There is no policy that does not have both pros and cons, and the only sources provided for today’s reading are regarding the cons of quality of life policing. But coming from an area where jails were overcrowded for serious offences, so people who’d committed lesser crimes were booked and released – and it was always the same people getting booked – the logic behind quality of life policing makes sense. It’s probably something I would support. Whether or not it was excessive aside – and I really can’t say either way, there was no statistical evidence given (the Erzen article stated that the number of homicides had risen over 1999-2000, but provided no evidence for any other crime rate; it was all mostly anecdotal in both that and the INCITE pamphlet) – it did what it claimed. Did it clean up NYC? Most likely – the sources aren’t arguing against that. Did it catch people wanted for greater crimes on lesser charges? Again, most likely – but as no solid evidence was provided on this, I can’t say. But saying that arrests are higher after a policy designed to – honestly – increase arrests is too obvious.

Question: Why do or don’t you support quality of life policing? In light of today’s reading, do you think it would be effective if the policy were altered, or should it be scrapped altogether?