Newark's crime pause: A lesson for Durham?

Barry wrote recently about recent comments at a neighborhood meeting where a Durham P.D. official stated that writing speeding tickets in the absence of a functioning traffic court with dedicated D.A.'s wasn't a priority, since the justice system and courts weren't devoting the time and energy to enforce penalties and consequences for what might be seen as "minor infractions." As Barry put it:

We hear a lot about "broken windows" theories of community development when we talk to our municipal leaders. Think of vehicles driving at unsafe speeds through our neighborhood streets as mobile broken windows. The prompt parents to keep their kids indoors, and discourage pedestrians from using the neighborhood. There are about as many traffic fatalities in Durham as homicides over the past five or six years. It's not an insignificant problem, and it's one that deserves more of an effort from our civic leaders to fix than what we're getting.

For the record, the meeting in question was one I attended with City staff, on the topic of traffic calming in my neighborhood. I've got a lot of respect for Durham's transportation department and its staff, and for the work Chief Lopez has done since coming to the Bull City.

But I'll confess my blood boiled over seeing the visible skepticism, bordering on derision, from a representative of the D.P.D. in this instance. (An individual invited to the meeting, incidentally, to talk about ways that law enforcement could play a role in traffic calming on a busy state thoroughfare.)

As I reflected back on the meeting in the days to come, though, I realized any frustration with the officer in question was misdirected. The broader issue is one for city leaders, who rightly prioritize violent crimes as the main target for enforcement -- but who should not, as Barry emphasizes, forget the importance of making sure that 'quality of life' issues are enforced.

This encounter was on my mind when I read a story recently about an historic pause in homicides in Newark, N.J. -- a city not much larger than Durham, but one plagued with many times the Bull City's murder rate.

Newark marked its 33rd day Friday without an official homicide, a startling fact for a city that has averaged about two killings a week over the last few years and saw homicides spike 50 percent from 2002 to 2006....

[Newark police spokesman Lt. Todd] McCarthy attributes the drop in homicides to a broader strategy to fighting crime that includes prosecuting petty crimes, like loitering and public drunkenness, as well as more serious ones.

He also credited a recent push to share information and resources with other law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, state police and U.S. Marshals Service.

In addition, the city last year began installing a network of more than 120 surveillance cameras in high-crime areas of the city.

"It's not one thing we do, it's everything we do," McCarthy said. "It's a confluence of a lot of strategies and tactics applied in the right way."   

Other news reports credit a concerted, multi-agency effort to find criminal leaders and wanted repeat offenders and to lock them up behind bars.

Now, some of this is already happening in Durham. A pilot of anti-crime cameras is underway in North-East Central Durham. And there's been quite a bit of discussion, among the public and now between governmental leaders, about the need to revisit bail and release policies to find a way to end the revolving door problem in Durham's criminal justice system.

(I always think it's a mixed benefit when the D.P.D. is so quickly able to release a photograph of suspects wanted for questioning after a crime spree. On the one hand, it makes it easier to find these individuals. On the other hand, the photos all have an odd similarity: cinderblock backdrop, close-in cropping, unhappy expressions on the visages of the photo's subjects. Because these are photos that the criminal justice has in their files. Because these folks have been arrested for crimes before.)

While there's been activity in these areas, however, and with a highly visible "Operation Bull's Eye" involving increased enforcement in one of Durham's crime hotspots, one has to wonder if the enforcement for quality-of-life crimes is really happening.

At least where speeding's concerned, it doesn't seem to be. I wonder whether what Newark considers "petty crimes," like loitering and intoxication, get the same level of enforcement.

It's a tough approach to sell. Tuesday's Herald-Sun article about Lopez's recent community meeting found a local pastor complaining about questions from residents "involving specific incidents of burglaries or vandalism in relatively safe neighborhoods," noting that it was "selfish" in not addressing "the more pervasive issues of violence in higher crime areas of the city."

Again, to emphasize -- no, from a purely objective level, it's not that these quality of life issues are more important that violent crime per se. Protecting the personal safety of citizens, it seems, should always be the highest priority of law enforcement.

But if Newark's self-assessment is accurate, we shouldn't forget the link between the petty and the profound when it comes to crime, either.

Comments

[Dan S.]

Most anyone who's had any reasonable experience in a well-run Police Department will tell you that routine traffic stops (broken tail lights, running stop signs, speeding) net a large number of people who have either committed a 'serious' crime, or are about to. Psychologically, it's explained that someone who disregards a 'big' law, like murder, robbery, etc, will similarly disregard 'little' laws like stop signs and speed limits. Higher visibility of law enforcement, even in traffic enforcement roles, also leads to lower incidence of crime.

