Community Policing And Crime Prevention - Research Paper Example

Community Policing And Crime Prevention Introduction The steady increase of economic interaction of international players and the rapid growth of multinational entities taking part in the global market has been the main catalyst and proof that time has indeed evolved. From a matter of mundane interest, profit and maximum rate of returns have been the primal considerations of people seeking to ride the tide of the times. But while many are absorbed into thinking that money alone has been the yardstick of evolution, matters such as growing population, increase in crime rate, rapid decline of literacy rate, increase in unemployment and underemployment rates and the apparent proliferation of poverty-related crimes and diseases have been abundant as well. While it is true that the capabilities of people nowadays have greatly surpassed what has been envisioned years hence, the simultaneous development of societal challenges, political issues, economic pitfalls and even religious dilemmas have likewise been prompted. This then has caused the governments around the world to establish more responsive machineries and policies in articulating and exercising their inherent powers over their people (Crowe, 1991). While the fundamental powers of the state have remained constant over time, the effectivity of the statutes and its implementing by-laws and guidelines may have tarnished through the years (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). As a result, the intrinsic powers of the government, that is, eminent domain or expropriation, taxation and police power have been requiring attention and possibly, amendment (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). Consequently, the adoption of modern concepts of democratization, the promotion of free trade in the international arena, the promotion of freedom of religion and the thwarting of regimes attempting to discriminate against such practice and the current high regard given to human rights and individual sovereignty has been incorporated into the current times. Among such innovative responses to these changes, the re-invention of the exercise of the police power of the state has likewise been undertaken (Das and Lab, 2002). This is endeavored by many governments and nation states as a response to the rapid transformation of the society as a unit and its evolving nature and character (Eck and Spelman, 1987). Also, the development seen in the exercise of the government's police power through the police department has been the most definitive and spot-on response to the growing demands of the people and their circumstances (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). From the onset, police power has been mainly referring to the ability of the state to regulate the behavior of their citizenry by enforcing order within their particular jurisdiction (Gardiner, 1982). Under the Constitution of the United States (10th Amendment), police power has been relegated to the individual states and that the Federal Government is precluded from exercising such (Gardiner, 1982). Under the police power of the states, the respective administral head may create laws and policies, through their individual constitutions, aimed at exacting obedience from the citizens by implementing sanctions, modes and means of punishment or other forms of inducement or coercion (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). As a result of this police power, states have resorted to the creation of police departments to exercise legitimate force to exact civil obedience and provide security and protection (Gardiner, 1982). In this regard, law enforcement has been the main vehicle of the state to protect and serve the people while requiring compliance from them as well (Kelling, 1981). Through the years, law enforcement has taken the same path towards advancement where policies and mandates have been reformed to match the needs of the current times (Eck and Spelman, 1987). Different schemes and bureaucratic differentiation have been adapted in different locations so as to make the law enforcement unit better suited to the particular needs of their jurisdiction (Das and Lab, 2002). Organizational variations may be found in the utilization of some states of uniformed police, detectives, auxiliary police, specialized units, military police and even religious police while some areas only take advantage of uniformed police forces and the others yet take advantage of the military police and uniformed police or any other combination for that matter (Crowe, 1991). Likewise, conceptual variations also exist (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). In some locations, the law enforcement adopt a more socially-conscious agency while the others adhere to a more rigid and straight-laced system (Gardiner, 1982). There are those that capitalize on the importance of establishing a more open and accessible office whereas there are those who believe in the need to establish a more stern and incorruptible agency so as to create a semblance of control and authority (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). That is, while law enforcement has remained constant in its mandate to serve and protect the people, the vehicle through which they perform such functions have been evolving along with time (Eck and Spelman, 1987). While the world has come into a more relationship-centered epoch, tenets espoused by law enforcement and police force have simultaneously taken advantage of such transformation (Gardiner, 1982). This transformation has been greatly affected by the following: (1) the civil rights movement; (2) the ascent of academic interest; (3) the emergence of foot patrol; (4) the publication of "Broken Windows;" and, (5) the more recent reform movements. Brief History of Community Policing As mentioned, while the definition of law enforcement has remained constant since its inception, the implementing rules, guidelines, systemic by-laws and organizational hierarchy have been in mutable flexibility (Crowe, 1991). That is, while the duty of police officers has remained unchanged, the manner by which they carry out this mandate has been the main focus of transformation (Eck and Spelman, 1987). Community policing is one such advent. Defined as the manner by which law enforcement performs their duty to serve and protect the people by taking active participation in the community