Broken Windows Policing: The Theory That Criminalized Black Neighborhoods
What Is “Broken Windows” Policing?
“Broken windows policing” is a theory that claims cracking down on small, visible signs of disorder — like graffiti, loitering, littering, or public drinking — will prevent more serious crimes. The idea is that one broken window left unrepaired signals neglect, which encourages more vandalism, then escalates to theft, assault, and beyond.
The theory was made popular in the 1980s and 1990s, and became official policy in cities like New York under leaders like Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Police Commissioner Bill Bratton.
But in practice, this approach didn’t make communities safer. It made them targets.
What Did It Actually Do?
In reality, broken windows policing led to:
- Over-policing of Black and brown neighborhoods, regardless of actual crime rates
- Massive increases in arrests for petty, non-violent offenses like trespassing, marijuana possession, or riding a bike on the sidewalk
- Harassment and profiling of young Black men, especially teenagers
- The use of “stop-and-frisk” tactics that violated civil rights and led to few actual convictions
- More people getting pulled into the criminal justice system over minor infractions, resulting in sentencing disparity, mass incarceration, and lasting economic harm
The original theory assumed that poor people are inherently prone to crime unless punished constantly. It treated poverty as a threat. Disorder as criminality. Blackness as dangerous.
That’s not public safety. That’s systemic bias in a badge.
How It Played Out on the Ground
In many cities, police were encouraged to make as many low-level arrests as possible. Officers were graded on productivity. Tickets and court fees became a source of city revenue. And in the process:
- People lost jobs for missing work due to court appearances
- Young people got criminal records for skipping school or jaywalking
- Elderly residents were harassed for sitting outside too long
- And families were torn apart over infractions that wouldn’t even be noticed in white suburbs
Meanwhile, corporate crime — wage theft, environmental dumping, real estate fraud — went ignored.
That’s not justice. That’s white supremacy in policy form.
What the Research Shows
Even the original authors of the broken windows theory — James Q. Wilson and George Kelling — later admitted the theory was frequently misused and didn’t actually reduce serious crime.
Studies have shown that:
The lasting impact was trauma, criminalization, and broken trust — not safety
Cities using broken windows policing didn’t experience greater drops in violent crime than cities that didn’t
Harsh policing of low-level “disorder” often increased distrust and made communities less likely to report actual crimes
Wikipedia
Broken Windows Theory
Video
The Impact of Broken Windows Policing on Black Communities
Molly Crabapple: How ‘broken windows’ policing harms people of color
Further Reading
How A Theory Of Crime And Policing Was Born, And Went Terribly Wrong (NPR)
The Problem with “Broken Windows” Policing (PBS)
The Dark Side of ‘Broken Windows’ Policing (New York Times)
Even the creator of ‘broken windows’ policing thought it could lead to racial problems (pri.com)
Broken Windows, Broken Lives: The Danger of the NYPD’s Quota-Driven System (Leitner Center)
Don’t Blame My ‘Broken Windows’ Theory For Poor Policing
We Were Never the Problem
Black communities have always been blamed for the symptoms of poverty, while the real causes — housing discrimination, income inequality, underfunded schools — go untouched.
🖤 “We Were Never The Problem” is a rejection of that logic. We weren’t dangerous because of a broken window. We were targeted because the system was designed to police poverty — not prevent crime.
Let’s be clear: safety doesn’t come from punishment. It comes from investment.