Many of you might be familiar with the book The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. Reading some of your emails and seeing some of the posts on this blog...and of course my own personal experiences in this building, reminded me of a section of the book that talked about how New York City dealt with a crippling crime situation during the 80's and 90's.
Their solution to the criminal problem in the subway was dubbed The Broken Window Theory and I believe that from this story a parable, relative to some of the activity in this building, can be made. For those of you not familiar with this theory, it goes a little like this...
During the 1980’s to early 1990’s the New York City subways were likened to Dante’s Inferno because of the theft and murders that occurred in the trains and stations. Around that time criminologists James Q. Wilson and George Kelling developed what they called the Broken Windows theory. This theory basically proposed that crime was the natural result of a disorder. If people see broken windows, trash, and minor crimes such as vandalism and graffiti they will naturally end up assuming that they can get away with worse crimes. Kelling applied this principal to clean up the New York City subways. Rather than trying to stop the murders and thefts on the subway system Kelling attacked the problem of graffiti. Next another follower of the Broken Windows theory, William Bratton, developed a system that cracked down on farebeating. Farebeaters were arrested, chained together, and left in a line near the turnstiles until a full load had been caught. In these two simple ways Kelling and Bratton changed the atmosphere of the subway. Now it didn’t look like the subway was a place where one could get away with crime. The trains were clean, and potential criminals had to walk past a daisy chain of arrested farebeaters every time they wanted to enter the subway. Suddenly the subways were no longer seemed like a convenient place to commit a crime. I definitely agree with the Broken Windows theory because it makes sense for people to be effected by their environment. An untidy, broken environment will make people frustrated and angry. It also makes them care less for their environment so that they don’t mind ruining it even more. In this way it becomes an epidemic as one person vandalizes a train. Then other people start vandalizing trains. Eventually people start thinking that they don’t want to pay $1.25 to ride the trashed out subway trains. People start farebeating because they don’t feel that the subway is worth $1.25. Farebeating is a crime, and although it is not a particularly harmful one, it sets a pattern for illegal conduct that becomes associated with the subway, hence attracting other criminals.
So one would assume then, by this theory, that since folks smoke in front of the building (although not recently, do the torched bushes have anything to do with that?) or trash the common areas, that it is acceptable behaviour by the masses.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, I'm going to have an all-night rave on the roof this weekend, because obviously this sort of boorish behaviour isn't discouraged!
Is it unacceptable to smoke in front of the building?
ReplyDeleteI can't tell if that's sarcasm or not.
ReplyDeleteIf it is, I'm sorry, haven't had enough coffee yet this morning.
If it's not, you're highly disrespectful and rude. If you want to smoke, there's courtyard full of ashtrays and a roof.
To be honest I'm not sure of the building's official policy on smoking and if it has designated smoking areas. I believe the city has an ordinnce as to how close one can smoke near an entrance however. Perhaps management will read this and weigh in on their policy.
ReplyDeleteAt very least I think it's a bit disrespectful to smoke in front of the doors. Smokers have long maintained that it is their right to smoke, and so far it's not illegal, but they rarely address the issue of others inhaling their smoke and putting up with their mess. I've always thought it strange how smokers think nothing of throwing their butts on the ground, out their car window, wherever. Ponderous man!
I have addressed in an earlier post how smokers have made the planters out front their personal ash trays. Both of the aforementioned conditions I consider pretty nasty.
BTW, Tricky, I never said smokers were responsible for the bushes being burned in the front of the building. I think one could reasonably make that assumption, and it may indeed be the reason, but I don't know it for a fact. If so, it's one more reason to ban smoking outside of the building.
Tricky, I think the point I'm making about with the Broken Window Theory is simple. If "situations" in the building are allowed to perpetuate, they will encourage similar behavior. If they are swiftly and decisively dealt with, they will send the message that stupidity will not be allowed.
ReplyDeleteThis should be an aggressive staff policy.
