Aggressive preventive police patrol is unpopular in many areas of the community, notably minority communities, but it has continued because of assumed benefits. Research produced in the 1970's, however, fails to demonstrate that significant benefits are derived from such policing. Because the practice is most often used against young minority males, it can be considered discriminatory, and instances can be cited of illegal frisks, illegal searches of cars, and illegal arrests. These practices not only fail to reduce crime, but they jeopardize any goodwill that police may have developed in minority communities. The police would do better to embark on strategies that reduce fear of crime, strengthen relations with all segments of the population, improve police attitudes and behavior toward citizens, are modest in scope (recognizing the difficulty of modifying police organizations and practices), and increase citizens' perception of a police presence. These goals can be served by establishing foot patrols in geographical areas that have high population densities. This will increase contact with citizens. This does not necessarily mean establishing patrols that are exclusively on foot. It could involve using the slack time of car patrols for patroling areas, such as parks and university areas, on foot. Four notes are provided.