'I want to know and you tell me true, What the hell the police can do'

So charged a big dancehall hit of yesteryear. And a lot of people agree. They argue that our soaring crime rate is the direct result of a deeply flawed society - endemic poverty, poor education, massive income disparity, a vicious cycle of ghetto violence from parent to child, an 85% illegitimate birth rate and consequent lack of male role models. Until these are remedied, they say, nothing we do can improve matters.

Now the powers of the Jamaica Constabulary Force are limited, and it can not by itself create a new Jamaican society. But it ‘s nonsense to argue that methods of policing have no effect on crime levels. If we are prepared to adopt policies which have proved successful elsewhere, there is no reason why Jamaica’s violent crime rate can not be sharply reduced.

A few years ago New York was a byword for out of control criminal behaviour. Many commentators seriously felt that the situation there was irremediable. But between 1992 and 1998 crime was reduced by two thirds, with reported murders falling from 2,200 to 600. New York is now considered the safest big city in America. (In contrast homicides in Jamaica have increased from about 600 to 1,000 in the same period.)

What caused this? Basically an intelligently thought out and efficiently applied approach to crime fighting. The Police Command initiated a new strategy which included frisking suspects and engaging in random patrols in high risk areas, where loiterers, probationers, parolees and gun carriers are taken into custody. A good deal of emphasis was also placed on apprehending perpetrators of seemingly inconsequential misdemeanors like jumping subway turnstiles.

To the New York police, petty pavement mischief is the root of more serious offenses - small crime begets large crime and idle young men graduate from throwing stones to shooting bullets. Nor do they ignore minor signs of disorder such as shattered windows, public drunkenness and graffiti because these send a message that the community has no standards. This ‘zero tolerance’ approach derives from James Q. Wilson’s 'broken window' theory. If one window in a building is left broken, this argues, all the others will soon be gone - so mend the first broken window quickly. In other words, neat environments beget order, while chaotic surroundings breed indiscipline. It is not a new or original theory. But as New York has proved, it works when put into practice properly.

(Of course proper implementation includes strict guidelines and internal police monitoring. Completely unrestrained ‘zero tolerance’ policing can become a recipe for officially sanctioned brutality, and there have been protests in New York about the unwarranted use of force. It seems New Yorkers generally support ‘zero tolerance’ but resent the rude and disrespectful manner of many police. The same would probably be true here. Those who completely dismiss a proven strategy because of a few extreme incidents are surely throwing out the baby with the bath water.)

Jamaica can also learn from Japan, whose police force is regarded internationally as probably the most efficient in the world. One of its most effective tools in fighting crime is the police box. These are essentially mini police stations, sometimes manned by only one person, placed in strategic areas. Some 6,000 police boxes are manned day and night in Japan's towns. In the countryside there are 9,000 boxes, which sometimes double as policemen's homes. By deploying manpower rather than concentrating it in big police stations, Japan's police are accessible to civilians at all times. And the strategy works. Crime has gone down in Japan over the past 30 years, the reverse of the situation in most places.

Why can’t the police here combine these two proven strategies? We’re not talking about spending millions of dollars on ivory tower theories, but utilizing our present resources in new ways which have been shown to be highly effective in practice. It would be asking too much to implement such policies everywhere in Jamaica at once. But what is to prevent us trying these new ideas in limited areas? And let us start with those areas of almost total indiscipline that exist everywhere in Jamaica - the bus terminals.

Transportation centres in every town are seas of chaos, worlds unto themselves where every semblance of reason and order has vanished. Not only have aggressive 'sellers', loutish 'ductors and arrogant drivers raised the art of indiscipline to a new high, but ordinary citizens needing to get to school or work have to run a daily gauntlet of touts, beggars and pick pockets. Bus terminals are surely natural candidates for the application of the 'broken window' theory.

But why not go even further and set up police boxes in each transport centre? Think how much of a relief it would be to commuters, especially female ones, if the forces of law were instantaneously at hand. Petty theft and personal harassment would fall dramatically if perpetrators knew police were right on the spot and able to respond immediately. Cost would not be a factor. Police boxes are not hugely expensive, and could easily be sponsored by nearby businesses, providing an ideal avenue for businessmen to demonstrate direct involvement in their communities.

With the right attitude and proper planning our transport centres could then be transformed into havens of peace and order, instead of dens of confusion and anarchy. The government could even hire inspectors to ensure that these areas were kept neat and clean. After all, police would be right there to arrest any vandals bent on malicious destruction of public property. Idlers and those naturally inclined to indiscipline might protest, but life would surely become much less stressful for average Jamaican traveler.

Such a two pronged approach - a limited 'broken window' policy combined with the selective distribution of sponsored 'police boxes' - could have far reaching results. If it worked in the transport centres, and there is no reason it should not, the public surely would welcome it elsewhere. So why not start just one test project like this, in say Parade? What would we have to lose? After all, the journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.