Thomas:
ReplyDeleteYes, Thomas, I agree with you. My point (tongue firmly in cheek) about having a party was that the rules not being adequately enforced (or 'selectively' enforced) is a problem.
Also, common sense on the tenants is also an issue. For example, hey Knucklehead, don't bring glass to the roof, if you do, pour your beverage of choice into a plastic cup and keep the rest in a cooler.
Common sense would seemingly eliminate a lot of the headaches.
No I got you Tricky. You're right that the rules aren't being adequately enforced. I'm not entirely sure how this should be handled either, and "knuckleheads" are extremely hard to get through to. I think generally common sense and knucklehead are mutually exclusive. It appears to be an element that not only doesn't get it, they don't care.
ReplyDeleteMy previously quiet floor has recently gotten two new tenants on it (that I know about). One has already had an extremely loud party in their apartment and the other evidently has multiple tenants with frequent visitors. Perhaps this wouldn't be a problem except that they evidently don't know how loud they are outside of their door. They are constantly screaming, laughing loudly, or just talking at a highly audible level.
I'm not really the shy type, but I don't feel like being the floor tattletale, nor do I want to always be confronting people because of their noise. I also don't want to always be calling the rental office either. Frankly it's starting to make me feel like a crank, and I'm not. I just think some level of respect for your neighbor largely makes these type of things obvious.
Part of the problem is that the management office advertises the more expensive apartments in the building as "perfect for roommates." This encourages younger tenants and the group home mentality. Just google Jefferson at Capitol yards on craigslist and you'll see a bunch of them.
ReplyDeleteRicky,
ReplyDeleteI was serious in my comment, though I could have elaborated.
I am no longer a smoker and do not reside at Jefferson, but next door. I agree that failing to dispose of cigarette butts properly, burning bushes, and causing loud disturbances, all constitute socially unacceptable, and in some cases, criminal behavior.
Admittedly, I am unaware of the building or city policy on smoking near the entrance. My question was meant more to probe the situation and generate a discussion on what is "socially acceptable" vs. what is legal. While presumably few people want to enter or exit a building to a cloud of smoke, what is a reasonable remedy to that? Ban smoking within 20 ft, 50? In public places?
Anon,
ReplyDeleteAppreciate the clarification.
I'm not anti-smoking. I'm a non-smoker, but I really don't care if people smoke or not. Additionally, I'm NOT in favor of smoking bans, I think they infringe upon individual rights.
I just don't think that standing infront of the building is a good place for it, because of two reasons...
1) It looks tacky and doesn't encourage people to enter the building. It looks like your guarding the place.
2) There isn't a proper place to dispose of your cigarette butts, so they end up on the ground or in one of the planters, and who cleans them up? Our fantastic maintence staff, who IMO, puts up with way too much crap, like the dog piss I saw in an elevator yesterday.
Personally, I think that by management placing ashtrays and places to dispose of butts in the courtyard and on the roof that they've encouraged smokers to take their breaks there.
Some of these fokls are outside because they choose not to smoke in their apartment. I applaud this - I'd much rather deal with smokers outside the front of the building than having their smoke invade my personal living area through vents and such.
ReplyDeleteWhile I also agree with not smoking in the apartment, the fact remains that management has done a great job of placing ashtrays and cigarette disposal areas in the courtyard and the small balcony just off the lobby. Those would probably be more appropriate places to smoke.
ReplyDeleteTricky, I agree. Maintenance have to put up with way too much bull--still they do a great job. I'm really glad that we have a maintenance staff that most of us can feel really good about. That's a big deal. It really sucks when you live somewhere where maintenance seemingly doesn't exist.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that it's better for smokers to smoke outside rather than create that smell inside. I'm not sure of the policy, but I think this is a no smoking building, is it not? I'm gonna find out.
Still, I have smelled it in some of the apartments.
We had smoke drifting into our apartment until we brought it up with management and they had maintenance install a "smoke guard" or "smoke stop" on the bottom of our door. Didn't think this would do much, but I haven't smelled smoke since.
ReplyDelete