A Reform Of Piss-Poor Policing In New York City?

“Urinating and drinking in public,” Bloomberg News reports, “would no longer be treated as crimes under a package of bills New York’s City Council will consider to ease enforcement of quality-of-life offenses that lawmakers say clog the courts and have been disproportionately enforced against minorities.”

The editorial board of the New York Times views this relaxing of the “broken windows” approach to policing as a “promising step,” in large part because “overly harsh responses” to pissing in public “shackle too many people — often the poor and those in black and Latino communities — with criminal records…. A more rational set of laws and punishments,” the New York Times editorial board asserts, “can keep the peace and ease the burden of overpolicing in communities of color.”

Do Bloomberg News or the New York Times have any evidence that the current laws against public urination “have been disproportionately enforced against minorities”? That is, can they cite evidence that “minorities” (does that include Asians, or just blacks and Hispanics?) who urinate in public are prosecuted at a higher rate than whites (and Asians?) who urinate in public? If not, why does the Times believe such enforcement is “overpolicing”?

Say What? (2)

  1. CaptDMO January 27, 2016 at 8:35 am | | Reply

    Broken windows.
    It’s better to be pissed off than to be pissed ON!

  2. Mike January 27, 2016 at 8:51 pm | | Reply

    This is absolutely maddening. As a resident of Manhattan during the mid – late 1970s, I can tell you that public urination and defecation in broad daylight was quite common on streets and sidewalks … Admittedly, most of these were street people but would you would also see the occasional drunk.

    Here’s a thought: what will the police officer do if he sees a man urinating on the street, in view of women or girls… The city council’s decision is that the officer is only supposed to issue an appearance ticket. However in order to urinate on the street the micturator will have to expose himself. Isn’t that an occasion for a state charge as well? The city police are being ordered to ignore the applicable law.

Say What?