The process became labeled and tainted because quality of life" was left to mostly the ivory tower crowd and beurocrats to define and they defined it as "standa

The process became labeled and tainted because quality of life" was left to mostly the ivory tower crowd and beurocrats to define and they defined it as "standards of behavior not befitting my suburb". The end result was that the police were told to harass everyone who was working on their car on the street, drinking on the front porch or playing loud music (i.e. things nobody in the communities where they happen considers abnormal) and the police who didn't really want to enforce that stuff picked the people who they felt the least empathy for to enforce it on (hint: those people were mostly poor and not white). It works in that it used the almighty jackboot to root out violations of minor local ordinances in exactly the kinds of neighborhoods where nobody wanted those ordinances in the first place. And that makes it a crappy place to live. And of course the criminals move elsewhere, because career criminals tend to not have very long term living arrangements and can easily relocate to neighborhoods where you're not gonna get harassed for walking your dog with beer in hand. The problem just shuffles around. Also enforcing laws that criminalize what a community considers normal behavior is exactly how you destroy community trust. Community policing reduced crime, because people begrudgingly violated minor laws less publicly, but it didn't increase standards of living.