Indianapolis v. St. Petersburg Why do their policing styles differ? Article: “Police Culture and Coercion”, Criminology, 41:4, 2003

FBI UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS – 2003 – NUMBER OF OFFENSES KNOWN TO POLICE PopulationTT ViolentMurderRapeRobbAggAsltTT PropBurgTheftVehTheft Indianapolis St. Petersburg Ind:St.P ratio 3.2:11.7:14.9:14:12.4:11.4:12.8:12.6:1 3.7:1 DEMOGRAPHICS – 2000 CENSUS Area (mi 2 )Pop dens./ mi 2 % Pop. < 25 Indianapolis % St. Petersburg % Ind:St.P ratio 2.7:10.5:11.2:1 (21%>) POLICE FORCE CHARACTERISTICS Ofcs (w/o supv)Ofc/1,000 pop. Indianapolis St. Petersburg Ind:St.P ratio 2.2:10.7:1 (29%<)

Indianapolis – St. Petersburg comparison (racial profiling article) Differences between communities – Crime – Police coverage – Population density – Geographical area Effects of differences on environment of policing – Officer backup / number on scene – Response time – Officer safety – Crime solving – Pressures to move on (calls waiting) Can these explain differences in policing styles between areas? – Indianapolis: impersonal “traditional” approach – St. Petersburg: personalized “community” approach Individual differences in policing styles within agencies remains – How officers target motorists does vary

Politics  Agency approach (traditional-professional OR community-oriented)  Officer styles (crime fighter OR service oriented)  Use of force, coercion, profiling Environmental forces  Agency approach (traditional-professional OR community-oriented)  Officer styles (crime fighter OR service oriented)  Use of force, coercion, profiling Are agencies and officers free to “choose” their approaches and styles? This...? Or this?

Officer styles (crime fighter OR service oriented) Environmental forces Agency approach (traditional-professional OR community-oriented) Use of force, coercion, profiling PoliticsEducatorsFunding Sources Individual factors Or is the model even more complex?