   Their children may be forced to attend a school that they feel is not on par with their educational standards.



I feel that officers should be required to live where they work.   They are policing a community and should be familiar with the area, concerns and people of that community.  They should also be spending their money where they make it.  They are public servants so it would make sense that they work and live in the area that they serve.  If for any reason there was a major emergency within the city and they were called in they should be living in an area that would allow for a quick response time.



Officers who have advanced degrees in education according to the website tend to have less disciplinary actions in their career.  This may be because they have a more formal education in the law and know how to deal with various walks of life due to their educational background.  These officers receive more commendations and use less sick time.  

According to the text college officers make more sound decisions.  They act in a more professional manner when dealing with the public.  They become less authoritarian in their demeanor.  They are able to show empathy and have the flexibility to handle difficult situations which may be why they use less sick time.  They are more informed about the law and have a greater sense of responsibility of upholding the law when it comes to people’s rights.  They also may have less of a chance of being sued civilly.

 I really do not see any cons to having an educated police officer.  So if I was in charge I would mandate that all officers receive a college degree.  We must make sure that they have some training in the law and dealing with various types of people.  I think that because they are public employees who represent the state or city that they must all be formally educated. 

Cambridge University Hot Spot Experiment

Cambridge University Hot Spot Experiment

Criminologist Professor Lawrence Sherman set up a long term experiment with the police department to study crime in a scientific manner in Manchester and come with solutions to deter these crimes.  The study was designed to study crime hot spots with the strategic placement of officers at these locations.

Professor Sherman stated that his research done in the United States produced positive results with a crime reduction of two-thirds which is 66%.  His experiment in the Cambridge experiment was to see if he could reduce crime by 50%.  In theory his positive results in the U.S. may be emulated in the Cambridge Experiment.

He has shown in his previous experiments that crime usually takes place within 3% of locations in a city.  Those locations are considered hot spots.  He has shown that by upping police presence in those areas crime incidences have been reduced.  I believe that by removing police presence from low crime areas and concentrating them in hotspots simultaneously within a city will serve as a deterrent to crime rates.  The issue of crime displacement was brought up by having offenders locate to another turf.  If he places police in all hotspots then the issue of turf wars would be eliminated.   By eliminating beats he will be able to have police focus on all crime hotspots around the clock.  Police will still have to respond to incidence calls that relate to behind closed doors but overall according to his previous results crime rates will in fact be reduced.  Having police located in strategic locations will allow them to respond to incidences more rapidly.  I do not think there will be a need to increase police officers on the force because by eliminating unnecessary patrols of low crime areas more officers will be freed up to be positioned in hotspot areas. 

Blu Flu

In the hypothetical situation of where 75% of the police work force calls in sick and only 25% of officers remain for active duty, I would have to rethink the policing strategies for that time period. First I would review any available crime mapping material to assess where the department should focus their resources at. I would locate the various hotspots throughout the city. I would place 7% of
the force in both drug and gun violence hotspots. Directed Patrol studies have shown to be
effective. In the jersey City study researchers found that directed patrols in hot spots were effective and” targeted drug enforcements reduce crime”(Worrall, J.,2008). I would place 5% of the force on the streets engaged in the broken windows law enforcement approach. If they officers target minor crimes in a particular fashion the hope is that it will act as a deterrent to larger crimes being committed. The community will have a sense of peace and go about their activities. Having a lively neighborhood may in fact reduce crime by the number of observant citizens on the street. I would have 10% of the force available to respond to emergency calls. They would be assigned to random patrol. By constantly being on move they will likely be within a particular area to provide a good response time to a 911 call. I would use the remaining 3% of the force to be stationed at the variouspolice and sub-stations within a city. I would also have a police mobile tactical unit parked and located in a high-risk high crime area for the duration of the call-out period to serve as a police presence and act as a deterrent. Although random patrols according to the text does not have a significant effect on reducing crime it would allow for a generalized police presence through-out the city in cases of emergencies and allow for the department to have officers actively looking for any signs of wrong-doing. I think that the amount of officers would be effective as about only 10% of any force is on duty according to the text. There are other departments like SWAT that can be called in if necessary.

