When we come cross news, one of the things that strikes us is the number of stories that focus on people breaking the law. Be it companies committing fraud; religious or political leaders putting a price on someone’s head; stories of mobs killing innocent people they suspect of having eaten beef; women who are killed by stalkers; acid attacks; honour killings; female foetuses being found in drains; activists being killed; the list of depressing headlines and stories is endless. For most of us, there is this sense of déjà vu when we read these stories. And, we probably have. We have seen this ever since we began following news. Things don’t seem to change, because there is a general sense that most people will get away with crime. And, while the average law-abiding citizen may shrug their shoulders, and accept that this is the way the world is, others look at those who get away, and think that they will too. People commit crimes because they see others get away with it.
‘Broken Windows’ is a theory in sociology that looks at disorder within neighbourhoods. It is derived from the belief that in urban settings, the concept of social disorder and crime are interconnected. It derived out of observations by sociologists and policemen that in certain areas of urban America, beset by petty crime, if a building had a broken window (usually smashed by a stone), then sooner or later, all other windows in that building will be broken. The reason was simple, someone has gotten away breaking a window, so will we. This was borne out by a series of experiments. One such experiment was conducted by Phillip Zimbardo, a sociologist from Stanford. He left two cars without number plates, one in an area with high crime, and the second in a middle-class area. The one left in an area with high crime was vandalised within an hour, by people who looked relatively well-heeled and non-criminal. The one left in the middle-class area was not touched for a week, till Zimbardo’s team took a sledgehammer to the car. Within half an hour, residents joined in and the car was demolished. In both cases, the crime was committed by people not expected to commit crimes. They saw an opportunity, they saw no one cared what happened, they saw no seeming penalty, and otherwise law-abiding people, committed a crime.
So, how do you prevent a crime? You fix the broken window. You take away the opportunity of committing the crime, or you show publicly that crime does not pay. And, overall, as the broken windows got fixed, as the petty crime began getting addressed, the larger crimes too seemed to diminish. To see the broken windows theory in action in India, take into consideration traffic in any major city, and observe the way people drive. The signals we break, the sound pollution rules we flout, the way we cross roads, the way cars are double-parked outside malls and multiplexes; or look at how easily we dismiss laws on noise pollution — loudspeakers at mosques, temples, gurudwaras, weddings, funerals, birthday parties. Or take it one step further, look at how shops and eateries have encroached onto pavements. And, when questioned about any of this ‘law breaking’, the response is ‘why don’t you ask x person to stop first’.
One way to stop bigger crimes is to visibly stop the smaller crimes. Societal disorder will have to be countered by law and order. The Rule of Law has to be demonstrated. Tow away cars, destroy encroachment (and not just by the slums), confiscate loudspeakers, at one level. And, at the second level, throw the book at the bigger crimes. Fast-track the process so that justice is delivered. If parents who committed female foeticide were sent to prison, would gender imbalance continue to be a problem today? If rioters before 1984 went to jail, would the 1984 riots have taken place? And, if the rioters from 1984 were in jail, would every subsequent riot have taken place? What India needs is a consensus on crime and punishment, and the certainty that if a crime is committed, punishment will follow, swiftly. It is this, and only this, that can reduce the descent into disorder.
The author works at the intersection of digital content, technology and audiences. She is also a writer, teacher, and film-maker.
