Police order maintenance activities are important but controversial. They are controversial because there is no clear and consistent definition of what constitutes disorder and because the justification for police intervention in disorderly situations in uncertain. Some behavior that creates disorder is illegal and the basis for intervention is clear: the law. Other behavior that creates disorder is not illegal; instead, it violates community or neighborhood expectations of what constitutes appropriate civil behavior. Under such circumstances a primary basis for police intervention is the political will of the community.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Kelling, George L.
1986. “Order Maintenance, the Quality of Urban Life, and the Police: A Line of Argument.” In Police Leadership in America: Crisis and Opportunity, edited by William A. Geller. New York: Praeger.
2.
Moore, Mark H.
and George L. Kelling. 1983. “To Serve and Protect: Learning from Police History.”The Public Interest, 70 (Winter): 49-65.
3.
The Newark Foot Patrol Experiment. 1981. Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation. (See especially, “Conclusions,” pp. 111-129.)
4.
Skogan, Wesley G.
and Michael G. Maxfield. 1981. Coping with Crime: Individual and Neighborhood Reactions. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
5.
Tocqueville, Alexis de
. 1945. Democracy in America. Vol. I. New York: Vintage.
6.
Trojanowicz, Robert C.
Unpublished. “An Evaluation Report: The Flint Neighborhood Foot Patrol.”
7.
Will, George F.
1983. Statecraft as Soulcraft: What Government Does. New York: Simon & Schuster.
8.
Wilson, James Q.1983. “Crime and American Culture.”The Public Interest, 70 (Winter): 22-48.
9.
Wilson, James Q.
and George L. Kelling. 1983. “Broken Windows.”The Atlantic Monthly. (March): 29-38.
10.
Wycott, Mary Ann
. 1982. “The Role of Municipal Police: Research as a Prelude to Changing it.”Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
