By Lisa Calderon

 On any given day, you can drive down streets in the Cole neighborhood in urban Denver and be a witness to an unofficial version of “broken windows” policing: flashing lights from police cars as motorists are pulled over and their vehicles searched; Black and Latino people standing on sidewalks being frisked and handcuffed, or youth of color lined up to gain entry to the juvenile “community court.”
Children looking no older than 10 or 11 years old lined up on a curb with a police officer standing over them and issuing citations. A 16-year-old African American child, who was walking home from high school, slammed into a wall in an alley by a white police officer and given a citation for “being a wise guy” after he had the audacity to ask to call his mother. His offense? Taking a few steps into a “crime scene” to avoid getting hit by a car near the busy intersection.
The police argue that aggressive policing of disorderly conduct activities prevents major crimes. But a July 2006, Rocky Mountain News disputes that.
“The Denver Police Department's ‘broken windows’ policing initiative in the Westwood neighborhood has increased arrests there by nearly 50 percent” within the first six months of the project, the paper reported. Officer-initiated calls for police service rose nearly 70 percent, while citizens seeking police assistance declined by nearly 10 percent.
Police say the policy is a response to the Westwood neighborhood residents, low-income/working class and mostly people of color, who want a crackdown on criminal activity. They further say aggressive policing has not produced more than a few complaints of harassment. They say the increased number of arrests creates safer neighborhoods.
Such justifications are fundamentally flawed. Living in a “high crime area” I understand what it means not to have to worry about gang shootings, drug activity or having my property vandalized.  However, when people are afraid, hurting and asking for help, the solution should not be replacing one oppressive force with another. Police are part of the solution for promoting safer and healthier communities. But the quality of that police interaction must be measured and implemented with as much consideration to civil rights safeguards as to pro-arrest strategies.
According to the Human Rights Watch 2003 report “Incarcerated America,” which analyzed U.S. Department of Justice statistics, more than two million men and women are now behind bars in the United States:
‘Contrary to popular perception, the report reads,” violent crime is not responsible for the quadrupling of the incarcerated population in the United States since 1980. In fact, violent crime rates have been relatively constant or declining over the past two decades. The exploding prison population has been propelled by public policy changes that have increased the use of prison sentences as well as the length of time served, e.g. through mandatory minimum sentencing, ‘three strikes’ laws, and reductions in the availability of parole or early release.
Although these policies were championed as protecting the public from serious and violent offenders, they have instead yielded high rates of confinement of nonviolent offenders. Nearly three quarters of new admissions to state prison were convicted of nonviolent crimes. Only 49 percent of sentenced state inmates are held for violent offense.”
More troubling, the report concluded, is the extent to which the imprisoned are African American. Blacks account for 12 percent of the U.S. population, but 44 percent of all prisoners, the report found.
The Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition, a prisoner’s rights group, makes the connection between “tough on crime” policies and their devastating consequences for communities of color:
“People of color are dramatically over-represented in our prisons,” the group writes on its Website (www.ccjrc.org). “Sixty-nine percent of people in Colorado prisons for drug possession or use are people of color. Latinos account for 17.1 percent of the state’s population in Colorado, but make up 29.9 percent of the prison population. Similarly, African Americans make up 3.8 percent of the population, but represent 20.7 percent of the prisoners. Whites, 74.5 percent of the population, account for 46.4 percent of the prison population.”
Concerns about broken windows policing are moot if the policy actually works. Alas, there is no hard evidence that it does. Many human rights advocates on the East coast, where this policy became popularized under the Rudolph Giuliani administration in New York City, have protested against it. Crime in New York dropped, theoretically indicating that the policy worked. What is not known was the impact of other factors that occurred simultaneously, or as a result of efforts made years prior. For instance the “crack cocaine market slacked, resulting in less violence. Improved medical and emergency-response decreased murder rates by saving victims who would have died.
While the policing industry expands, unanswered questions remain, such as what to do about the potential for police abuse. As activist Robin Skyler points out, “Increased police aggression can also lead to an alarming increase in police violence…Increased police aggression can lead to increased distrust of the police.”
The concept for broken windows policing began with an article by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling published in Atlantic Monthly, March, 1982. The basis of the theory was that “little things lead to big things” and that “small-scale neglect leads to anti-social behavior.” Therefore improving order reduces crime. However, the authors point to only one study to document this. Wilson and Kelling seem to rely on the “just trust the system” reasoning that perhaps should be expected from policing industry consultants. Yet, questions about police accountability remain, including whether there will there be increased police accountability with increased police powers.
Broken windows policing is the latest reincarnation of failed “war on drugs” strategies that were built around white middle-class fears of lurking and violent Black and Brown masses. We owe it to our children to let go of the myth that increased police presence automatically equates to increased community safety. Communities need resources, not feel-good initiatives, to create alternative visions of safety and accountability. We must not be fooled that trendy policing strategies will transform our communities.

Editor’s note: Lisa M. Calderon, M.L.S., J.D., is a resident of Denver’s Cole neighborhood. She is the legal and social policy director for the  Safehouse Progressive Alliance for Nonviolence in Boulder.