www.cops.usdo

Cruising

by Ronald W. Glensor

Kenneth J. Peak

Problem-Oriented Guides for Poli

Problem-Specific Guides Seri

No. 
www.PopCenter.org

Got a Problem? We’ve got answers!

Log onto the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing websit

at www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help

you deal more effectively with crime and disorder in your

community, including:

• Web-enhanced versions of all currently available Guides

• Interactive training exercises

• On-line access to research and police practices

• On-line problem analysis module

Designed for police and those who work with them to

address community problems, www.popcenter.org is a grea

resource in problem-oriented policing.

Supported by the Office of Community Oriented Policing

Services, U.S. Department of Justice.

Center for Problem-Oriented Policin
Cruising

Ronald W. Glensor

Kenneth J. Peak

This project was supported by cooperative agreement

#2002CKWX0003 by the Office of Community Oriented Policing

Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein

are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the

official position of the U.S. Department of Justice.

www.cops.usdoj.gov

ISBN: 1-932582-43-6

January 2005

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides Series

Guide No. 29

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series

The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about

how police can reduce the harm caused by specific crime

and disorder problems. They are guides to prevention and

to improving the overall response to incidents, not to

investigating offenses or handling specific incidents. The

guides are written for police–of whatever rank or

assignment–who must address the specific problem the

guides cover. The guides will be most useful to officers

who

• Understand basic problem-oriented policing

principles and methods. The guides are not primers in

problem-oriented policing. They deal only briefly with

the initial decision to focus on a particular problem,

methods to analyze the problem, and means to assess

the results of a problem-oriented policing project. They

are designed to help police decide how best to analyze

and address a problem they have already identified. (An

assessment guide has been produced as a companion to

this series and the COPS Office has also published an

introductory guide to problem analysis. For those who

want to learn more about the principles and methods of

problem-oriented policing, the assessment and analysis

guides, along with other recommended readings, are

listed at the back of this guide.)

• Can look at a problem in depth. Depending on the

complexity of the problem, you should be prepared to

spend perhaps weeks, or even months, analyzing and

responding to it. Carefully studying a problem before

responding helps you design the right strategy, one that

is most likely to work in your community. You should

not blindly adopt the responses others have used; you

must decide whether they are appropriate to your local

situation. What is true in one place may not be true
ii Cruising

elsewhere; what works in one place may not work

everywhere.

• Are willing to consider new ways of doing police

business. The guides describe responses that other

police departments have used or that researchers have

tested. While not all of these responses will be

appropriate to your particular problem, they should help

give a broader view of the kinds of things you could do.

You may think you cannot implement some of these

responses in your jurisdiction, but perhaps you can. In

many places, when police have discovered a more

effective response, they have succeeded in having laws

and policies changed, improving the response to the

problem.

• Understand the value and the limits of research

knowledge. For some types of problems, a lot of useful

research is available to the police; for other problems, little

is available. Accordingly, some guides in this series

summarize existing research whereas other guides illustrate

the need for more research on that particular problem.

Regardless, research has not provided definitive answers to

all the questions you might have about the problem. The

research may help get you started in designing your own

responses, but it cannot tell you exactly what to do. This

will depend greatly on the particular nature of your local

problem. In the interest of keeping the guides readable, not

every piece of relevant research has been cited, nor has

every point been attributed to its sources. To have done so

would have overwhelmed and distracted the reader. The

references listed at the end of each guide are those drawn

on most heavily; they are not a complete bibliography of

research on the subject.
About the Problem-Specific Guides Series 

• Are willing to work with other community agencies

to find effective solutions to the problem. The police

alone cannot implement many of the responses

discussed in the guides. They must frequently implement

them in partnership with other responsible private and

public entities. An effective problem-solver must know

how to forge genuine partnerships with others and be

prepared to invest considerable effort in making these

partnerships work.

These guides have drawn on research findings and police

practices in the United States, the United Kingdom,

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and

Scandinavia. Even though laws, customs and police

practices vary from country to country, it is apparent that

the police everywhere experience common problems. In a

world that is becoming increasingly interconnected, it is

important that police be aware of research and successful

practices beyond the borders of their own countries.

The COPS Office and the authors encourage you to

provide feedback on this guide and to report on your own

agency's experiences dealing with a similar problem. Your

agency may have effectively addressed a problem using

responses not considered in these guides and your

experiences and knowledge could benefit others. This

information will be used to update the guides. If you wish

to provide feedback and share your experiences it should

be sent via e-mail to cops_pubs@usdoj.gov.
iv Cruising

For more information about problem-oriented policing,

visit the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing online at

www.popcenter.org or via the COPS website at

www.cops.usdoj.gov. This website offers free online access to:

• the Problem-Specific Guides series,

• the companion Response Guides and Problem-Solving Tools

series,

• instructional information about problem-oriented policing

and related topics,

• an interactive training exercise,

• online access to important police research and practices,

and

• on-line problem analysis module.
Acknowledgments 

Acknowledgments

The Problem-Oriented Guides for Police are very much a

collaborative effort. While each guide has a primary

author, other project team members, COPS Office staff

and anonymous peer reviewers contributed to each guide

by proposing text, recommending research and offering

suggestions on matters of format and style.

The principal project team developing the guide series

comprised Herman Goldstein, professor emeritus,

University of Wisconsin Law School; Ronald V. Clarke,

professor of criminal justice, Rutgers University; John E.

Eck, professor of criminal justice, University of

Cincinnati; Michael S. Scott, clinical assistant professor,

University of Wisconsin Law School; Rana Sampson,

police consultant, San Diego; and Deborah Lamm Weisel,

director of police research, North Carolina State

University.

Karin Schmerler, Rita Varano and Nancy Leach oversaw

the project for the COPS Office. Suzanne Fregly edited

the guide. Research for the guides was conducted at the

Criminal Justice Library at Rutgers University under the

direction of Phyllis Schultze.

The project team also wishes to acknowledge the members

of the San Diego, National City and Savannah police

departments who provided feedback on the guides' format

and style in the early stages of the project, as well as the

line police officers, police executives and researchers who

peer reviewed each guide.