[Michael Bacon]

Absolutely -- residential speeding should be Durham's implementation of "broken windows." I just dropped a big blog post with more than you ever want to read from me on it: http://bullinfull.typepad.com/bif/2008/02/speeding-broken.html

[B]

By all means enforce residential speed limits because of the inherent public safety issue. But:

"...routine traffic stops (broken tail lights, running stop signs, speeding) net a large number of people who have either committed a 'serious' crime, *or are about to*"

Sorry, but that last bit leaves me cold. If the police are of the mindset that stepping up enforcement on minor violations is going to help them catch bigger fish, that means they are going to tend to treat everyone they encounter like...well, criminals.

One need look no further than the security line at RDU to see an example of what I am talking about.

"Psychologically, it's explained that someone who disregards a 'big' law, like murder, robbery, etc, will similarly disregard 'little' laws like stop signs and speed limits"

Sure, but that doesn't mean the reasoning holds in the other direction. In fact, I'd go so far as to wager the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of neighborhood speeders--while assholes, to be sure--are not, in fact, murderers and robbers.

[gails14]

Here's an easy way - use camera to catch speeders as well as individuals who run red lights:

http://seattlest.com/2008/02/18/speeding_camera.php

This weekend the Washington State Senate narrowly passed a bill approving remote cameras to take photos of speeding drivers. A single one of these cameras, so-called "photo cops," can issue as many citations as 25 police officers.

Washington State is eager to approve more uses for police cameras, as the installation of four red-light cameras in Seattle have brought in more than a million dollars of revenue in their first year of use. The city of Seattle is already in the process of installing 22 more red-light cameras. Under the bill that was passed this weekend, the cameras could also now be used to monitor speed on arterial streets notorious for speeding.

[Jonathan Jones]

Red light cameras (and speeding cameras) are not a feasible option in N.C. at the moment.

Article 9 of the state constitution mandates that proceeds from fines for breaking criminal laws go to schools. The agency taking the fine can take a small administrative cut, but 90 percent of it has to go to the local school board.

Red light camera programs are run by third-party agencies that own the cameras and administer the program in return for a percent share of the fine levied.

A case out of High Point a couple of years ago upheld the requirement that 90 percent of the fine go to the school board, effectively shutting down red light programs across the state:
http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/coa/opinions/2006/050571-1.htm

So unless cities want to invest in developing their own red light/speeding camera technology, or one of these companies that owns the technology is willing to sell without taking a cut off the tickets, you won't see any of those around here.

[Jonathan Jones]

I forgot to add, that the red light camera programs in Wake County are based on different legislation than what High Point and the rest of the state were using. The rest of the state's red light programs had to shut down.

[Emily]

Increased police presence will not help the problem. Has anyone else feared for his or her life while trying to get through the Roxboro/Avondale and Roxboro/Club intersections in the afternoons? People run lights, disobey turn arrows, make their own turn lanes, and block the intersections, and we've seen plenty of cops sitting in traffic, clearly seeing this, but not doing anything about it. We've gestured wildly to the cops, pointing to the offenders, but still nothing. And if you do obey traffic laws, you get harassed by people behind you who are in a hurry to get through the intersections.

As for the bail issue, perhaps I take a different approach because I work with the state public defenders, but universally increasing bail is not necessarily a good idea. Bail is meant to keep in those who are either likely to immediately offend again, or those who are flight risks. It's not intended as a punishment in itself. If bail is raised like the DAs are proposing and the community seems to want, do community members also mind paying for the new jail Durham's going to need to house all those who can't make bail?

[hurley]

They have speed cameras all over England now, I don't see them catching on in America unless they're rifle and shotgun proof! I've heard, and this may be an urban legend, that as part of Jimmy Carter's metrification program all new signs on the interstates showed mileage and speed limits in both English and metric units. This was quietly dropped after a couple years because of the expense of replacing signs where the metric numbers were obliterated by bullet holes.

[Steve]

I'm so encouraged to hear that so many others are as frustrated and angry as I am about the speeding problem in our neighborhoods. I'm more disgusted each day by the DPD's continued inaction. Clearly the DPD does not give a damn about the public safety risk that speeding poses. This is clearly evidenced by morons speeding down my street at well over the posted limit (usually around double), only to be followed by a police cruiser who is also in a rush who does not pull over the speeder, also speeding well over the limit - no lights or sirens, no apparent emergency. The ONLY time that I have seen someone stopped on our street was after our car was side-swiped in the middle of the night, and then the enforcement only lasted a couple of days, and was anemic even then.
The DPD needs to dedicate several officers whose sole job is to rotate around the city's speeding "hot spots" and pull over speeders. I'll bet that they'll also find a few bail jumpers, probation violators and other ner-do-wells.
I don't know what the current laws are, but I think that if you are caught doing double the speed limit, regardless of what the speed limit is, that your license should be immediately suspended - no ands, ifs or buts.
I'm so tired of dealing with these jackasses speeding through our neighborhoods putting our lives in danger.

