Last weekend, the NYPD released images of a man wanted for an assault on the subway — one that was, police say, committed in response to being asked by a senior citizen riding in the same car to stop smoking. The story might easily be overlooked, but it illustrates an important point worth making: many of the “low-level” infractions progressives argue should not be policed often mask something more nefarious.

Whether police should intervene when individuals break what are perceived to be minor rules — like hopping the turnstile, smoking in the subway, and playing music from a speaker in a public place — has been an ongoing debate for as long as I’ve been alive. Progressive police critics helped drive a movement to de-emphasise public order enforcement which culminated with prosecutors and politicians adopting non-enforcement policies and decriminalising such offences.

Some seem to have buyer’s remorse in the wake of recent decriminalisation efforts, as evidenced by both the unseating of many so-called “progressive” prosecutors, and the passage of a number of ballot initiatives countering that push last November.

In New York City, however, Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral Democratic primary victory shows that the debate is not quite settled. Mamdani’s policy proposals include taking the NYPD out of traffic enforcement, decriminalising prostitution, and creating a new department of community safety tasked with addressing crime and disorder by adding to the social safety net.

Ultimately, the discourse about public order enforcement in places like New York City has long been hindered by the fact that so many of the arguments about what, if anything, should be done about antisocial behaviour like playing music on a speaker while riding a public bus rest on three fundamental misapprehensions.

First is the idea that such behaviour is not malicious in nature. Anyone who has endured the indignity of biting their tongue while someone acts blatantly antisocial in public intuitively understands that such behaviour is an expression of power — reinforced by the credible threat of violence. It’s essentially a dare. The guy who lights up a cigarette on a commuter train knows he’s not supposed to; and he’s counting on the fact that it’s going to bother those around him. He expects people to keep quiet about it, and when they do, it feeds his own self-perception as a “tough guy” insofar as he understands fear to be the primary explanation for the silence.

On the off chance that someone does decide to confront the antisocial brute, it gives him an opportunity to express himself through violence or the threat thereof. The Bronx case is just one example. Others include: last year’s stabbing of a Metro North railroad commuter after he protested the loud music of another passenger; the 2023 incident in which a 45-year-old subway rider was assaulted aboard an A train in Brooklyn after asking a group of other passengers to put their cigarettes out; and the 2021 assault and robbery of a 58-year-old Staten Island man after confronting a group of men about their loud music.

These incidents reflect the second misapprehension, which is the false dichotomy so often drawn between “violent” and “non-violent” crimes. The categorisation is relied upon to distinguish the crimes police should respond to and seek to prevent from those that don’t warrant the risk of a police encounter. But in reality, many so-called non-violent offences only lack an element of violence because no one challenged the perpetrator. In truth, retail thieves, low-level drug dealers, and vandals are perfectly willing to resort to violence in order to carry out their crimes.

Lastly, what many progressives fail to appreciate is that — beyond the relief felt by those of us weary of enduring brutish behaviour — policing disorder often produces tangible results, uncovering serious crimes that might otherwise have gone undetected. Earlier this month, NYPD officers stopped a moped carrying three passengers for what might be considered “minor” violations — only to discover that one passenger was illegally in possession of a handgun.

In the end, those arguing that blatantly antisocial behaviour shouldn’t be policed are inviting the decay of our shared spaces. Last weekend’s subway slugging should serve as a reminder to the prosocial among us of what we stand to lose if we allow such public disorder to metastasise.