Contents

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

The Problem of Cruising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Related Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Factors Contributing to Cruising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Understanding Your Local Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Asking the Right Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Harms Caused by Cruising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Victims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Locations/Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Measuring Your Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Responses to the Problem of Cruising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

General Considerations for an Effective Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Specific Responses to Cruising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Responses With Limited Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Appendix: Summary of Responses to Cruising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Recommended Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Contents v

The Problem of Cruising 

The Problem of Cruising

This guide begins by describing the problem of cruising,

and reviewing factors that contribute to it. It then

identifies a series of questions to help you analyze your

local cruising problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the

problem, and what is known about them from evaluative

research and police practice.

You should note that while both cruising and street racing

involve vehicles, some primary differences exist between

them. Cruising is a pastime largely confined to downtown

areas; sanctioned cruising can also provide an economic

boost to the community.† Conversely, street racing is

typically an underground affair, causing many related

problems.

The simplest definition of cruising is "unnecessary

repetitive driving."1 Attempts to legally define cruising

have been more difficult, however, as people have

successfully challenged anti-cruising ordinances in court

on constitutional grounds.

Since at least the 1950s, people have cruised for a variety

of reasons: to show off their own car, to see other

people's cars, to find racing competitors, to impress

members of the opposite sex, and to socialize.2

Reinvigorated and glamorized by popular films such as

American Graffiti, cruising remains an enormously popular

rite of passage for many young people.3 Today's cruisers

drive a variety of vehicles: classic cars, pickup trucks,

mini-trucks, muscle cars, lowriders (whose chassis

narrowly clear the ground), and even motorcycles. Cruisers

are particularly prevalent on Friday and Saturday nights,

and they can number in the thousands.

† For example, northern Nevada

weeklong "Hot August Nights"

event generated $132 million for 

cities of Reno and Sparks, with

more than 800,000 people atten

(RRC Associates 2003).
2 Cruising

But cruising is not purely harmless fun. It creates

problems for the police, nonparticipating motorists, some

businesses, and the community at large. Among them are

• conflicts between cruisers (including gang-related

violence),

• littering,

• noise (from vehicle engines, screeching tires, car

stereos, and exuberant fans),

• traffic congestion (including obstruction of emergency

vehicles),

• traffic crashes, and

• vandalism and unintentional property damage.

While cruising creates business for some merchants, it

impedes business for others.

Nattalie Hoch

Among the most common cruisers are the owners of classic, restored

and custom cars, who most often view the activity as an opportunity

to showcase their automobiles.
The Problem of Cruising 

In some jurisdictions, cruisers have divided up along racial,

ethnic, and subcultural lines: blacks, Hispanics, punkers

and heavy metal groups, the cowboy/western set, and so

forth. Sometimes these divisions lead to group conflicts

and violence, causing injury to participants and innocent

bystanders and heightening fear in the wider community.4

In some jurisdictions, cruising has taken on a "rock

concert" environment in which disorder, violence, and

police enforcement are integral to the experience, and

even expected and desired by the participants.

Related Problems

There are several cruising-related problems police must

also address. These call for separate analyses and

responses, and are not directly addressed in this guide:

• assaults,

• auto theft,

• curfew violations,

• display of pornographic videos on vehicle-mounted

televisions,

• drug dealing,

• drunken driving,

• gang-related activity,

• littering,

• loitering,

• loud car stereos,†

• noise (including illegal use of amplifiers,6 which can

activate burglar alarms7),

• street racing,††

• traffic gridlock,

• traffic violations and crashes,

• underage drinking, and

• vandalism.

† See the Problem-Specific Guid

titled Loud Car Stereos.

†† See the Problem-Specific Gui

titled Street Racing.
4 Cruising

Factors Contributing to Cruising

Understanding the factors that contribute to your problem

will help you frame your own local analysis questions,

determine good effectiveness measures, recognize key

intervention points, and select appropriate responses.

Since the 1940s, teenagers have had easier access to cars,

and cruising has become a popular pastime. Everyone used

to meet at drive-in restaurants. Two drive-in restaurants

often anchored the ends of a cruise route where cars

would "drag." Although there has been widespread closing

of drive-ins since the 1970s, young people still find places

to cruise.

Nattalie Hoch

Drinking, littering, loud music, large crowds of spectators, and

overcrowded vehicles can transform cruising from harmless fun to a

police problem.
The Problem of Cruising 

Cruising remains popular for many reasons:

• It appears to be unsupervised.

• It gives people who are too young to go to bars or

engage in other adult-only activities something to do

(especially in cities that lack alternatives to cruising).

• It provides a means to socialize.

• It allows people to show off their vehicles and driving

ability.8

• It lets people express racial and cultural pride (in

locales where racial and ethnic identity is linked to the

cruising phenomenon).

• Cars are a big part of American culture, and people

value the freedom of the open road and the notion that

one should be able to drive wherever one wants, whenever

one wants.9

Understanding Your Local Problem 

Understanding Your Local Problem

The information provided above is only a generalized

description of cruising. You must combine the basic facts

with a more specific understanding of your local problem.

Analyzing the local problem carefully will help you design

a more effective response strategy.

Asking the Right Questions

The following are some critical questions you should ask

in analyzing your particular cruising problem, even if the

answers are not always readily available. Your answers to

these and other questions will help you choose the most

appropriate set of responses later on.

Harms Caused by Cruising 

• Does cruising cause traffic congestion, impeding

emergency vehicles as well as others?

• How many police service calls are attributable to

cruising? What types of cruising-related calls and

incidents have been officially recorded? (Determining a

connection to cruising may not be easy if your records

system does not allow dispatchers and officers to

record such information.) Does controlling cruising

take up a lot of police resources?

• How many cruising-related assaults have occurred?

How serious have the injuries been? (You may want to

compare emergency room admissions records against

police reports: not all assaults are reported to police.)

• Does cruising contribute to high numbers of traffic

crashes? 
8 Cruising

• How long has cruising been going on in your

community?

• What percentage of cruising vehicles do officers deem

unsafe and/or illegally equipped?

Victims 

• What is the public's opinion of cruising (as indicated

by "letters to the editor," surveys, meetings, informal

conversations, and so forth)? Do most people want

cruising stopped altogether, or merely controlled?