[Scott]

Amen, Kevin. I find it interesting that most Durhamites' experience with crime is property crime, not violent crime. I think property crime is virtually ignored and "accepted" in this town. Enforcing simple things like traffic laws is SO simple, yet so effective. You don't have to investigate crimes, post wanted emails, etc. Just sit somewhere on Duke or Gregson and point the radar.

Identify the most dangerous parts of the City, setup regular speeding stings and seat belt checks along all the major thoroughfares in and out of that part of town and I promise you'll see crime plummet in that area.

Thanks for bringing this issue to light.

[Tim]

I own and live in a neighborhood with very high traffic speeds (posted 25, when they analyzed for speed bumps - which we are not getting - they found the average somewhere around 35), and have two small children. We're fortunate to have a back yard, but the kids have a tendency not to stay put and occasionally wander to the street. I understand the traffic concern.

The constitutional/liberty implications of government cameras concern me, the fears are the same as they were for most Brits when they were put around London. I admit they seem to have worked, if not always in preventing crime at least in prosecuting it.

That said, I think of traffic as a different issue than petty crime. If Durham residents want to lower the overall traffic speeds, a well-coordinated system of speed bumps, traffic circles, and road encroachments (think Anderson, I don't remember the technical term) would do the job 24/7, 100%, with one payout, and you don't have to spend officers and prosecutorial time on speed violations because the roads are designed to be driven at 25 mph, and so everyone drives it on them. Even with a huge law enforcement presence traffic violations are almost inevitable, since if a 25-mph road can be driven at 45 it is very likely to be and there just aren't enough police or punishments in the world to stop it. If you want to make money, penalize traffic crime like Florida; if you want to slow traffic - which ultimately seems to be the goal of BCR and the posters above - make a police presence known, and/or make it difficult or immediately dangerous to speed.

Petty crime enforcement, in which I'd include non-speed road violations (registration, license, jaywalking, loitering, trespassing, petty theft...) is a different matter. Unfortunately these crimes are traditionally quite regressive in penalty, but presumably the judiciary in cooperation with a thoughtful DA could come up with some mitigation for that (service hours versus fines, for example). I do perceive from other municipalities that enforcement of lesser statutes is effective at reducing instances of violent crime over time, but is that a side effect of greater police presence in the community? Either way it's not a bad thing, if civil liberties can be reasonably considered.

The concern I'd express is that you have to have sufficient resource to both investigate violent crime and also to break up petty crime, in the time between heavy-crime and light-crime, and based on my experience in Durham I'm not convinced that DPD has this. Maybe they do, and hopefully Chief Lopez will be able to ask for more people - temporarily, at least - if they don't. As I recall from his first few interviews he did express the desire to work on reducing the petty-theft-type crimes.

[Dan S.]

@B: I wasn't inferring that most cops are expecting to nab a serial killer when they pull someone over for 10-over in a 35, but a surprisingly high number of arrests on outstanding warrants begin with a basic traffic stop, that said, it usually accounts for a very small number of overall traffic stops.

[Yurlinda Higginbotham]

The only time I see DPD doing traffic "license checks" is on streets in areas that feature high concentrations of Hispanic residents or workers. Often the white folks are either given a cursory look or passed through.

I told an ex-Durhamite friend visiting last weekend that it's pretty much a lawless place, traffic law wise.

It's all part of the new normal for traffic time...

There used to be STEP (Strategic Traffic Enforcement Programs) stuff back in the day. I recall one in Winston-Salem that also pulled drivers driving well simply to compliment them for their good driving.

This morning a silver humvee and a car following it turned north (ie: the wrong way) from Trinity onto Roxboro. Fortunately, I suppose, they quickly pulled into the BMW Insurance/Thrift Store/Appliance Center/Nubian Art on the curb shop (is this a Ronnie Sturdivant enterprise, too?).

None of these big SUVs seem to have come with turn signals (I guess that's optional equipment or something these days). And if they do have 'em, folks apparently can't use 'em, what with their hands holding a mobile phone up to their ear and the other hand having to steer.

Any road with at least two lanes supporting same direction traffic means that the left lane is the fast lane, despite posted speed limits. Drivers in a left lane who might like to move to the right are generally unable to do so because of the tailgating, phone-talking, important busy-person who swerves and swoops around the speed-impeding vehicle.

It all sux.