Law Enforcement Management Issues - Essay Example

Law enforcement management The basic society anywhere in the world requires some form of compliance to an ity, some for of disciplined behavior all to ensure tranquility in the community. All this to be effective needs a stable and reliable system of law enforcement. This is usually achieved either by the military by brute force or by a police team with minimum force and public cooperation. Thus it is very important for a police force to command the respect and cooperation from the general public for its efficient operation. In order to make the law effective, it has to be enforced. Police goals often refer to two main objectives: 1. The prevention of crime and disorder and preservation of peace for community security 2. The protection of life and property and individual freedom. These are achieved by Crime prevention: working with juveniles educating public, providing visible evidence of police availability etc. Crime repression: by investigating crime, by punishing offenders recovering stolen property and convicting violators of law. Regulation of non-criminal conduct: by controlling non-criminal citizens in traffic, public events and in domestic disputes. Provision of services: by rendering information, directions, general assistance etc. Protection of individual freedom: by informing citizens of their obligatory rights, privileges etc. The law enforcement officer must all the time, do his sworn duty and not ignore any letter of the law. But in reality it is the law enforcement officer who concentrates on those areas that pose the most immediate danger or threat is the most effective. Since ages ago man has always been governed by regulations within the community in order to believe that he fits in or and also cater to socially desirable patterns of conduct. Even earlier than that crime has been thought of as a local problem and to counter that enforcement has to be community oriented too. Enforcement of the law hence should be strengthened more and more where crime is spawned, i.e. in local communities. Faced with such considerations, much of the burden of crime prevention and crime control must be borne at the community level. But to achieve this objective we need farsighted police administrators and enlightened citizenry to work for the common good. But the surprising fact of life is that, " The police do not prevent crime" Experts know it, the police know it but the common public doesn't. But if the fear of the police in the common man's mind often lets him pause and think at least for a second before he can commit the crime then that is what we credit to the police. According to the Bureau of the Justice, statistics in 1987, have found no correlation between the number of police personnel per capita and the crime rates. The major jobs of the police officer would include patrolling, criminal investigation, and regulating traffic. Administration is an additional function that involves recruitment, training, public relations and all the housekeeping functions of purchasing, paying and supervising and so forth. Traditional police management included an elaborate hierarchy of command. Police are a uniformed service where the authority is solely based on rank. Compliance is insisted upon and detailed rules cover anything and everything a police officer might do and high level of micromanagement occurs. Decisions were generally made at " the top chain of command" by a select few and passed down. The generally accepted theory was "Higher ranks give commands and lower ranks obey". This causes some frustrations. The police personnel at the lower end of the pyramid are often confused because they are forced into real life situations where they are not able to follow the rules to the book and often turn a blind eye to it because they want to avoid confrontations. This officer also feels unprotected and exposed and this also adds to their inefficiencies. It also puts his immediate commanding officer in quandary about exercising his control or watching from the sidelines. This centralization of authority served to be impractical as the nation grew. Decentralization was born of the skepticism of concentrated power and their inefficiencies. The fact the cooperation of the local agencies were imperative attain a level of performance was a determining factor as well. The law enforcement officers at the local or field level were now freer to do the job and free availability of shared information has gone on to faster crime solutions. Police officers currently are all paid for overtime in the city. Due to not very high salaries, these people do focus on maximizing their returns by working off hours like scheduling an arrest at the end of the shift in order to continue work for a few more hours. The Seattle Times, 16 November 1991, states that at least 200 police officers earned $8000 in overtime above and beyond their salary of 40,000. In a large U.S City the state and police departments weren't able to cooperate by forming a joint task force because the city police was allowed overtime and wanted to do the raid in the evening while the state police wasn't allowed overtime so they wanted to finish it during the day. Another reason is that although police are thought of people who draw the gun and make arrests, it is often a mix of jobs, mundane waiting and dealing with the nitty gritty of human life. It does take its toll and causes some bitterness or revision of ideals and philosophies in especially young recruits who have joined with lofty ideals. This causes some frustrations and the police were often criticized for brutality and lost face with the public. "The police technique of third degree " has all but disappeared today. It has gone on to recognize the rights of a single individual and now respects the rights of the community as a whole in its unmistakable need for reassurance from the law enforcement agency. Until recently good press" was not a concern for the law enforcement agencies. However considering that the general public's vision of what's going on with them was solely the product of the media, this prompted the law enforcement agency to start cooperating with the media personnel. This would involve integrity on both sides, the media not blowing up a slip on the part of the agency out of proportion and at the same time trying to report factual aspects of the events. The enforcement agency on the other hand should try not to gloss over their mistakes or critique the media if they do. Cooperation for the common good and sticking to work ethics on both sides has now instilled a trust in the police department in the eyes of the public. The concepts of Police review boards have now gained wider interest. The presence of a body where the citizens will be able to lodge complaints in case of "unacceptable" police behavior seems to work well with the public who seem reassured that in case of any abusive, illegal or immoral conduct they have a forum to voice their grievances. At the same time, sufficient evidence must be provided to indeed prove that the event did take place. Above and beyond all this, during the 1980's police recognized a few things. 1. The police cannot prevent crime without community help. 2. The police must do more than react to criminal incidence and 3. That patrolling on foot done traditionally was too passive. Wilson and Kelling in 1982 declared, " what the police need to do is actively and visibly assist in creating a climate of order, security and trust in public places, especially in locations in which crime is concentrated. They can do this when they are not responding to calls for service, by regulating public behavior that is not criminal but is unsettling, fear inducing or disturbing. These three insights have become the basis if rethinking strategies that has come to be known as community policing or a community oriented attack on crime. Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux define community policing as: "A new philosophy of policing, based on the concept that police officers and private citizens working together in creative ways can help solve contemporary community problems related to crime, fear of crime, social and physical disorder, and neighborhood decay. The philosophy requires that police departments develop a new relationship with the law-abiding people in the community, allowing them a greater voice in setting local priorities, and involving them in efforts to improve the overall quality of life in their neighborhoods. It shifts the focus of police work from handling random calls to solving problems (Community Policing, 1990:5) The National institute of Justice, the research arm of the department of U.S. Department of Justice has funded pilot projects and research on community policing. The Philosophy of Community Policing Visionary executives in the law enforcement management agencies look at a combined attack on crime by community as a whole, more as a philosophy rather than as a strategy and recommend the following changes to traditional governing policies. The whole organization should have a long-term goal that is conveyed through the entire department. The methodology of the operation of the police executive should cater closely to the expectations of the community. The department should receive feedback from both the employees as well as the community members. The right people for the right job should be recruited Policing should focus on the needs and wants of the community and not on department issues. Community perceptions of crime, police performance, and quality of life problems should not be ignored and attended to with sincerity. Police executives should strive to provide the best possible service and value to the community in relation to police resources expenditures (Couper and Lobitz, 1993). Change is called for not only in police responsibilities, but also in the goals, operations, and management of the police force. Management perception changes Traditional police management often-involved efforts to reform police work by increasing the quality of police service and accountability. This of course, as discussed often, translated into rigid controls, inflexibility and under utilization of resources due to lack of authority. Community policing now has reformed itself to encompass customer demand, providing the best possible service, comprehensive problem solving, and employee motivation and job satisfaction more in keeping with the contemporary style of management. New emphasis on the policing jobs Under this concept, including traditional police functions such as reducing resolving conflict etc., areas traditionally de-emphasized in police work, (such as educational and youth activities, and addressing community problems like neighborhood decay, street and park maintenance, etc.) will be given more importance. Operational Impact Revamp in traditional outlook begins by defining a strategy, as this is crucial to everybody concerned to understand where these changes are directed to and in the process developing an effective set of operational activities Environmental pressures Since the community is now involved there are some extra pressures. Pressures may be from local agencies involved, from the residents when expectations are not met and between the officers themselves when the officer in charge gets very involved with the community, or from the political forces in operation there. Elements of improved crime prevention Examined operationally, it involves Consultation, Adaptation, Mobilization and Problem solving (CAMPS). This is based on a three-staged approach of refocusing, refining and reallocation. The following are the widely used elements in a community-oriented attack of crime prevention: Consultation: Law enforcement agencies have now made it a point to consult local groups and agencies. This is due to the fact that they are more aware of the local problems and needs. While police tend to focus on the serious crimes, the local consultative committees are more aware of what the patterns are with respect to that area. These meeting help to educate people and enlist support in fighting crime. It allows people to air grievances face to face without any middle level. Lastly it helps in the evaluation of the efforts undertaken and develops a rapport with the community in due time. Adaptation: Recognizing that crime and order needs vary from place to place the police have tried to restructure command structures so that they can use resources more flexibly. This encourages the local commanders to make decisions and take new initiatives rather than depend upon high authority and uses decentralization of the police powers more effectively. Mobilization: Rather than relying upon themselves, police have developed programs that enlist the assistance of the general public. The best-known community prevention programs are called the Big Three, Neighborhood Watch, and Operation Id and security surveys. These programs allow police personnel access to permission where forbidden by law. For e.g. in Ontario, Canada, parents of teenagers who are away for the weekend allow police personnel to enter if the circumstances warrant. Under normal law, police have no authority to enter. Also in Los Angeles Police Assisted Community Enforcement called PACE, has been in action to alleviate crime, especially drug dealing. Problem solving: This involves studying the situation before the crime takes place and taking corrective action to stop it. In Edmonton, Canada, residents of a neighborhood kept complaining that there were constant fights in an area. On investigation, the police found that the owner of one of the area nightclubs had falsified information about parking space available. This led to a lot of fights in the parking lot disturbing the neighborhood peace. The club was closed until adequate parking provisions were made and peace reigned. This is a typical example of proactive policing where the problem is addressed before it escalates. Conclusion Police in the U.S are continually searching for ways to reduce crimes and prevent disorder. Such changes will not come easily, but a progress towards a welcome change has been made. Although community policing challenges the customary management principles of the police force and serves to help communities define police work by adopting contemporary management policies. It heralds a new center of political power and represents a renegotiation of social contract between police and society. Sources Carter, David L. "Measuring Quality: The Scope of Community Policing" School of Criminal Justice Michigan State University Rosen Baum, Dennis, Editor "Community crime prevention, does it work" Justice system manuals volume 22, Sage publications More, Harry W "Effective police administration A behavioral approach" Criminal Justice series West-Publishing Co. Germann, A C, Day, Frank D. and Gallati, Robert R.J Introduction to law enforcement Publisher Charles. C. Thomas - Thomas Books Bailey, David H "Police for the future" Oxford University Press Smith, Bruce and the American academy of political and social science, co-author "New goals in police management" The American academy of political and social science, Philadelphia "Community Policing Topics COPS" Office of Community policing U.S. Department of Justice 23 Sept 2005 Read More