The broken windows theory and community policing and how they relate to each other.
View Paper
ESSAY DETAILS
Words: 3022
Pages: 11
(approximately 235 words/page)
Pages: 11
(approximately 235 words/page)
Essay Database > Social Sciences > Sociology
Community Policing and the Broken Windows Theory
The idea of community based policing and the broken windows theory go
hand in hand in this new era of policing. Robert C. Trojanowicz, an early visionary who helped define the community policing movement, described community policing as "... a philosophy of full-service, personalized policing where the same officer patrols and works in the same area on a permanent basis, from a decentralized place, working in a proactive partnership
showed first 75 words of 3022 total
Sign up for EssayTask and enjoy a huge collection of student essays, term papers and research papers. Improve your grade with our unique database!
showed first 75 words of 3022 total
showed last 75 words of 3022 total
B. Community Policing: How to Get Started. Cincinnati: Anderson, 1994. Pg. 1 Walters, Paul M. F.B.I. Law Enforcement Bulletin. November 1993, Volume 62 Issue 11. Pg. 20 Wilson, James Q. Deregulating the public service: Can the Government be Improved?. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1994. Pg. 21 Wilson, James Q. and Kelling, George L. Broken Windows: The Police and Neighborhood Safety. The Atlantic Monthly, March 1982. Pg. 7, 9, 15 Wycoff, Mary Ann. Community Policing Strategies. Washington D.C.: National Institute of Justice, 1994. Pg. 138
B. Community Policing: How to Get Started. Cincinnati: Anderson, 1994. Pg. 1 Walters, Paul M. F.B.I. Law Enforcement Bulletin. November 1993, Volume 62 Issue 11. Pg. 20 Wilson, James Q. Deregulating the public service: Can the Government be Improved?. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1994. Pg. 21 Wilson, James Q. and Kelling, George L. Broken Windows: The Police and Neighborhood Safety. The Atlantic Monthly, March 1982. Pg. 7, 9, 15 Wycoff, Mary Ann. Community Policing Strategies. Washington D.C.: National Institute of Justice, 1994. Pg. 138