The combining of administrative, civil, and criminal law has broadened modern crime control mechanisms and greatly increased the legal authority and discretion of law enforcement officers. Such legal hybridity has contributed specifically to the pervasiveness of spatial regulatory practices (or spatial remedies), such as the use of banishment policies and civil gang injunctions (CGIs), by police in urban centers. While banishment policies and CGIs exemplify the reliance on legal hybridity to manage “deviant” populations spatially, empirical evidence suggests that spatial remedies guided by the theoretical underpinnings of deterrence and broken windows perspectives are not efficacious at predicting observed behavioral changes. We argue for a critical approach to understanding disobedience to spatial remedies, suggesting that routine activities theory is an appropriate framework to expose why these mechanisms fail to generate robust compliance or remedy problem areas.

中文翻译：

---

文明化空间或刑事化地方：使用日常活动理论更好地理解法律混合如何在空间上调节“异常人口”

行政法、民法、刑法相结合，拓宽了现代犯罪控制机制，大大增加了执法人员的法律权威和自由裁量权。这种法律上的混杂尤其促成了城市中心警察使用驱逐政策和民间帮派禁令 (CGI) 等空间监管实践（或空间补救措施）的普遍性。虽然驱逐政策和 CGI​​ 证明了依赖法律混合在空间上管理“越轨”人口，但经验证据表明，以威慑和破窗视角为理论基础的空间补救措施在预测观察到的行为变化方面并不有效。我们主张采用一种批判性方法来理解对空间补救措施的不服从，