These surveys included; community surveys, police encounters, response times, and more. The community survey was given to about twelve hundred residents. The survey was conducted by people who lived throughout the three beats. They were asked about their fear of crime, happiness with law enforcement, and victimization involvements. People who had encounter with police were also surveyed. The respondents were asked about their encounter with the police and how satisfied they were with the services provided. Another survey that was given was response time data. It was researched that rapid response revealed two factors. First, the time between the crime commuted and when the crime has been discovered is a major factor. Second, people who are involved in a crime usually wait a couple minutes before calling the police, they sometimes call someone prior to making a report. This is crucial because there is now no possibly way to catch the criminal and make an arrest at the crime scene. Citizens were happy to see the rapid response time, but it had little to no effect on criminal activity. (The Crankshaft Publishing, …show more content…
Part of the reason why the experiment showed no improvement is because simply adding or subtracting patrol officers in a large area is unlikely to have a big impact. This experiment illuminated the phantom of residual deterrence. This involves assuming the police are patrolling an area from having seen them at another time or place, leading to the presumption that the police are present when there is no patrol in the area. Police are now focusing on managing their time more wisely. Kansas City officers were patrolling with no purpose and aimlessly driving around. It was later understood that the root of effective policing is community policing, problem-oriented policing, and intelligence policing. Patrol officers who construct their day to day job with meaning show much more effect than an officer who is driving around waiting for a call to be presence. (Telep, Weisburd,