The Status Of NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH in Virginia â D

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SUPPORT FOR A NW ROLE IN “HOMELAND SECURITY” — 81% (96) The contact persons were asked if the members and leaders of their local NW groups would support the idea of adding a counter-terrorism component to the mission of local NW groups. Eighty-one percent (96) said they would. Fourteen (14) of the 22 contact persons who opposed the idea faxed their completed surveys to DCJS and did not offer any explanation for their answers. Of the other eight, • three said the idea would not generate enough citizen interest to sustain an organization, • two said localizing the issue of terrorism would scare citizens, • one said that counter-terrorism policy should not be the province of local government, • one said it wouldn’t catch on in rural or sparsely populated areas and, • one said it would encourage governmental invasiveness (i.e. government as “big brother”). RESOURCES NEEDED FOR A HOMELAND SECURITY MISSION The 96 contact persons supporting a homeland security mission were asked to identify the resources they would need to carry it out. Ninety made reference to 123 specific resources. These grouped as follows: • 37% (45) called for more staff and NW leader training and/or information about terrorism • 32% (40) called for more training materials, brochures and hand-out literature • 15% (19) called for more money • 10% (12) called for more staff • 6% (7) called for new equipment such as computers and vehicles WILLINGNESS TO HELP BUT VERY LITTLE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HOMELAND SECURITY Eighty-three percent (83%) of the contact persons who supported a NW homeland security mission made comments that suggested a lack of knowledge as to what such a mission would entail. Thus, while there was a general willingness to help in the war on terrorism, no source of expertise or ideas on how NW would best serve has, as yet, been identified. Furthermore, some agency contact persons were genuinely skeptical about the appropriateness, practicality, or impact of such a mission. CONCLUSION The survey revealed that NW is still a major component of Virginia’s crime prevention policy. Although crime rates are down and the current lexicon of law enforcement is more attuned to the words and concepts of “community-oriented policing,” there is continued recognition of NW’s status as a seminal and basic law enforcement strategy. 11 In fact, given the concern with Homeland Security, it may be that NW will play an even more important role in the post-9/11 era. As more law enforcement personnel become involved in counter-terrorist training, information gathering and inter-agency information sharing, etc., greater reliance on NW citizen-police partnerships seems inevitable. 11 Neighborhood Watch, relying as it does on a working partnership between citizens and police, may be the purest model of community-oriented policing in existence. 14 THE STATUS OF NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH IN VIRGINIA
John G. Schuiteman, Ph.D. July 8, 2002 Questions for the DCJS Survey on The Status of Neighborhood Watch in Virginia Agency Surveyed: ___________________________________________________________________________________ If town PD, record county where town is located: __________________________________________________ Agency NW Contact Person: rank/title________________________________________________________________________________________ first name/last name _____________________________________________________________________________ contact tel.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ contact email address: ___________________________________________________________________________ 1. Does your agency sponsor Neighborhood Watch (NW) NOTE: sponsorship involves having at least one officer or deputy whose specific duty or duties include organizing or maintaining NW. 1 = YES; 0 = NO (If NO, please explain) ___________________________________________________________ a. If YES, how many separate NW groups do you sponsor ___________________ b. If YES, how many homes participate _______________ (don’t know=0) 2. How many agency staff have the specific duty of organizing/maintaining NW groups __________________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________________ 3. How active are these groups (let the respondent answer and then code): 1=Very Active _____ 2=More active than inactive _____ 3=Mixed-50–50 active and inactive _____ 4=More inactive than active_____ 5=Very inactive _____ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________________ 4. How many of these groups have citizen coordinators that you can identify and call on for assistance _______ % (0=don’t know) Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________________ 5. How are these groups organized (neighborhood... block .....street) 1 = Neighborhood 2 = Block 3 = Street or Road 4 = Civic Association 5 = Mixture Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________________ THE STATUS OF NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH IN VIRGINIA 15
Page 1 and 2: REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINA
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS 2002 Neighborhood
Page 5 and 6: INTRODUCTION In March 2002, Attorne
Page 7 and 8: SURVEY FINDINGS NUMBER OF LAW ENFOR
Page 9 and 10: When the sponsor agencies were cate
Page 11 and 12: LOCATION OF ACTIVE NW PROGRAMS The
Page 13 and 14: METHODS AGENCIES USE TO PROMOTE NW
Page 15: Fifty-three percent (53%) of the sp
Page 19 and 20: VA Law Enforcement Agency Sponsorsh
Page 21 and 22: NW Program Sponsor How Agency Conta
Page 27 and 28: Photo Credit-Laureen Hyman

The Status Of NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH in Virginia â D

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?

The Status Of NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH in Virginia â D