• How has cruising affected business and home owners?

Do business owners report increased or decreased

revenues as a result of cruising?

• Who are the most vocal complainants about cruising?

What is the specific nature of their complaints?

• How many people have been injured in cruising-related

incidents? Are they victims of violent or nonviolent

offenses? Personal or property crimes? Traffic crashes?

Offenders

• Who are the cruisers (age, race, ethnicity, subcultural

group)?

• Are there organized groups of cruisers? If so, are they

gangs? Are there tensions and confrontations between

the groups? Do they fear, distrust, or commit crimes

against each other?

• Who causes most of the problems–cruisers, passengers,

observers, or those not interested in cruising itself, but

there to capitalize on other opportunities (e.g., drug

dealing or other crimes)? 

• Why do people cruise? 
Understanding Your Local Problem 

• To what degree are unsupervised youths contributing to

the problem?

• Where do cruisers live (i.e., are they local or from out

of town)? How far do cruisers travel to get to the

cruising area?

• What percentage of people cited or arrested for

cruising-related offenses have previously been cited or

arrested for similar behavior?

• On average, how many passengers do cruisers have?

Locations/Times

• Where are your jurisdiction's main cruising locations?

Have they changed over time? If so, why?

• Does cruising occur on public streets, or on private

property (e.g., parking lots)?

• Is cruising concentrated in business areas, residential

areas, or both? What attracts cruisers to these areas?

Do the areas have adequate lighting and traffic control?

• When does cruising typically occur (time of day/night,

day of week, time of month/year, certain holidays)?

When are cruising-related problems most acute?

Measuring Your Effectiveness

Measurement allows you to determine to what degree your

efforts have succeeded, and suggests how you might

modify your responses if they are not producing the

intended results. You should take measures of your

problem before you implement responses, to determine how

serious the problem is, and after you implement them, to

determine whether they have been effective. All measures
10 Cruising

should be taken in both the target area and the

surrounding area. You should be aware that your

responses to cruising might displace it and related

problems to other locations or types of offenses. (For

more detailed guidance on measuring effectiveness, see the

companion guide to this series, Assessing Responses to

Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers.) 

The following are potentially useful measures of the

effectiveness of responses to cruising:

• reduced number of cruising-related service calls;

• reduced number of cruising-related offenses;

• improved citizen perceptions of safety regarding

cruising;

• improved merchant perceptions of business

profitability;

• reduced number of repeat offenders;

• improved perceptions among racial, ethnic, or

subcultural minority groups about how fairly police

treat them; and

• reduced police expenditures to control cruising.
Responses to the Problem of Cruising 1

Responses to the Problem of Cruising

Your analysis of your local problem should give you a

better understanding of the factors contributing to it.

Once you have analyzed your local problem and

established a baseline for measuring effectiveness, you

should consider possible responses to address the

problem.

The following response strategies provide a foundation of

ideas for addressing your particular cruising problem.

These strategies are drawn from a variety of research

studies and police reports. Several of these strategies may

apply to your community's problem. It is critical that you

tailor responses to local circumstances, and that you can

justify each response based on reliable analysis. In most

cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing

several different responses. Law enforcement responses

alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the

problem. Do not limit yourself to considering what police

can do: give careful consideration to who else in your

community shares responsibility for the problem and can

help police better respond to it.

General Considerations for an Effective Strategy

1. Enlisting community support. The prospects for

effectively addressing cruising improve when it is

perceived as a community problem and not just a police

problem. Combined efforts by the local government,

community leaders, and media to inform citizens about the

problem and involve them in initiatives to address it will

enhance the likelihood of success. Without sufficient

community support to control cruising, police risk

criticism for cracking down on what some see as an

innocent pastime. Therefore, we suggest that an
12 Cruising

educational campaign be launched to inform the public

about cruising ordinances or crackdowns, and to solicit

local compliance with, and support for, police actions.

Other efforts might include distributing pamphlets to

cruisers and area car clubs to solicit their help.

For many years, cruising problems plagued Santa Ana, Calif., on

weekend nights. Many youths–a lot of them gang members–filled

a popular cruise street and committed numerous violent, gangrelated, and public-disorder crimes. High- visibility patrols and

heavy enforcement accomplished little; in fact, the problem only

grew worse. Lacking the resources to address the problem alone,

the Santa Ana Police Department (SAPD) formed a multiagency

task force comprising officers from almost every municipal

Orange County police agency and the California Highway Patrol.

In total, about 125 officers were deployed on weekends for three

weeks. The SAPD examined the cruising participants' motivation.

After determining that participants both expected and desired the

disorder and violence, the SAPD and cooperating agencies decided

to change the "rock concert" environment to one of strictly

controlled vehicle movement and personal contact between

officers and cruisers. The registered owner of each cruising

vehicle subsequently received a registered letter explaining the

city's policy. This operation put a stop to cruising within the first

few nights, and two years later the city was still free of cruising,

and officers formally assigned to the problem were being

redeployed citywide. Source: Walters (n.d.).
Responses to the Problem of Cruising 1

Longmont, Colo., had a long history of cruising problems that

included fighting, noise, traffic congestion, liquor violations,

shoplifting, littering, drug dealing, vandalism, and weapons

offenses. Cruising participants filled several business parking

lots. The Longmont Police Department (LPD) examined the

cruising problem's 20-year history and conducted a national

survey of other police agencies to learn how they addressed

cruising. The LPD's review of its own practices revealed that

channeling traffic and issuing citations had no effect, and that

officers had no commitment to solving the problem. City

forums were held to consider possible solutions. Through the

forums, many business owners agreed to post NO

TRESPASSING signs in their lots, install or repair lights, gate

entrances and exits, and install barriers as necessary. Beat

officers also got involved in developing solutions. The LPD[

circulated a newsletter to more than 300 businesses, keeping

them updated on issues and strategies, and gave cruisers a flier

outlining the department's partnership with citizens, and its new

zero-tolerance approach. Press releases and news stories also

informed residents about the problems and about forthcoming

police actions. Both on- and off-duty officers then took to the

streets, on foot and bike, for enforcement operations. They

issued over 800 summonses and 200 warnings, and made 171

arrests. The results were zero noise complaints from residents,

and significant reductions in property crimes (40 percent),

crowd dispersals from parking lots (66 percent), and disorderly

conduct offenses (11 percent). Disturbances and weapons

assaults also dropped significantly. Police had contingency plans

for displacement, and where it occurred, beat teams resolved the

problem. Source: Earhart (2000).
14 Cruising

2. Establishing alternative activities for youth.

Although cruising is a major means of socializing for

young people, events such as car shows or dances might

also appeal to them. While some cruisers cruise to rebel

and might not want to participate in officially sanctioned

events, others less committed to cruising might participate.

