Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T03:46:41.661Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Critic Third-party policing: a critical view

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

By
Tracey L. Meares
Edited by
David Weisburd  and
Anthony A. Braga
Tracey L. Meares
Affiliation:
Max Pam Professor of Law and Director, Center for Studies in Criminal Justice University of Chicago
David Weisburd
Affiliation:
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Anthony A. Braga
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Get access

Summary

According to Lorraine Mazerolle and Janet Ransley (2003), “third-party policing” describes police efforts to persuade or to coerce third parties, such as landlords, parents, local government regulators, and business owners to take on some responsibility for preventing crime or reducing crime problems. Obviously this definition seeks to distinguish policing directed at those who are and who might be criminal offenders from policing efforts directed at non-offending “others.” Thus, the definition emphasizes the affinities that third-party policing has with other forms of civil regulation. Examples of such regulation abound. In an effort to ensure that corporations do not defraud stockholders, regulators place constraints, both civil and criminal, on accountants and lawyers. In an effort to make sure that employers do not violate civil rights laws, legislators have structured statutes so that violators pay plaintiffs' attorneys fees should the plaintiffs win. In this way, plaintiffs are persuaded to become “private attorneys general” helping public officials to enforce the law. In an effort to ensure that athletes do not take illegal drugs, the National Football League requires teams to complete random urine tests of players. The federal government is now pressuring the Major League Baseball to do the same. In this way, the sports leagues become third-party enforcers of laws prohibiting the use of certain drugs.

Given the pervasive forms of such regulation today, that such “third-party” efforts are becoming common in the enterprise of street crime control should hardly be surprising.

Type
Chapter
Information
Police Innovation
Contrasting Perspectives
 , pp. 207 - 222
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Braman, D. (2004). Doing time on the outside: The hidden effects on families and communities. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caulkins, J. P. (1998). The cost effectiveness of civil remedies: The case of drug control interventions. In Mazerolle, L. G. and Roehl, J. (eds.), Civil remedies and crime prevention, 9. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
Cheh, M. M. (1994). Can something this easy, quick, and profitable also be fair? Runaway civil forfeiture stumbles on the Constitution. New York Law School Law Review, 29, n1.Google Scholar
Committee to Review Research on Police Policy and Practices. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Douglas, W. O. (1960). Vagrancy and arrest on suspicion. Yale Law Journal, 70, n1: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doyle, D. P. and Luckenbill, D. F. (1991). Mobilizing law in response to collective problems: A test of Black's Theory Of Law. Law & Society Review, 25, 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grogger, J. (2002). The effects of civil gang injunctions on reported violent crime. Journal of Law and Economics, 45, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klarman, M. J. (1991). The puzzling resistance to political process theory. Virginia Law Review, 77, 747–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. A. and Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, J. P. and Sabol, W. J. (2004). Assessing the effects of mass incarceration on informal social control in communities. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 267–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazerolle, L. and Ransley, J. (2003). Third-party policing: Prospects, challenges and implications for regulators. Paper presented at the Current Issues In Regulations: Enforcement and Compliance Conference, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Mazerolle, L. G. and Roehl, J. (eds.). (1998). Civil remedies and crime prevention. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
Meares, T. L. (2002). Praying for community policing. California Law Review, 90, 1593–1634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagin, D. (1998). Criminal deterrence research at the outset of the twenty-first century. In Tonry, M. (ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ready, J., Mazerolle, L. G., and Revere, E. (1998). Getting evicted from public housing: An analysis of the factors influencing eviction decisions in six public housing sites. In Mazerolle, L. G. and Roehl, J. (eds.), Civil remedies and crime prevention. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. (1999). Foreword: Race, vagueness, and the social meaning of order maintenance policing: Supreme court issue. Journal of Criminology and Criminal Law, 89, n3: 776–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, D. and Clear, T. (1998). Incarceration, social capital and crime: Implications for social disorganization theory. Criminology, 36, 441–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, R. J. and Wilson, W. J. (1995). Toward a theory of race, crime and urban inequality. In Hagan, J. and Peterson, R. (eds.), Crime and inequality. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., and Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, C. R. and McKay, H. D. (rev. ed. 1969). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas: A study of rates of delinquency in relationship to differential characteristics of local communities in American cities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Transcript of Meeting before Chicago City Council Committee on Police and Fire 107 (1992, May 18).
Williams, R. and Hawkins, R. (1992). Wife assault, costs of arrest, and the deterrence process. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 29, n3: 292–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1996). When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Zimring, F. E. and Hawkins, G. (1997). Crime is not the problem: Lethal violence in America. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bennis v. Michigan, 116 S. Ct. 994 (1996).
City of Maquoketa v. Russell, 484 N.W.2d 179 Iowa (1992).
Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 US 71, 95–98. (1992).
Hutchins v. District of Columbia, 942 F. Supp. 665 D. D.C. (1996).
Nunez v. City of San Diego, 114 F.3d 935 9th Cir. (1997).
Salerno vs. United States, 481 US 739 (1987).
18 USC. 981 (1988 & Supp. V 1993).
19 USC. 1609–1615 (1988 & Supp. V 1993)
21 USC. 881 (1988 & Supp. V 1993)
Chicago, Il., Code § 8-4-015 (1992).
Bennis v. Michigan, 116 S. Ct. 994 (1996).
City of Maquoketa v. Russell, 484 N.W.2d 179 Iowa (1992).
Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 US 71, 95–98. (1992).
Hutchins v. District of Columbia, 942 F. Supp. 665 D. D.C. (1996).
Nunez v. City of San Diego, 114 F.3d 935 9th Cir. (1997).
Salerno vs. United States, 481 US 739 (1987).
18 USC. 981 (1988 & Supp. V 1993).
19 USC. 1609–1615 (1988 & Supp. V 1993)
21 USC. 881 (1988 & Supp. V 1993)
Chicago, Il., Code § 8-4-015 (1992).

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×