Worrall, J., 2008. Crime Control in America What Works? Pearson Education Inc,. 2nd Edition

Kathys sentencing options

Since liberals believe that man is naturally good; that there is no absolute standard of morality to be taught and adhered to by citizens; and that crime is a product of poverty and deprivation. They tend to hold society as a whole as responsible for criminal behavior. They believe that they have failed a person who commits crimes and therefor that person must not be wholly held accountable for their actions. So as a liberal I would sentence Kathy to a rehabilitation facility or straight probation for her crimes since they are her first offense.

Conservatives believe that man is born with a natural capacity for good or evil; that there are absolute moral values that need to be instilled upon an individual through social contacts to be able to ensure than an individual of good character and moral values is molded. they believe that individuals of bad character and defective moral values are responsible for crime, not socio-economic conditions. Conservatives believe that even though the poor are deprived they are not predestined to criminality by their condition. They also believe that individuals have free will and freedom of choice regardless of their particular personal circumstances. Thus, for conservatives, the individual is responsible for his or her criminal acts, and needs to be held accountable for them by society. So as a conservative I would sentence Kathy to a jail sentence with restitution followed by probation that is appropriate for the crime.

As a radical I would believe that crime is a product of capitalism. I would sentence Kathy to pay a hefty fine as well as restitution. i would make her adhere to strict community service programs as well to pay back society for her deviant behavior.

Deterrence- Is a way to discourage certain behaviors. I would sentence her to jail for 48 hours to show her what her life might end up being like if she continues her path of destruction.

Retribution- Is punishing people based upon the severity of their crimes. I would use the recommended sentencing guidelines put in place to make sure she pays back her debt to society.

Incapacitation-It is the removal of individuals from society to protect society by sentencing them to house arrest, incarceration, or another method of restraint. I would sentence her to house arrest with ankle monitoring.

Rehabilitation-Is planned intervention intended to change behavior. In the case of Kathy I would send her to a drug and alcohol rehabilitation center as well as offer social programs such as job training to ensure she stays on the right path after rehab.

As a police chief I would find making a presumption of guilt hard because everyone is innocent until proven guilty no matter the case. I would try to ensure that the public's rights were protected at all costs to ensure there is no backlash from the community.I would favor formality at all times.  I would have a hard time being concerned with ends not means because how you get there has a great effect on the outcome.

Crime Problems unit 1 blog

Crime Problem: Fights outside nuisance bars in a given city

Violent behavior tends to crop up in young individuals when they are under the influence of alcohol. Bars and nightclubs that cater to a younger crowd seem to be problem areas within a city around closing times.

Crime Solution: Enhanced foot patrol by police officers during problem times such as weekends. Police presence seems to be a deterrent to illegal behavior. Having ample officers in the area may help to diminish the level of violent behavior with an earlier response time. Another solution would be to have these establishments close earlier so that people do not consume too much alcohol. It would also free up more officers for an area rather then having them respond to multiple incidents at various locations within a city.

The desired outcome of this solution would to have the police presence act as a deterrent to specific behaviors. Closing early would allow officers time to monitor the areas around closing times rather than being stretched thin throughout the city.

The difference between outcome evaluation and process evaluation is that outcome evaluation is an impact assessment. Outcome evaluation is a method to determine whether some form of social action is a success or failure. It is an approach to a crime problem. Process evaluation is a way to determine if a program or policy in effect is operating as it should with the specific desired results. Outcome evaluations determine whether the approach to solving a problem work. Process objectives relate to determining if the components of the goal were successfully completed and outcome objectives determine if the overall success of the program had a positive or negative effect.

The differences between macro and micro crime control are macro level crime control consists of approaches to the crime problem that are intended to have a dramatic and desirable effect on crime in an entire area. It can also include an approach that is intended to affect the maximum amount of people at the same time. micro level crime control is more isolated in geographic locations. It deals primarily with small groups and individuals.

I believe that the desired outcome needed in this instance would be an example of a micro-level approach.

I would use the Crime Solutions. Gov to gain funding because they deal with community crime prevention strategies. I also found my city on there with a positive evidence rating for hot spot policing which is a method I would implement to solve this issue.