You should ask cruisers what alternative activities would

appeal to them.

3. Promoting other uses of the cruising area.

Increasing foot traffic in the cruising area, encouraging

businesses to stay open later, allowing restaurants to set up

tables between sidewalks and curbs, and bringing special

events to the area (perhaps closing part of the street for

them) can discourage cruisers, as they have to compete for

space and attention. However, legal challenges may arise if

use of public space is seriously restricted or people are

charged admission to enter a public area.11

Specific Responses to Cruising

4. Enacting and enforcing cruising ordinances. Typical

cruising ordinances regulate how many times the same

vehicle can pass a fixed point within a certain time.†

Warning signs to this effect are recommended, and may be

legally required.†† Police can give offenders a verbal or

written warning (on the spot or in a letter), cite and release

them, or arrest them. Enforcing such ordinances, however,

usually requires many officers and, accordingly, is costly.12

Cruising ordinances have led to legal challenges. Most

courts have held that, while the right to travel "has long

been recognized by the courts as inherent in

our...personal liberty,"13 government has a legitimate

interest in regulating vehicle traffic. The courts have

concluded that cruising ordinances are valid insofar as

† A 1988 Boise (Idaho) Police

Department survey of 229 police

agencies serving populations of

more than 50,000 revealed that

most jurisdictions had some form

of local ordinance regulating

cruising (Carvino 1990). See also

Gofman (2002).

†† For example, a California

statute authorizing cities and police

to combat cruising and divert

traffic provides that police cannot

ticket a cruiser unless they have

previously given the cruiser a

written warning after he or she has

passed a traffic control point, and

that cities must post adequate

notices at the beginning and end of

the street section subject to

cruising controls (Gofman 2002).
Responses to the Problem of Cruising 1

they prohibit only repetitive driving in specific locations,

and do not impede regular travel.14 Where such ordinances

have been successfully challenged, it has usually been on

the grounds that they were impermissibly vague.15 In other

challenges to cruising ordinances, such as when police

ticketed a delivery truck driver for cruising, the court has

held that the ordinance regulated all motorists uniformly

and thus was not discriminatory.

At least one federal court has addressed anti-cruising laws.

In Lutz v. City of York,

† the Third Circuit Court of Appeals

found that cruising does fall under the fundamental right

of intrastate travel, although ordinances may place a

reasonable time, place, and manner restriction on such

movement. The court found the York, Penn., ordinance

problematic because it applied on weekday nights, when

cruising was generally not a problem, and other traffic

laws already addressed most of the disruptions caused by

cruising. This case is the majority rule on anti-cruising

laws. Since Lutz, local governments enacting anti-cruising

ordinances have generally added procedural safeguards,

such as requiring that adequate notice be given.

Local ordinances vary as to whom, specifically, police can

charge with a violation. Most ordinances apply to the

driver only, but others apply to passengers as well, or to

the car's owner if he or she is in the car.

There is a risk that police might enforce cruising laws

against drivers not actually cruising. To minimize this risk,

some jurisdictions require not only proof of an intent to

drive repetitively and unnecessarily, but also that the

accused be exonerated if he or she has a legitimate reason

for repetitive driving.17

Keep in mind also that some local businesses that cater to

cruisers might suffer financially from cruising crackdowns.

† Lutz v. City of York, 692 F. Supp

457, at 457-58 (M. D. Pa. 1988),

aff'd, 899 F.2d 255 (3d Cir. 1990)
16 Cruising

5. Enforcing trespassing and loitering laws. Police

often enforce cruising ordinances in conjunction with

trespassing and loitering laws to keep cruisers from

hanging out on private property near the cruising location.

Enforcing trespassing and loitering laws on private

property will likely require that property owners grant

police specific authority to do so in their behalf. Judicial

cooperation may be necessary to ensure that such

enforcement is perceived as productive.18

6. Restricting parking. Prohibiting parking–both on

public streets and in nearby private parking lots–serves to

limit the number of spectators in the cruising area.

Without a sufficient crowd, cruisers are discouraged from

cruising.

7. Enforcing laws that restrict juveniles' driving

privileges. At least 36 states have enacted tighter

restrictions on teenage drivers, and these restrictions can

help police control cruising, especially at night. The

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration refers to

this trend as "graduated driver licensing."19 Common

restrictions include prohibiting 15- and 16-year-olds from

driving without an adult passenger at night, requiring that

seat belts be worn, and limiting the number of passengers

a young driver can have. They further threaten license

revocation if underage drivers are convicted of any

offense involving drinking.20

8. Regulating and redirecting traffic. In conjunction

with strict enforcement of other ordinances, nearly every

city that has aggressively addressed cruising problems has

used barricades and traffic cones to shut off selected

streets, keep traffic flowing in one direction, prohibit Uturns at favorite U-turn points, or redirect traffic (to shut
Responses to the Problem of Cruising 1

down main cruising streets, channel traffic to one lane to

identify drivers, inhibit conversation and antagonism

between vehicle occupants, etc.). Many police agencies

have found that using signs is not a long-term solution,

however; when they remove the barricades and cones, the

cruisers return. Furthermore, residents must be able to get

through barricades to leave or get to their homes.

