The Three Eras of Law Enforcement - Research Paper Example

The Three Eras of Law Enforcement al Affiliation The Three Eras of Law Enforcement Introduction Since the establishing of America, through its many changes to the present, the policing body’s agenda has always remained clear; to enforce and uphold our society’s law. The way this is currently being done of course is different from the early American police forces meaning that law enforcement has witnessed trends as they come and go. Policing as it is understood today has clearly advanced from various economic, political and social forces. To understand better the police and the function of the law enforcers in the society, one has to be aware of how policing has evolved to become what it is currently. This paper will discuss the three eras of law enforcement looking at different aspects of the historical context of police, which will better help with understanding of how economic, political and social forces have molded the social policing institutions. The paper will also focus on the different transformational periods that law enforcement has undergone to be what it is today. The political Era, 1840-1930 The 1840-1930 political era has been associated with five main aspects namely the fact that authority came from law and the politicians, foot patrols were extensively used, the social service function was broad, there existed a strong connection between the force and the community and it also portrayed a decentralized organization. The political era’s main disadvantage lay on the aspect that the police authority mainly depended on the law and politics; on the other hand, the close political connections also presented certain challenges. For example, in New York regular officers even under the directive of a superior police officer could not be dismissed. The chief’s tenure was mainly limited to a year. Therefore, any early New York police officer who had strong political support could directly disobey the directives of his commanding officer. As compared to the British officers who were worried about things like wearing disorderly uniforms, showing up for work late and behaviors considered as disorderly to citizens, their American counterparts were assaulting their superiors, releasing their prisoners from other police officers custody and extorting money from the citizens. It is unnecessary to point out that during this era; corruption became a major issue in law enforcement. The biggest underlined factor for corruption was the soils system that had a motto that suggested that to the victor goes for the spoils. This ended up causing unrefined interruptions with the law enforcement. For example, there was an impression by the winning party that its members should be given special privileges in naming promotions favorites, they should be exempted from arrests and the police should assist in carrying out personal feuds against rival candidates. Therefore, in this system what eventually happened is that it led to incompetent people being staffed into the police force by the politicians as rewards for their assists in making sure their immunity was guaranteed from supervision or by fixing arrests as required. In this law enforcement era, the minorities had a role as early as 1861 in Washington D.C. African-Americans were already serving as police officers. It is in the larger cities that they were first hired, and they made up approximately 2.7 percent of all security guards by 1900. By 1910, that number declined when African-American police officers were less than 1 percent. Minority police officers, during this era, were only aloud to arrest other black citizens and they were exclusively hired to patrol black areas, and they were only allowed to patrol in police cars that were marked Colored police. Very few of the African-American officers were ever given special assignments or promotions. In this era, the role of women was mainly restricted to positions as police matrons and processing female prisoners. It is not until the turn of the century when women were seen as regular police officers by the police department more than 220 cities employed police officers by the end of World War 1. The inclusion of women into the police force was welcomed and they got assigned to cases that mainly dealt with children and women (Kelling & Moore, 1989). Reform era 1930-1980 The reform era which occurred between the period of 1930- 1980 is the second era in law enforcement. The characteristics with which this period is recognized with include the authority coming from professionalism and the law, their primary function being crime control, efficient organization, centralized, emphasis on preventive motorized response, remoteness from the community and rapid response to crime. August Vollmer was a man who majorly advocated for this era, he was the town’s law enforcer and by then California, Berkeley chief of police from 1905–1932. Augustus is often referred to as the Dean or father of Modern Police administration. Examples of his initial contributions include the latest advancements in criminalists and the early use of motorized patrol. He recommended the creation of a fingerprint system that was centralized and the FBI later established this. He started the first unit for juveniles, and he was also the first person to stress on the relevance of hiring police officers with college education (Roberg and Kuykendall, 1993). He established at San Jose State College the first law enforcement degree-granted program, and was also a supporter of police officers being actors and social service workers in crime prevention by superseding in potential criminals lives, for example the juveniles. The reformers in this era like Vollmer wanted to completely detach politics from policing. Law enforcers were to be