has been with us forever,” I said. “Nothing we’ve done or are likely to do is going to stop all the burglars, thieves, and social deviants from doing what it is they do. So are you telling me you have a solution to end all crime? I mean, what can anyone do that’ll really make a difference?”
“You’re right,” Dylan replied, “we may never completely eliminate all unwanted behaviors, and no, I don’t have a solution to eliminate all crime. But we can eliminate some crimes and greatly reduce the incidence of others. Now, it’s important to remember that the commission of a crime is a behavior, and it’s the behavior we want to eliminate—not the people. This can be accomplished, at least in part, by radically and permanently altering the environment so the surroundings and conditions are no longer conducive to deviant behavior.”
“How do we do that?” I asked.
“By either eliminating or mitigating the opportunity,” he said. “If we minimize the opportunity to commit a crime, then we’ll minimize all related criminal behavior as well. And one simple way to do that is by increasing the possibility of detection. If we increase the number of people that report suspicious activities, utilize appropriate technology, detection devices, and warning systems, we necessarily increase the possibility of detection. The bad guys count on people turning their heads and looking the other way. Identify the offender and you’ll increase the potential for apprehension, incarceration, and successful prosecutions, all post-event. However, if you eliminate or reduce the opportunity for crime, you’ll also eliminate or reduce its occurrence. It’s important to reinforce the notion of prevention because there’s so much we can do with time and space to limit the potential for criminality.
“There’s an equation regarding crime that seems to have all but disappeared as a relevant factor from modern policing. Means + Motive + Opportunity = Crime. Traditional policing methodologies wait for the left side of the equation to fulfill itself before attempting to do something about the right. This is an ill-founded prescription and it just plain doesn’t work. While trying to figure out ‘who done it’ may be an interesting and clever game idea, it makes for lousy policing. The police use the equation primarily as a way of explaining to new officers the factors necessary for crime to exist or as a method to assist in identifying likely suspects. Its greater value, however, is in helping us understand the most effective course to reduce the potential for crime.
“We learned in basic mathematics that whatever you do to one side of an equation necessarily affects the other. If we reduce any one or all of the factors necessary to produce crime—the left side of the equation—we necessarily reduce the incidence of crime on the right, thus prevention, not apprehension.
“The most salient factor on the left side of the equation and the one most susceptible to immediate intervention is Opportunity. By reducing the level of opportunity, we necessarily reduce the amount of resulting crime. Using this model, the police practitioner—in cooperation with the community—can identify appropriate intervention measures to reduce the level of opportunity immediately while further working to mitigate circumstances that give individuals the means or motives to undertake acts of criminality over the long term. Educating people to practice personal safety and to accept responsibility for the safety and security of their own persons and property is critical to effective crime prevention. Working together is our best protection from those who are inclined to take advantage of the uninformed and the unaware.
“It’s difficult to believe people are ready to accept personal responsibility for helping reduce crime. However, it’s individuals who are victimized and it’s the individual who’s in the best position to minimize his or her susceptibility to crime.
“I’m only beginning to understand the interconnectedness of things myself. I used to work, unilaterally, on finding solutions to what appeared to be the problem—the symptoms—never considering the implications for others or the impact others might have on the issue. I failed to examine the cause. I only looked at the effect and who was affected, not what effect they could have. Now I recognize the potential peripheral consequences that altering any part of any system may have on other parts of the system. I also recognize the need to identify the causation and not a mere symptom. I see everything as being inextricably tied. As we progress, we’re likely to become even more dependent upon one another.”
“You already know the kinds of problems the police have working with the people in this community. There’s an overwhelming strain between the police and the minorities here,” I interjected. “Getting people to work together and to accept individual responsibility sounds good, but that requires trust. And we don’t trust each other, partly due to personal biases and partly because of a lack of knowledge and understanding of each other.”
“I can’t argue with any of that,” Dylan said. “I can only tell you the future shows promise, but we’re going to have to be careful to ensure that biases from our past don’t follow us into the future. Our determination to cling to past assumptions could block important advances. For example, myths and stereotypes regarding race, ethnicity, or gender inequalities need to be eradicated. Comparatively speaking, we’re just beginning to appreciate the need for parity among all people and the benefits that may result. We’ve only begun to realize the importance of inter-cultural development in policing. The minorities of our nation should be viewed as assets and not as an infringement on an overburdened welfare system. We must develop a willingness to educate ourselves, to speak other languages, to learn other customs and to appreciate—even revere—different perspectives.
“But I want to shift gears and touch on the drug problem, if you don’t mind. We’re running close on time, but I just wanted to say something briefly about drugs.”
“I don’t mind at all. I know we’ve gone over a lot and I appreciate it. I’m sorry to keep bugging you, but right now I’m a sponge. I’ll take whatever you’re willing to give, so please go on.”
“This’ll be short. Part of our problem with trust is wrapped up in this drug thing,” the chief said. “This nation is experiencing significant increases in addictive and violent behaviors. Minorities have been pegged, unfairly I might add, with being more involved and pretty much responsible for drugs across the country. But drugs are not a minority problem. We have to acknowledge that and take the problems associated with the production and distribution of illicit drugs, both nationally and internationally, more seriously. Oh, we think we’re serious. After all, we’ve declared war on drugs; we’re losing, but we’re still fighting. Unfortunately, drugs haven’t gone away and the war is hurting us all.
“The drug trade contributes significantly to the impoverished conditions of certain segments of our society. The elimination or mitigation of the flow of drugs into our communities should allow for greater stability and normalization of activities more conducive to a healthy environment. We desperately need a concerted effort to eradicate the illegal manufacture, distribution, and use of drugs in our communities. But jailing the addict is not the solution. That proposition has us merely standing on the periphery again. There are currently more people in American jails and prisons than the Soviet Union incarcerated at the height of Communism.”
“Chief, what are we doing about problems associated with the use of handguns? Guns and drugs seem to go together.”
“Not a whole lot,” he admitted. “At some point, we have to realize the folly of participating in a mini-arms race. The number, capability, and production of small arms accessible to the general population are causes for concern. Our children are killing each other with guns. They seem to think a gun is an acceptable manner by which to resolve disputes. We need to reverse the trend of violence and promote a sense of compassion and unity as we provide one another with a better understanding of—and respect for—life. We need to provide our children with alternative conflict resolution mechanisms and limited access to the more destructive