To deal with the worst of gang-related cruising, cities have

erected barriers to block off one end of affected streets;

the courts have upheld such practices.21 Some jurisdictions

have created an ordinance allowing the on-duty command

officer to erect barricades and close main cruising routes

when cruising becomes a problem.22

9. Increasing street lighting. Increased lighting in large

parking lots or other cruising gathering points can help to

make those areas safer.23 (Note, however, that it can be

very expensive for property owners to install and maintain

additional lighting, and too much light can cause glare and

disturb nearby residents.)†

Responses With Limited Effectiveness

10. Sanctioning cruising in alternative locations. Some

police agencies, such as those in Arlington, Texas, and

Huntington, W.Va., have tried to relocate and control

cruising rather than stop it. In this response, police divert

cruising to locations where it is less likely to disrupt other

community activities. They might select well-lit locations

with a "downtown" atmosphere, reduced and slower

traffic, more side streets for turning, more on-street

parking, and added lanes.24 Or they might reserve a large

parking lot for cruisers, setting up traffic cones to create

† The Lighting Research Center, 

subsidiary of the Rensselaer

Polytechnic Institute, is an excell

resource for lighting information

addressing transportation, health 

safety, productivity, and perform

issues. See

www.lrc.rpi.edu/resources/news

ews/apr04/generalnews.html.
18 Cruising

cruising routes. (A task force studying Boise cruising

problems found this alternative highly controversial,

however, and did not recommend its use, due to city

liability issues and business-owner opposition.)25

Nordic Pontiac Association

Sanctioned or controlled cruising has been shown to have only

limited effectiveness as a response to cruising problems.

To the Arlington Police Department (APD), cruising had become

a chronic headache that defied solution, freezing traffic for hours,

adversely affecting businesses, and disturbing residents. The

APD's first response was to assign its 15-officer motorcycle unit

to the area; they issued up to 600 tickets a night for minor

violations. After two years, it became evident that enforcement

was producing no long-term results. Next, they set up barricades

to divert and break up the traffic flow. But crowd control

remained a core problem, with fights, alcohol and drug abuse,

vandalism, littering, and thefts in abundance. Finally, the city

leased a large parking lot and opened it to cruisers on weekend

nights, staffing it with police, equipping it with portable

restrooms, and cleaning up each morning. The presence of foot

and mounted patrols was a key component of the plan, providing

a secure yet unstructured environment. Everyone involved deemed

the effort a success. Street traffic flowed smoothly, customers

returned to once off-limit businesses, and neighborhoods were

free from problems. Source: Bell (1989).
Responses to the Problem of Cruising 1

11. Enforcing juvenile curfews. Because cruising

typically occurs at night, enforcing juvenile curfews can

reduce the number of young people on the street, thereby

reducing their risk of offending and being victimized, and

reducing the number of cruising spectators.26 Enacting and

enforcing such curfews can be politically controversial,

however. Furthermore, if the majority of the cruising

crowd is too old to be affected by curfews, their usefulness

will be limited.

In Anoka, Minn., up to 500 teenagers were milling about among

cruisers on weekend nights, resulting in fights, traffic violations,

underage drinking, vandalism, sexual assaults, and drug dealing.

The city appointed a task force to study the problem and

recommend solutions. First, the city enacted a no-cruising

ordinance, which included the designation of a No Cruising

Zone. To be considered a violator, a driver had to have passed a

traffic control point at least three times between 10 p.m. and 2

a.m., and before police could issue a citation, they had to have

previously issued a warning ticket good for six months. The

warning clause proved to make the ordinance ineffective, and

meanwhile, gang activity, drug dealing, serious assaults, and

vandalism were increasing. The city removed the warning clause

and more clearly defined the loitering law. More officers were

assigned downtown on bike and foot patrols, and off-duty state

troopers and sheriff's deputies were also hired. While they were

enforcing the ordinances, the department also picked up all

youths violating the curfew ordinance. Word circulated about the

crackdown, and violators filled the courtrooms each week. After

five weekends of intensive enforcement, the cruising and

loitering problems were solved. Source: Revering (1993).
20 Cruising

12. Increasing police patrols. All cities that use police to

address cruising problems do so on a large scale,

employing foot, bike, and motorcycle officers to enforce

existing ordinances to the fullest. (Foot patrol and bike

officers can more easily move through congested traffic

areas and parking lots, identifying violators and

communicating with drivers.) Some cities have numerous

off-duty officers work solely on cruising problems, while

others have special units do so. Other jurisdictions have

created a multiagency task force, deploying state troopers

as well as local deputies and officers to quell the problem

on weekends.27 However, such saturation patrol is

normally quite expensive, and therefore unsustainable for

the long term.

13. Sentencing offenders to community service. People

convicted of minor cruising-related offenses might be

sentenced to do community service tasks pertaining to

cruising, such as cleaning up litter left over after cruises,

repairing property damaged during cruises, etc.28 This

approach may reduce jail crowding and costs. While

community service may be good policy and often receives

widespread business and citizen support, it alone may not

guarantee that offenders won't cruise again.29

14. Setting up sobriety and vehicle inspection

checkpoints. Sobriety and vehicle inspection checks can

help remove intoxicated drivers and unsafe vehicles from

the cruising area. They are, however, costly. Moreover,

they may cause traffic congestion and confusion.
Appendix 2

Appendix: Summary of Responses to

Cruising

The table below summarizes the responses to cruising, the

mechanism by which they are intended to work, the

conditions under which they ought to work best, and some

factors you should consider before implementing a

particular response. It is critical that you tailor responses

to local circumstances, and that you can justify each

response based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an

effective strategy will involve implementing several

different responses. Law enforcement responses alone are

seldom effective in reducing or solving the problem.

1.

2.

3.

11

14

14

Enlisting

community

support

Establishing

alternative

activities for

youth

Promoting other

uses of the

cruising area 

Establishes joint

ownership of

the problem,

while educating

the public

Removes some

of the

motivation for

cruising,

directing youth

attention away

from the streets

Discourages

cruisers, as they

have to compete

for space and

attention

...there is

sufficient police

knowledge of,

and public

interest in, the

problem

...a long-term

goal of

establishing teen

clubs or centers

is set, and local

businesses

contribute

...foot traffic

increases, cruise

areas are used for

special events,

and businesses

stay open later

Partnerships

offer the best

approach for

addressing

problems over

time

It sends a

message that

youth are

important and

community

amenities are

accessible to all

There may be

legal challenges if

public space is

seriously

restricted or

people are

charged

admission to

enter public areas

Response

No.