professionals in that their main roles were to enforce the law impartially and fairly. Some departments, as time went by, declared a full-scale war on crime and this lessened the initial social service functions, and in some cases, they were rendered non-existent. Rapid response to calls and preventive patrol in automobiles were the two main key components to this war, which is the policing style that most Americans have come to expect and are already conversant with. Much technological advancement also came with this new era. With the quality roads introduction, it became more practical to use automobiles, scientific aid and law enforcements use of computers, which became vital in evidence collection. These developments that transformed the traditional law enforcement into a more professional field and verified Vollmer’s theory that stressed on college educated officers. There are advantages and disadvantages associated with the use of automobiles, just as in any other form of patrol. The advantages include having a faster response time to service calls, being an excellent means of offering traffic control, an ideal way for equipment, document and people being transported and the most cost-effective way for patrolling. Its down side is that, it confines the law enforcers to certain areas, like in traffic jams or in confined spaces. Another hindrance is that it removes the contact with the citizen which is an integral part of law enforcement (Wilson & Kelling, 1982). The use of aircraft is also another form of patrol that was introduced during this era. Because of the 30-times visual range advantage that the plane has over the automobile, its effectiveness is estimated to be 15 times that of a patrol car. However, the disadvantage is that there is not much that can be done by the airborne officer as compared to those on the ground. Due to the aircraft patrol high visibility, it is very efficient in pursuit, rescue, search and stakeout situations. Aircraft patrol is mostly used in large cities mainly due to the fact that its expensive. In the last decade computers have made a much more significant impact that all the other factors during mentioned during this era. Community Problem-Solving Era 1970- present A new era in policing started in the 1970s and it became known as the Community Problem-Solving Era. However, the community policing era officially started in the 1980s and has continues to the present day. The main characteristic of this era is the authority coming from the support of the law, professionals and community. A better hold on crime control within the community was provided by the broad range of services. Patrol officers gained more authority through the decentralized organization, which let them develop a more intimate connection with their communities. Within this era, there was an increase in the use of foot patrols and increased knowledge of solving problem. Policing became more centralized on citizen’s satisfaction. Currently, it is being referred to as Community Policing trying to work with the community to find its underlying problems, and address them before they lead to crime or escalate forms the community-policing basis. As compared to other philosophies seen in policing, community policing is considered different (Greene, 2000). The communities, in the late 70s, had become a diverse pool of subcultures, nationalities and attitudes. People associated or identified themselves as belonging to different groups and often the police were not included in any of them. A burst of changes and new ideas during this period in the economic and sociopolitical structure began to occur that eventually would bring about a new kind of law enforcement officers. The police management felt the necessity of highlighting on these issues and their general outlook with the public. This era’s primary function is to regulate crime while offering a wider variety of social services. The police are becoming more involved with the people’s problems and they are also returning to the community. Public relations, problem solving and foot patrol are a few of the methods that are implemented in starting this process. The general improvement of the citizen’s quality of life is its overall strategic goal (Brown, 1989). Summary of findings main points and aspects of law enforcement Policing has been shown to have had two stages already in the past, reforms and political and that we are now currently progressing towards the third era, the community era. In each of these analyzed eras the dimensions of policing that have been reviewed have made it possible to describe the divergent policing styles implemented in the past and the present, but it has also heighten the knowledge of the future police policy makers. For example, the confusing policing experiences with team policing existent during the 1960-1970s are explained by the implemented organizational concept. However, despite the team policing popularity with the citizens and involved officers, it generally did not stay for long in the police departments. It was often implemented and planned with passion and for several years maintained. But then, it would vanish with little fanfare with all the people involved with it stating regretfully that actually it wouldn’t have sufficed as a policing tactic (Bittner, 1970). A close analysis of team policing, however, reveals that it was a strategy that reformers wrongly approached as a method. The authorization used during the two earlier eras show that they both had implications. For instance, law enforcers depended on the neighborhoods for actual support. The definition of functions changed such that the service role of the police was broadened. Demands such as needs, and wants came directly to team members from the citizens. Organizational design changed such that