The subjectivity and unconstitutionality seen in law enforcement today stems from the application of modern proactive policing and assistive programs such as COMPSTAT. In the 1990’s when New York implemented COMPSTAT and other community policing techniques inspired by the Broken Windows Theory, they did so with the intention to determine what policing needs were required by the community. By addressing these community-specific needs, the police assumed that the trust between police and community would be restored; however, instead of taking advantage of the newly opened direct lines of communication with minority communities, the police took to number crunching and data compiling to determine what they believed the community needed. The lawyer and Professor of Criminology Peter Hanink deplores
…show more content…
His basic complaint is that COMPSTAT is heavily impacted by racial profiling and that this consequently clouds the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of minorities. Hanink himself writes, “The shift from bottom up information gathering to top down number crunching may have had a more significant effect: the implementation of de facto racial profiling,” (Hanink 2). In making this comment, Hanink emphasizes how the implementation and reliance on an assistive management program like COMPSTAT has led to racial profiling. While proactive policing is in large part driven by crime rates, programs like COMPSTAT that are employed throughout the nation make these techniques bias. Moreover, this bias is noticed not only by scholars examining policing techniques, but also by minority communities, who in light of recent findings, will continue to be uncooperative and uncompliant to a system that harbors racial bias. In order to mend the relationship between the police and community, assistive programs should be reformed by broadening the scope of crimes recorded and eliminating sectarian factors, such as race and class, when determining where police should be more densely
His basic complaint is that COMPSTAT is heavily impacted by racial profiling and that this consequently clouds the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of minorities. Hanink himself writes, “The shift from bottom up information gathering to top down number crunching may have had a more significant effect: the implementation of de facto racial profiling,” (Hanink 2). In making this comment, Hanink emphasizes how the implementation and reliance on an assistive management program like COMPSTAT has led to racial profiling. While proactive policing is in large part driven by crime rates, programs like COMPSTAT that are employed throughout the nation make these techniques bias. Moreover, this bias is noticed not only by scholars examining policing techniques, but also by minority communities, who in light of recent findings, will continue to be uncooperative and uncompliant to a system that harbors racial bias. In order to mend the relationship between the police and community, assistive programs should be reformed by broadening the scope of crimes recorded and eliminating sectarian factors, such as race and class, when determining where police should be more densely