by building relationship amongst the citizens and becoming liaisons of the community they are assigned to, community policing has taken the center stage in modern law enforcement (Das and Lab, 2002). Community Policing has also been referred to as the relationship-centered manner of law enforcement as it prioritizes the creation of bond between the police force and the community they serve (Eck and Spelman, 1987). As such, community policing is a method of enforcing obedience over the people through the implementation of a programs aimed at making the local police officials community-centered and people-oriented (Greene, 2000). In this regard, community policing is a strategy that is subjective as to its type, as its applicability highly depends on the kind and character of its jurisdiction (Greene, 2000). This type of police system has been brought about by several circumstances in history (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). First of which is the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). This era brought the reform in societal discrimination following the call for racial liberation and mass integration of the African-Americans (Gardiner, 1982). As a result of the mass upheaval and continuous riots at that time, law enforcement sought for ways to exercise their power over the people and eventually enable them to reinstate their foothold on their jurisdictions (Gardiner, 1982). As a result to the changes, police operations were re-designed according to definite geographical boundaries with the designation of teams (community beats) alternating their duty hours (Das and Lab, 2002). The increase of awareness and academic enlightenment of the seventies has also aided in the development of community policing as to what it is now (Kelling, 1981). During that period, governmental funds are available which were then diverted to studies geared towards the improvement of law enforcement among other things (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). As a result, traditional policing was deemed ineffective to the growing needs of the times and that a more responsive and people-oriented police system was adopted (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). During this time, the Kansas City Patrol Experiment was undertaken and the said study established the fact that community satisfaction is attributable to the increase in police-community cooperation (Kelling, 1981). Likewise, this experiment illustrated the need of law enforcement to step down from its pedestal and offer a more relationship-centered type of service that the people often equate with social responsibility and efficiency (Kelling, 1981). Following the growing demand of the people for a more active and constant police presence, foot patrols were implemented by many law enforcement units (Gardiner, 1982). Michigan was the first state to have implemented the foot patrol system where police officers were tasked to roam around their areas of jurisdiction with community interaction and the building of relationships with its jurisdiction in mind (Kelling, 1981). As a result, Newark also adopted the foot patrol method however; it was utilized for a different reason (Eck and Spelman, 1987). In Newark, foot patrol was used as deterrence to crime where it was believed that the physical presence of police officers in the area would eliminate or even hinder the preponderance of crimes (Das and Lab, 2002). In 1982, the journal "The Atlantic Monthly" published an article of James Wilson and George Kelling entitled, "Broken Windows" which tackled the importance of deterring the instigation and performance of criminal behavior by thwarting small signs of rebellion or untoward manifestations. In the article, it was stated that it is vital to "[c]onsider a building with a few broken windows," and that "[i]f the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows" and that "[e]ventually, they may even break into the building, and if it's unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside." This article highlighted the need to take advantage of small opportunities to stop crime as this would be equivalent to putting a stop to a more criminal behavior that would eventually arise from such small overt criminal act. To this, Wilson and Kelling (1982) stressed the importance of having foot patrol officers so as to properly monitor their area of jurisdiction and thereby preclude any criminal act or behavior. Consequently, many states deemed it more efficient to endeavor a more community-oriented system (Crowe, 1991). That is, in Baltimore, the police agency took on a more socially-involved stance as the police officers acted as community organizers whose main task is to provide their citizens with protection and aid in the alleviation of their sufferings due to the growing chasm of inequality and the rising of the classes (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). As a result of the many movements, community policing has eventually took a more permanent role in law enforcement (Eck and Spelman, 1987). That is, while police officers saw the need to distance themselves so as to enforce their authority over their jurisdiction, they likewise saw the necessity of establishing relationships with the people they serve (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). Also, homeland security was considered by many law enforcers as seeming to be easier to maintain when the local police officers are deeply ingrained into their society (Friedmann and Cannon, 2007). This is due to the fact that the local police officials have an easier time identifying the residents of their area from those who are not and through such, they are able to pinpoint possible culprits or determine probable criminal behavior (Friedmann and Cannon, 2007). In this manner, policing evolved into a more socially-aware and responsive unit apart from the agency exercising police power through force and coercion (Gardiner, 1982). Through this, law enforcement developed into a conscientious affair and not a despotic undertaking (Das and Lab, 2002). Factors Affecting Community Policing As an element of crime prevention and a pressing duty of law enforcement, community policing or its success in implementation is affected by many factors (Crowe, 1991). Among these are: (1) community acceptance; (2) the role played by other governmental agencies; (3) presence of volunteer groups and other associations; (4) private