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

General Considerations for an Effective Strategy
22 Cruising

4.

5.

6.

7.

14

16

16

16

Enacting and

enforcing

cruising

ordinances

Enforcing

trespassing and

loitering laws

Restricting

parking

Enforcing laws

that restrict

juveniles' driving

privileges

Deters cruisers

through the

threat of fines

or other

penalties

Reduces

opportunities for

onlookers to

watch cruising,

thereby reducing

a main incentive

for it

Limits the size

of the crowds

watching the

cruising

Reduces the

number of

juveniles

cruising, thereby

reducing their

risk of offending

and being

victimized

...a large number

of officers are

deployed in the

cruising area,

and they enforce

the ordinances in

conjunction with

other, related

ordinances

...police obtain

judicial

cooperation, so

that enforcement

actions have a

significant

impact

...parking is

restricted on

both public

streets and

private parking

lots near the

cruising area

...the laws

prohibit youths

from driving at

night and limit

the number of

passengers they

can have 

Cruising

ordinances are

generally less

vulnerable to legal

challenges if the

city posts warning

signs in cruising

areas and police

first give cruisers a

written warning;

they can be

expensive to

enforce

Enforcing

trespassing laws

on private

property requires

owners' consent;

loitering laws are

subject to legal

challenges 

New parking

ordinances may be

required

Stiffer penalties

might include

license revocation

if underage

drivers are

convicted of any

drinking-related

offense; it requires

a strong police

commitment to

enforce the laws

Response

No.

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

Specific Responses to Cruising
Appendix 2

8.

9.

10.

11.

16

17

17

19

Regulating and

redirecting

traffic

Increasing

street lighting

Sanctioning

cruising in

alternative

locations 

Enforcing

juvenile curfews

Discourages

cruisers from

driving in

cruising areas,

and prevents

conversation and

antagonism

between vehicle

occupants

Reduces the risk

of traffic

crashes, gives

victims a better

opportunity to

identify

offenders, and

increases the

public's sense of

security

Moves cruising

to areas where it

is less likely to

interfere with

other activities,

and where police

can more easily

monitor and

control it 

Reduces the

number of

juveniles

cruising, thereby

reducing their

risk of offending

and being

victimized

It may require

special legal

authorization

It may be costly to

implement and

bothersome to

surrounding

residents

Local governments

may be liable for

harms occurring at

officially

sanctioned

locations; police

must still be

present to monitor

cruising; extra

amenities may be

required if the

locations are

deemed public

spaces

Curfews are

commonly

politically

controversial and

subject to legal

challenge; police

enforcement may

be labor-intensive

...police also

enforce related

ordinances

...a qualified

lighting designer

and city planners

determine types

and locations of

lighting

...all or most

cruisers are

willing to use the

alternative

locations

...there is

widespread

public support

for curfew

enforcement 

Response

No.

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

Responses With Limited Effectiveness
24 Cruising

12.

13.

14.

20

20

20

Increasing

police patrols

Sentencing

offenders to

community

service

Setting up

sobriety and

vehicle

inspection

checkpoints 

Deters cruisers

through

increased police

presence and

enforcement 

Deters offenders

Discourages

cruising, and

removes

intoxicated

drivers and

unsafe vehicles

from the

cruising area

It is costly and

reduces the

number of officers

available for other

tasks

It could gain

widespread

business and

citizen support,

and promote

positive policeyouth relations,

depending on

whether police

administer the

program in a

positive manner 

They are laborintensive and

costly

...a special detail

of officers (e.g.,

a traffic unit) is

deployed at peak

cruising times

...community

service activities

address cruisingrelated harms 

...the

checkpoints do

not contribute to

traffic

congestion and

confusion

Response

No.

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations
Endnotes 2

Endnotes

1 Gofman (2002). 2 Witzel and Bash (1997). 3 Gofman (2002). 4 Patterson and Barbour (1989). 5 Walters (n.d.). 6 Brinkmann (2001). 7 Lezon (1999). 8 Carvino (1990). 9 Carvino (1990). 10 Carvino (1990). 11 Trapp (2000). 12 Trapp (2000). 13 Brandmiller v. Arreola, 199 Wis.2d 528, 544 N.W.2d 894

(Wis. Supr. Ct. 1996). 14 Podgers (1996). 15 State v. Stallman, 519 N.W.2d 903 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). 16 Scheunemann v. City of West Bend, 507 N.W.2d 163 (Wis.

Ct. App. 1993). 17 Gofman (2002). 18 Carvino (1990). 19 U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration (2004). 20 Wilkinson (2001). 21 See, for example, Townes v. St. Louis, 949 F. Supp.731

(E. D. Mo. 1996), aff'd, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 8861

(8th Cir., Sept. 6, 1997). 22 Carvino (1990), as reported by the Reno Police

Department, pp. 1–16. 23 Carvino (1990), as reported by the Reno Police

Department, pp. 1–16. 24 Carvino (1990); see also Avon and Somerset

Constabulary (2002).
26 Cruising

25 Carvino (1990). 26 Meares and Kahan (1998). 27 Walters (n.d.). 28 Carvino (1990). 29 Carvino (1990).
References 2

References

Avon and Somerset Constabulary (2002). "Car Cruisers: A

Partnership Bridging the Gap Between Car Cruisers

and the Authorities." Submission for the Tilley Award,

Home Office, United Kingdom.

Bell, J. (1989). "Cruising Cooper Street." The Police Chief

(January):26–29.

Brinkmann, P. (2001). "Illegal Amplification: 'Bass Craze'

Earns Tickets as Police, Residents Crack Down on

Loud Cars Cruising Decatur Streets." Herald & Review

(Decatur, Ill.), Aug. 30, p. 1.

Carvino, J. (1990). Downtown "Cruising" in Major U.S. Cities,

and One City's Response to the Problem. Boise, Idaho:

Boise Police Department.

Earhart, C. (2000). "Main Street Crime-Watch Project."

Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for

Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing.

Gofman, S. (2002). "Car Cruising: One Generation's

Innocent Fun Becomes the Next Generation's Crime."