lower levels of the organization made tactical decisions and tactics, for instance in citizens consultations. Environmental relationships such as the needs of the small geographical areas were responded to by the permanent team members and outcomes, for instance in citizen satisfaction among others made it difficult for law enforcement to be effective (Walker, 1977). What has become clear about team policing during the research, is that it was a strategy of competing with varied expectations on every aspect of law enforcement throughout the eras no wander under such circumstances it was terminated. Reforms and team policing like the reform and political era implications were incompatible strategically. A small law enforcement unit could conduct a team policing experiment or have a small team-policing unit, but reform policing proved to be more effective since it established a clear boundary between change in strategy and organization making it something that is practical since it addresses the current issues faced in law enforcement. In summary, this essay simply points out that policing is in an era of evolution from a reform strategy to a community-based strategy and the transition involves more than just making organizational or tactical adjustments and accommodations. Policing, currently, is going through a transition just like the basic change it underwent when it transcended from the political to the reform era. If features of the emerging organizational strategies are discovered and the law enforcement institutions are helped through the transitions rather than being left on their own, it can be presumed that police administrators and policymakers will be more effective. Citizens will be better served and the police profession will be restored as shown by the differences in the three policing strategies (Walker, 1977). My overall impression and valuable lessons From the above analysis, I have the impression that the early version of law enforcement power in America was mainly used for controlling the minorities or blacks riots. Implementation of political instruments of race oppression and slave patrols, as well as racially biased laws during the political era was acceptable. During the law enforcements first 150 years, power was mainly used to suppress, control and abstract the cultural minorities from taking any pleasure in their civil rights. Early American law enforcers were empowered and expected to implement the racial bias acts to retain their control. Racial minorities had no legal standings or political power during the political era. It’s not until the twentieth century that black officers came into existence. Therefore, police attention and protection for these areas the minorities resided was extremely rare. Instances of the law policing for those who were unprotected is what the reform era represented where reconstruction and the civil war led to a transformation in the political and legal status of the minorities in this period. Some of the minorities were starting to gain political strength by becoming law enforcers. However, after a 1986 court ruling, police departments were not obliged to hire minorities or blacks. Some departments needed education, literary criteria, location, and past crime history as a basis for new officers, hiring and many of the minorities or black officers were fired. The transition from the early political era where minorities and blacks didn’t have political backing, to the reform era, where they did not have the laws support, meant that there was very little assistance for the minorities and blacks to gain any advantage in law enforcement, and aid ease some of still remaining racial disparities (Williams, and Murphy, 1990). The community-solving era currently being experienced, if analyzed critically shows that the police often conduct the community policing in areas that it is not necessarily needed as compared to taking it to areas of high crime or areas with low income where they do not have public support. In my view, the community problem solving law enforcement should be focused in such places first and before extending outwards from there. It is noted that the early historical representation of law enforcers within the cities and the officer’s inability to associate to those districts that need much attention often make it hard for them to change like the rest into the community era. In conclusion, what I have gathered so far is that unlike the two early eras of policing, community policing can gain much from African-American law enforcement officers who stress on citizens protection, constitutional rights and values that help improve the connection between minorities and police officers. References Bittner, E. (1970). The Functions of the Police in Modern Society. Rockville, Md.: National Institute for Mental Health. Brown, L. P. (1989). Community policing: A practical guide for police officials. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Greene, J. R. (2000). Community policing in America: Changing the nature, structure, and function of the police. Criminal justice, 3, 299-370. Kelling, G. L., & Moore, M. H. (1989). The evolving strategy of policing. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Roberg, R. R., Crank, J. P., & Kuykendall, J. (1993). Police & society. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Walker, S. (1977). A Critical History of Police Reform. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath and Co. Williams, H. & Murphy, P. V. (1990). The Evolving Strategy of Police: A Minority Perspective. Perspectives on Policing 13. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice. Wilson, J. Q. & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken Windows: The Police and Neighborhood Safety. The Atlantic Monthly no. 249; 29–38 Read More