Police Crime Control Strategies 1st

Edition Larry Hoover Solutions Manual

Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankdeal.com/product/police-crime-control-strategies-1st-edition-larry-hoov
er-solutions-manual/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Police Crime Control Strategies 1st Edition Larry

Hoover Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/police-crime-control-
strategies-1st-edition-larry-hoover-test-bank/

System Programming With C And Unix 1st Edition Hoover

Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/system-programming-with-c-and-
unix-1st-edition-hoover-solutions-manual/

Transactions and Strategies 1st Edition Michaels

Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/transactions-and-strategies-1st-
edition-michaels-solutions-manual/

Police in America 1st Edition Brandl Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/police-in-america-1st-edition-
brandl-test-bank/
Pricing Strategies A Marketing Approach 1st Edition
Schindler Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/pricing-strategies-a-marketing-
approach-1st-edition-schindler-solutions-manual/

Supervision of Police Personnel 8th Edition Iannone

Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/supervision-of-police-
personnel-8th-edition-iannone-solutions-manual/

Leadership and Management in Police Organizations 1st

Edition Giblin Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/leadership-and-management-in-
police-organizations-1st-edition-giblin-test-bank/

Police Operations Theory and Practice 6th Edition Hess

Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/police-operations-theory-and-
practice-6th-edition-hess-solutions-manual/

Process Control Modeling Design And Simulation 1st

Edition Bequette Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/process-control-modeling-design-
and-simulation-1st-edition-bequette-solutions-manual/
 Instructor’s Manual

CHAPTER 7
Offense Targeting Strategies

Learning Objectives
• List the offenses generally regarded as constituting suppressible street crime.
• Characterize the value of bait vehicles in combatting auto theft.
• Define tactical patrol, also known as a crime response team.
• Describe what the range of approaches to auto-theft suppression illustrates about strategic approaches
to theft.
• Identify how many common types of robbery exist and what variation among the types implies.
• Define offense clusters.
• Identify in legal terminology what best describes the “evil” associated with drug distribution.
• Identify the “macro” approaches to controlling drug distribution enterprises.
• Describe why the use of intensive field interviews is considered a strategy in its own right.
• Explain why the police should avoid indiscriminate use of efforts to obtain consent search
authorization.
• Characterize what data indicate regarding the racial/ethnic makeup of citizens subjected to either
traffic or pedestrian stops.
• Distinguish explanations for widespread disproportionality in the racial/ethnic makeup of citizens
stopped by the police.

Key Terms
Bait vehicles
Buy and bust
Buy and walk
Buy and warrant
Consent searches
Crime analysis
Crime response team
Field interviews
Malum in se
Malum prohibitum
Offense clusters
Pawn shop records submission
Racial profiling
Racial proportionality
Reverse sting operations
Salvage yard inspections
Tactical patrol

1 of 5

© 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Instructor’s Manual CHAPTER 7

Chapter Outline
Bait Property
Vehicles
GPS Tracking
Directive Responsive Patrol
Tactical Patrol
Multiple Concurrent Approaches
Specification
Pawn Shop Monitoring
Other Stolen Goods Markets
Offense Clusters
Drug Market Crackdowns
Intensive Field Interviews
Field Interviews and Racial Profiling
Implications for Strategy

Summary
• Offense targeting frequently takes the form of efforts to reduce a grouping of offenses commonly
called “suppressible street crime.” Suppressible street crime includes auto theft, larceny from a motor
vehicle, robbery committed in public places, burglary, street theft, vandalism, and gang-related
shootings/homicide. These offenses are typically addressed by tactical patrol, also known as a crime
response team. Tactical patrol units are freed from normal response to call-for-service responsibility,
and are directed to engage full time in crime reduction efforts, most frequently saturation patrol
accompanied by intensive field interviews. However, this is far from the only approach employed to
reduce suppressible street crime.
• Street-level interdiction is often more glamorous than effective, as illustrated by the use of bait
vehicles. Bait vehicles are prewired with global positioning system (GPS) locators and mechanisms
to stop the car on police command and concurrently lock all the doors so that they cannot be opened
from the inside. Although colorful, use of bait vehicles makes only a minor dent in the rate of auto
theft.
• The range of approaches to auto theft suppression illustrates that, for property crime, targeting stolen
goods markets is often far more effective than street-level interdiction.
• As a guide to interdiction efforts, the legal definition for various offenses may not be relevant. For
example, there are twelve common types of robbery ranging from a youth using some degree of force
to snatch a purse to a group of professionals attacking an armored truck. Variation among the types
clearly implies variation in police interdiction approach.
• Enforcement approaches sometimes address related clusters of offenses. For example, alcohol-related
enforcement might target problematic bars, driving while intoxicated, disorderly conduct associated
with drunkenness, and fights (assaults) associated with alcohol consumption. Similarly, essentially
the same tactics that are designed to reduce theft will also reduce theft of autos. Although some
approaches may be common throughout particular offense clusters, more typically the intervention
must be focused upon the peculiar dynamics of the offense.
• Interference with drug distribution is one of the most common offense-specific forms of police
targeting. Although the use of mind-altering drugs is not inherently “evil,” usually regarded as falling

