Strengths and Limitations of Zero Tolerance Policy
Discuss the strengths and limitations of one of the following:
Broken Windows Policing
Community Policing
Evidence-Based Policing
Hot Spots Policing
Intelligence Led Policing
Predictive Policing
Problem-Oriented Policing
Quality of Life Policing
Zero-Tolerance Policing
Essay format:
Word document
Times New Roman, 12-point font
Double space
1" margins
First line indent for paragraphs
Hanging format for references, under a heading of references on a separate page
Include your name, course name & number, and due date
No cover page necessary (but you can include if you want)
500-1000 words
Use word count to ensure your submission is within the paramenters
Minimum 2 academic sources
APA format for in-text citations and references
When in doubt, cite with page number
Keep your writing clear, concise, objective and academic
Support your assertions using a source or logical framework
Use paragraphs to separate ideas
Try to keep paragraphs 4-7 sentences
Avoid quotations; paraphrase whenever possible
Avoid "I" statements
Any statement not cited is implicitly the thoughts of the author (you)
Avoid colloquialisms
Policing
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Code: Course Name
Instructor’s Name
Date
Zero Tolerance Policy
Zero-tolerance policing is a method that attempts to decrease minor offenses and serious crimes by maintaining law and order administration by attacking the slightest disturbance and harassment. Zero tolerance policy is also referred to as "aggressive order maintenance," or “aggressive policing" and it is frequently linked to "broken windows" enforcement (Wolff and Intravia, 2019). The zero-tolerance policy stops interviews, frisks people acting untrustworthily, and conducts arrests for infractions where possible. The intolerance policy punishes all violations declared. Law bearers are prohibited from exercising the understanding or adjusting fines to suit the situations independently; they are obliged to apply the dictated penalty regardless of the person's liability, excuse conditions, or history. This predetermined punishment, whether simple or severe, is always given. The zero-tolerance policing in primary and secondary schools generally applies to the ban on firearms and drugs or other prohibited items on school premises. This policy is extended to colleges and universities to include the prohibition against any form of ferocity, racism, bigotry, homophobia, or general discrimination against another scholar or staff associate. Some teachers will apply a policy to student cheating or plagiarism (Slade et al., 2021).
Three concepts underpin zero-tolerance policing. The first is the basic idea of 'nipping things in the bud.' Avoid giving unforthcoming groups the impression that they have authority. Avert a dilapidated and unsightly environment from becoming a nesting ground for misconduct and unrest. The next assumption is that, in contrast to significant offenses, the police officer can use low-level, humanistic, pleasant control—in some senses "tolerant" action—of these little obstacles to the give-and-take of acceptable social interaction. The third comes after the previous two. At the low-level control, the police may style a significant effect, both directly by lowering trivial crime, graffiti, vandalism, and subordinate disruption and indirectly by creating an atmosphere that is less welcoming to more serious offenders (Punch, 2007)
Strength
Zero Tolerance to Criminals
Zero Tolerance policing is an effective deterrence to offenders. Due to more cops on patrol, there is a better awareness of police existence. According to research, there is a clear relationship between this apparent likelihood of arrest and crime rates. Corporal punishments are another strong warning since they make it obvious that the penalties of being caught would not be trivial annoyance...