Strategizing Police Presence: Reducing Crime Rates Through Hot Spot Policing

Abstract

I chose to look into policing as I was curious how the role of police would be seen during this time period. The first line of the chapter illustrated how some misconceptions last generations. It discusses how the public and it’s governing body tend to think that an increase in police presence will lower crime rates. I agree, it does seem like just adding more cops would make crime go down. However, things are seldom so simple. Sherman et al. (1996), states that strong police presence should be focused on high-risk areas also known as “hot spots”. An increase in police presence, not an increase in police population, can be beneficial if done so strategically. Another way police were found to help lower crime rate was to act respectfully towards others. Bad mannered police officers were noted as contributing to the public breaking the law. A criticism aimed at hot spot policing is that by directing police presence into a single area, crime will disperse to other areas. This is called the displacement effect or mechanism. A solution for this potential issue is proposed by Lazzati and Menichini (2016), who recommend using a game theoretic approach. This approach would utilize mathematical models to analyze crime maps and make strategic decisions on police presence. Lazzati and Menichini (2016), also discuss the outcome of police presence in hotspots during the late 1990s. It may be interesting to note that the late 90’s saw a sharp decline in crime rates. This fall, which is referred to as the New York “miracle”, may have occurred during or after the work of Sherman et al. (1996), was published. A References: Lazzati, N., & Menichini, A. (2016). Hot Spot Policing: A Study of Place-Based Strategies for Crime Prevention. Southern Economic Journal, 82(3), 893–913. Sherman, L. W.,...