2 of 5

© 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Instructor’s Manual CHAPTER 7

in the classification of malum prohibitum rather than malum in se, behaviors that are inherently evil
are intrinsically linked to drug distribution.
• Macro approaches to control of drug distribution include international interdiction by intervening in
the growth of plant sources of illegal drugs, interruption of international transport, and long-term
investigations focused on conviction of so-called drug kingpins. Such efforts are the purview of the
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. For the typical municipal American police agency, control
of distribution takes the form of undercover drug purchases with subsequent arrests of the sellers.
• The use of intensive field interviews to target various offenses is considered a strategy in its own right
because of the commonality of its use, and its concurrent employment to target several offenses. The
downside of intensive field interviews is the potential to harass law-abiding citizens. Field interviews
should be focused, sometimes called surgical.
• In addition to careful use of field interviews, police must avoid indiscriminate use of efforts to obtain
consent search authorization—a practice that frequently alienates innocent citizens.
• A particular form of citizen alienation engendered by intensive field interviews is the accusation of
racial profiling. The racial/ethnic makeup of citizens subjected to traffic or pedestrian stops in almost
every jurisdiction is disproportionate to their population within the community. Data
overwhelmingly support the assertion that racial and ethnic minorities, particularly Black citizens, are
disproportionately stopped by the police.
• Although some attribute the disproportionality to police bigotry, other explanations exist. In
particular, it is noted that for complex historical reasons, minorities disproportionately constitute the
residents of stressed neighborhoods with high crime rates. As part of legitimate efforts to limit
victimization of innocent citizens of such neighborhoods, the police deploy disproportionately more
patrol units to these areas. Where there are more patrol units there will be more stops.
Disproportionate deployment is further reinforced by field interview efforts to better control crime in
these neighborhoods, particularly drug distribution.

Review Questions

1. What offenses are generally included in the definition of suppressible street crime? What
characteristics make these crimes potentially suppressible—that is, what distinguishes
suppressible crime from nonsuppressible crime?

Suppressible street crime includes auto theft, larceny from a motor vehicle, robbery committed in
public places, burglary, street theft, vandalism, and sometimes gang-related shootings. Open-air drug
markets and prostitution solicitation are likewise sometimes included. The primary reason these
offenses are classified as suppressible is that they lend themselves to interdiction by police patrol. It
is also the case that they are high-repetition offenses committed by the same offenders.

2. The effectiveness of bait vehicles to apprehend professional vehicle thieves has been
characterized as “questionable at best.” Why might bait vehicles be ineffective at disrupting
organized car-theft rings? What alternatives exist?

The primary reason bait vehicles are ineffective at disrupting organized car theft rings is that it is so
obvious that the vehicle might be a police plant. Keys left in the ignition are certainly a giveaway.
Additionally, professional car theft rings usually use “contracted” thieves, often juveniles.
Apprehension of the car thief does not necessarily lead to breaking up the ring. The primary
alternative is stolen vehicle and/or vehicle parts secondary market interruption.

3 of 5

© 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Instructor’s Manual CHAPTER 7

3. What is implied in terms of interdiction approaches by the substantial variation among the
forms and circumstances of robbery?

The primary point to be made is that dramatically different interdiction approaches are required for
the different forms or circumstances of robbery.

4. Residents of stressed, crime-ridden neighborhoods most frequently welcome drug distribution

crackdowns. But not always. Why might residents fail to support drug distribution control
efforts?

In truly stressed neighborhoods, drug distribution and sale becomes, in effect, the local primary
economic enterprise. That is, drug sales bring cash into the neighborhood. Despite the substantial
price that must be paid, many residents believe that some cash flow is better than none.