Brandeis Law Journal 41:1–31.

Lezon, D. (1999). "Las Vegas Focuses on Cutting CruiserRelated Crime." Albuquerque Journal, June 7.

http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe (accessed July 14,

2003)

Meares, T., and D. Kahan (1998). "Law and Norms of

Order in the Inner City." Law and Society Review

32(4):821.
28 Cruising

Patterson, J., and G. Barbour (1989). "Cruise Control in

Lakewood." The Police Chief 56(1):32–34.

Podgers, J. (1996). "Rights of Passage: Three Rulings

Uphold Restrictions on Public Ways." ABA Journal

82(11):42–43.

Revering, A. (1993). "Cruising and Loitering: Preludes to

Serious Crime." The Police Chief (April):39–40.

RRC Associates (2003). Hot August Nights: 2003 Special

Event Research and Visitor Profile Study. Boulder, Colo.:

RRC Associates.

Trapp, D. (2000). "Cruise Control." City Beat: Panoramic

Cincinnati. http://www.citybeat.com/2000-07-

13/news/html (accessed Jan. 25, 2003) 

U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration (2004). "Graduated

Driver Licensing System."

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/outreach/safesobr/

19qp/factsheets/graduated.html (accessed Feb. 10,

2004)

Walters, P. (n.d.). "Policing Santa Ana: How a Community

Reduced Crime." Santa Ana Police Department

website,

http://www.chiefwalters.com/policing/index/html

(accessed Jan. 25, 2003) 

Wilkinson, T. (2001). "Among States, A Bid to Curb Teen

Joyriding." Christian Science Monitor 93(104):2.

Witzel, M., and K. Bash (1997). Cruisin': Car Culture in

America. Osceola, Wis.: MBI Publishing Co.
About the Authors 2

About the Authors

Ronald W. Glensor

Ronald W. Glensor is a deputy chief of the Reno, Nev., Police

Department. He has more than 26 years of police experience and

has commanded the department's patrol, administration, and

detective divisions. Glensor is recognized internationally for his

work in community policing and has advised more than 500

agencies throughout the United States, Canada, Australia, and the

United Kingdom. He was a research fellow at the Police Executive

Research Forum (PERF) in Washington, D.C., where he was

responsible for problem-solving training, and an Atlantic fellow in

London, where he examined repeat victimization at the British

Home Office. He received PERF's Gary P. Hayes Award in 1997.

He coauthored Community Policing and Problem-Solving:

Strategies and Practices, Police Supervision, and Policing

Communities: Understanding Crime and Solving Problems. He has

a master's in public administration and policy and a doctorate in

political science from the University of Nevada, Reno.

Kenneth J. Peak

Ken Peak is professor and former chair of the Department of

Criminal Justice, University of Nevada, Reno. He entered

municipal policing in Kansas in 1970 and subsequently held

positions as a ninecounty, LEAA-funded criminal justice planner

in Kansas; director of the four-state Technical Assistance Institute

for the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration; director of

university police at Pittsburg State University, Kan.; acting public

safety director at the University of Nevada, Reno; and assistant

criminal justice professor at Wichita State University, Kan. He has

authored or coauthored 16 textbooks (on community policing,

justice administration, police supervision, general policing, and

women in policing), as well as two historical books on bootlegging
30 Cruising

and temperance and more than 50 journal articles and

additional book chapters. He is past chairman of the

police section of the Academy of Criminal Justice

Sciences and past president of the Western and Pacific

Association of Criminal Justice Educators. He received

two gubernatorial appointments to statewide criminal

justice committees while in Kansas, and holds a doctorate

from the University of Kansas.
Recommended Readings 3

Recommended Readings

• A Police Guide to Surveying Citizens and Their

Environments, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1993. This

guide offers a practical introduction for police practitioners

to two types of surveys that police find useful: surveying

public opinion and surveying the physical environment. It

provides guidance on whether and how to conduct costeffective surveys.

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An

Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers, by

John E. Eck (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2001). This guide is

a companion to the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series. It

provides basic guidance to measuring and assessing

problem-oriented policing efforts.

• Conducting Community Surveys, by Deborah Weisel

(Bureau of Justice Statistics and Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services, 1999). This guide, along with

accompanying computer software, provides practical, basic

pointers for police in conducting community surveys. The

document is also available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs.

• Crime Prevention Studies, edited by Ronald V. Clarke

(Criminal Justice Press, 1993, et seq.). This is a series of

volumes of applied and theoretical research on reducing

opportunities for crime. Many chapters are evaluations of

initiatives to reduce specific crime and disorder problems.
32 Cruising

• Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing:The 1999

Herman Goldstein Award Winners. This document

produced by the National Institute of Justice in

collaboration with the Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum

provides detailed reports of the best submissions to the

annual award program that recognizes exemplary problemoriented responses to various community problems. A

similar publication is available for the award winners from

subsequent years. The documents are also available at

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij.

• Not Rocket Science? Problem-Solving and Crime

Reduction, by Tim Read and Nick Tilley (Home Office

Crime Reduction Research Series, 2000). Identifies and

describes the factors that make problem-solving effective or

ineffective as it is being practiced in police forces in

England and Wales.

• Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory for

Crime Prevention, by Marcus Felson and Ronald V.

Clarke (Home Office Police Research Series, Paper No. 98,

1998). Explains how crime theories such as routine activity

theory, rational choice theory and crime pattern theory have

practical implications for the police in their efforts to

prevent crime.

• Problem Analysis in Policing, by Rachel Boba (Police

Foundation, 2003). Introduces and defines problem

analysis and provides guidance on how problem analysis

can be integrated and institutionalized into modern

policing practices.
Recommended Readings 3

• Problem-Oriented Policing, by Herman Goldstein

(McGraw-Hill, 1990, and Temple University Press, 1990).

Explains the principles and methods of problem-oriented

policing, provides examples of it in practice, and discusses

how a police agency can implement the concept.

• Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime

Prevention, by Anthony A. Braga (Criminal Justice

Press, 2003). Provides a through review of significant

policing research about problem places, high-activity

offenders, and repeat victims, with a focus on the

applicability of those findings to problem-oriented

policing. Explains how police departments can facilitate

problem-oriented policing by improving crime analysis,

measuring performance, and securing productive

partnerships.

• Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the

First 20 Years, by Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of

Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services,

2000). Describes how the most critical elements of

Herman Goldstein's problem-oriented policing model have

developed in practice over its 20-year history, and proposes

future directions for problem-oriented policing. The report

is also available at www.cops.usdoj.gov.

• Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in

Newport News, by John E. Eck and William Spelman

(Police Executive Research Forum, 1987). Explains the

rationale behind problem-oriented policing and the

problem-solving process, and provides examples of

effective problem-solving in one agency.
34 Cruising

• Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing Crime

and Disorder Through Problem-Solving

Partnerships by Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott

Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. (U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services, 1998) (also available at

www.cops.usdoj.gov). Provides a brief introduction to

problem-solving, basic information on the SARA model

and detailed suggestions about the problem-solving process.

• Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case

Studies, Second Edition, edited by Ronald V. Clarke

(Harrow and Heston, 1997). Explains the principles and

methods of situational crime prevention, and presents over

20 case studies of effective crime prevention initiatives.

• Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety Problems:

Case Studies in Problem-Solving, by Rana Sampson

and Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2000) (also available

at www.cops.usdoj.gov). Presents case studies of effective

police problem-solving on 18 types of crime and disorder

problems.

• Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook

for Law Enforcement, by Timothy S. Bynum (U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services, 2001). Provides an introduction for

police to analyzing problems within the context of

problem-oriented policing.

• Using Research: A Primer for Law Enforcement

Managers, Second Edition, by John E. Eck and Nancy G.

LaVigne (Police Executive Research Forum, 1994). Explains

many of the basics of research as it applies to police

management and problem-solving.
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 3

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

Problem-Specific Guides series:

1. Assaults in and Around Bars. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-00-2

2. Street Prostitution. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-01-0

3. Speeding in Residential Areas. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-02-9

4. Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes.

Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-03-7

5. False Burglar Alarms. Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5

6. Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-05-3

7. Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1

8. Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001.

ISBN: 1-932582-07-X

9. Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8

10. Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V.

Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-09-6

11. Shoplifting. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-10-X

12. Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8

13. Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6

14. Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4

15. Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-14-2

16. Clandestine Drug Labs. Michael S. Scott. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-15-0

17. Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-16-9

18. Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel.

2002. ISBN: 1-932582-17-7

19. Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002.

ISBN: 1-932582-18-5
36 Cruising

20. Financial Crimes Against the Elderly.

Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-22-3

21. Check and Card Fraud. Graeme R. Newman. 2003.

ISBN: 1-932582-27-4

22. Stalking. The National Center for Victims of Crime. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-30-4

23. Gun Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. Anthony A.

Braga. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-31-2

24. Prescription Fraud. Julie Wartell and Nancy G. La Vigne. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-33-9

25. Identity Theft. Graeme R. Newman. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-35-3

26. Crimes Against Tourists. Ronald W. Glesnor and Kenneth J. Peak.

2004. ISBN: 1-932582-36-3

27. Underage Drinking. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-39-

28. Street Racing. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-42-8

29. Cruising. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004.

ISBN: 1-932582-43-6

Response Guides series:

• The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns.

Michael S. Scott. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-24-X

• Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce Crime: Should You Go

Down This Road? Ronald V. Clarke. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X

Problem-Solving Tools series:

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for

Police Problem-Solvers. John E. Eck. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-19-3
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 3

Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides

Domestic Violence

Mentally Ill Persons

Robbery of Taxi Drivers

Student Party Disturbances on College Campuses

Vandalism and Break-Ins at Schools

Illicit Sexual Activity in Public Places

Drunk Driving

Bank Robbery

Witness Intimidation

Drive-by Shootings

Runaway Juveniles

Exploitation of Trafficked Women

Disorderly Day Laborers in Public Places

Child Pornography

Crowd Control at Stadiums and Other Entertainment Venues

Traffic Congestion Around Schools

Problem-Solving Tools

Analyzing Repeat Victimization

Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem-Solving

Risky Facilities

Response Guides

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

Other Related COPS Office Publications

• Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook

for Law Enforcement. Timothy S. Bynum.

• Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the First

20 Years. Michael S. Scott. 2001.
38 Cruising

• Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety Problems:

Case Studies in Problem-Solving. Rana Sampson and

Michael S. Scott. 2000.

• Community Policing, Community Justice, and

Restorative Justice: Exploring the Links for the

Delivery of a Balanced Approach to Public Safety.

Caroline G. Nicholl. 1999.

• Toolbox for Implementing Restorative Justice and

Advancing Community Policing. Caroline G. Nicholl.

2000.

• Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing

Crime and Disorder Through Problem-Solving

Partnerships. Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott

Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. 1998.

• Bringing Victims into Community Policing. The

National Center for Victims of Crime and the Police

Foundation. 2002.

• Call Management and Community Policing. Tom

McEwen, Deborah Spence, Russell Wolff, Julie Wartell

and Barbara Webster. 2003.

• Crime Analysis in America. Timothy C. O’Shea and

Keith Nicholls. 2003.

• Problem Analysis in Policing. Rachel Boba. 2003.

• Reducing Theft at Construction Sites: Lessons

From a Problem-Oriented Project. Ronald V. Clarke

and Herman Goldstein. 2003.

• The COPS Collaboration Toolkit: How to Build,

Fix, and Sustain Productive Partnerships. Gwen O.

Briscoe, Anna T. Laszlo and Tammy A. Rinehart.

2001.

• The Law Enforcement Tech Guide: How to plan,

purchase and manage technology (successfully!).

Kelly J. Harris and William H. Romesburg. 2002.
Appendix 3

• Theft From Cars in Center City Parking 

Facilities - A Case Study. Ronald V. Clarke and

Herman Goldstein. 2003.

For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for

Police series and other COPS Office publications, please call

the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770 or visit

COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov.


FOR MORE INFORMATION:

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20530

To obtain details on COPS programs, call the

COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770

Visit COPS Online at the address listed below.

e10042579 Created Date: January 6, 2005

ISBN: 1-932582-43-6