5. Racial disproportionality of traffic stops in major cities is the rule, not the exception. What
might explain the disproportionality, other than institutionalized police bigotry?

The primary reason cited should be police deployment practices. Police officers are not evenly
deployed across a jurisdiction. Officers are concentrated in crime and disorder hot spots. These
cluster disproportionately in disadvantaged neighborhoods, and disadvantaged neighborhoods are
disproportionately the residence of racial and ethnic minorities. In colloquial terms, we put cops on
dots; where there are cops there are stops.

Real-World Scenarios

1. While other UCR Part I offenses have been declining in your jurisdiction, robbery has been
increasing. The increase has been so substantial that it has resulted in an overall increase in
violent crime, despite reasonable decreases in murder, rape, and aggravated assault. You have
been assigned as the commander of a task force charged with developing a “plan of attack.”
Describe how you would approach analyzing the issue, focusing on development of insight
relevant to the selection of effective interventions.

The central component of a quality response is recognition that the various forms and circumstances
of robbery require different interdiction approaches. Drawing upon Table 7.1, the response should
note that the various approaches address some form of robbery, but not all.

2. Recent efforts by your agency to shut down open-air drug sales in a particular neighborhood
appear to have been successful. However, although the neighborhood is certainly the better for
it, you soon learn that the drug dealers from that area have all relocated their enterprises to a
rundown “no-tell” motel on a nearby thoroughfare. The operation is so well organized that
“security guards” check vehicles as they enter the parking lot to be sure the customers are not
the police. As the captain in charge of the agency’s drug enforcement unit, how do you
approach enforcement in such a situation?

A range of responses is appropriate for this question. Certainly among them would be cultivation of
informants among the customer base. Simple visibility might be mentioned as a way to make the
enterprise economically unfeasible. A quality response would also mention nuisance abatement or
other approaches to shutting down the motel.

4 of 5

© 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Instructor’s Manual CHAPTER 7

3. You are the police chief of a jurisdiction in a state that recently passed a law in response to
concerns about possible racial profiling that requires police agencies to document the race
and/or ethnicity of both pedestrians and vehicle occupants stopped for any reason. You know
from the experience of other police agencies that the data will almost certainly indicate
disproportionate stops of minorities. Prepare a press release that explains why you expect
disproportionality in the data, and what you intend to do to distinguish inappropriate
discrimination from disproportionality expected from legitimate deployment practices.

The press release should emphasize variation in police deployment density, and the legitimate reasons
for such variation. Emphasis should be given to the fact that deployment by service demand or
offense prevalence is the only defensible way for a police agency in a democracy to deploy. A
quality response would also mention that in almost all such neighborhoods, the substantial majority of
residents consists of law-abiding citizens who want the presence of police. Means to distinguish
inappropriate discrimination from disproportionality would include careful documentation of all
stops, training to assure every stop is done with courtesy and respect to vehicle occupants, and the
establishment of easy means to register complaints.

Application Activities

1. Auto theft is motivated by several factors—joy riding, resale of the vehicle itself, resale in
foreign countries (particularly Mexico), stripping for parts to be sold, and occasionally with the
intent to use the vehicle in the commission of another crime, usually robbery. Use an Internet
search engine to locate the websites of several state auto-theft-prevention authorities (among
them: Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Texas). Develop an outline of the range of efforts discussed
on each authority’s website, identifying in particular those aimed at a particular type of theft.

A quality response should draw upon several of the websites, not just one. A minimum of five
distinct approaches to auto-theft prevention and interdiction should be mentioned.

2. To combat property-theft offenses, police agencies occasionally employ both stings and reverse
stings. Details of such efforts are discussed in most criminal investigation texts. Locate two or
three criminal investigations texts and summarize the observations regarding the dynamics of
stings.

A response should draw upon at least two identified criminal investigations texts. A quality response
should discuss both the logistical difficulties and legal strictures. Allusion to fencing operations
described in this chapter should also be included.

3. A broad strategic approach to combating property crime is disruption of stolen goods markets.
Locate the Problem Oriented Guide for Police, No. 57, Stolen Goods Markets by Michael Sutton.
Go to www.popcenter.org/guides/, the website for the Center for Problem Oriented Policing at
the University of Wisconsin. Outline the approaches to disruption discussed in the guide.

Approaches are clearly delineated in the guide; a response should parallel the information contained.

5 of 5

© 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.