businesses' take on community policing; and, (5) the stance taken by the media. The acceptance of the community of the perspective taken in by their local enforcement is necessary such that the people within their jurisdiction must approve of the more socially-centered stance of their local police (Gardiner, 1982). After all, the relationships to be established are with these citizens and as such, their acceptance is the most vital aspect of enforcing community policing (Kelling, 1981). Other governmental agencies oftentimes play an important role in the implementation of community policing as they commonly enter into partnerships with the local police in enforcing some of their programs (Das and Lab, 2002). As such, the acceptance of these other governmental instrumentalities is relatively necessary in order to promote community policing (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). The presence of volunteer groups and other similar organizations taking an active part in promoting community policing likewise guarantees the relative success of this undertaking (Eck and Spelman, 1987). After all, creating relationships with these groups could only foster communal awareness and social responsibility (Wilson and Kelling, 1982). The take of private businesses on the matter also may spell out the success of the implementation of community policing (Wallis and Ford, 1980). That is, while private businesses provide resources to the community, this influence may likewise aid in the more viable implementation of community policing (Wallis and Ford, 1980). For this reason, the role played by the media is also necessary as this would help mold the opinion of the community towards a more community-centered policing (Wilson and Kelling, 1982). As such, it then becomes important to note that the relative acceptance of the different sectors of the jurisdictional area plays a vital role in the successful implementation of community policing. After all, as soon as the approval of all the key players in the society is met, the doors toward the institutionalization of community policing or the complete assimilation of local police officers into the community will be opened (Dantzker, Fisher-Stewart, Saavedra, Markaryan, and Bennett, 2003). Current Trends on Community Policing and Crime Prevention In these times, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and community policing have been the main strategies adopted by law enforcement agencies worldwide (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). CPTED programs mainly revolve on the design and management of empirical structures in their respective jurisdiction as a means of strengthening public safety and promoting general welfare (Gardiner, 1982). On the other hand, community policing reinforce these efforts by appearing more available and ready to extend a helping hand or hold out an iron fist to quell criminal behavior (Wilson and Kelling, 1982). While community policing is not a direct response to crime prevention, modern times have seen the need to capitalize on relationships built by the police force with their respective community as a means of thwarting criminal behavior (Eck and Spelman, 1987). As a strategy in law enforcement, the presence of law officers in their areas undoubtedly aid in the stoppage or even if only causing the decrease of crime rate in their jurisdiction (Das and Lab, 2002). Following the tenet espoused by the "Broken Window" theory, the mere availability of law enforcement officers conducting foot patrol would heavily assist in the cessation of criminal activities (Wilson and Kelling, 1982). As such, modern times have necessitated that CPTED and community policing be implemented side by side so as to effectively reach out to the people by performing duties that would make them more involved in the community which is compounded by the presence of the police officers in their areas ready to take on criminals (Wilson and Kelling, 1982). Conclusion The changing times has brought about transformation in just about anything in the world. Nations have adhered to democratization, world economies have succumbed to globalization and the individual has been made aware of his self-worth as a person and his human rights as a citizen. Likewise, developments in science and technology have been abundant and reforms in social differentiation have been adopted. Policies that have once been deemed as highly beneficial have now redounded into mere inconsequential matters that need to be amended. Notions that were once the epitome of scholarly function have now been relegated to antiquated beliefs. As such, people have been forced to make novel responses to their growing demands and contemporary quandaries. Not distinctive from such movement, the government’s exercise of police power has likewise meted out this requisite transformation. From a highly rigid and formal institution, law enforcement has been made to evolve into a socially-responsive unit that endeavors to establish strong ties with its citizenry (Das and Lab, 2002). The CPTED and community policing have been the main weapon utilized by many law enforcement agencies in abetting criminal activities and impeding illegal actions (Crowe, 1991). As an instrument of law enforcement, community policing is a system that utilizes the vigilance of the residents and capitalizes on the relationships established by the police officer with the people of his area of responsibility (Eck and Spelman, 1987). Community policing then centers of persuading the citizenry to become involved in the task of promoting the safety of the area and their capacity to resist crime and eventually reduce fear (Fleissner and Heinzelmann, 1996). It may be said that community policing relies heavily the re-orientation of mandates as it necessitates the maintenance and continued fostering of the relationship of the police force and the public (Eck and Spelman, 1987). Community policing thrives in the strength of the bond created between the officers and the people they serve so as to effectively create a symbiotic relationship that is of mutual support and regard (Gardiner, 1982). That is, community policing as a tool of crime prevention will only be successful should there be the open and honest consideration and acceptance of the community of the perspective undertaken by their local law enforcement agency (Crowe, 1991). As a concept, community policing is highly affected by different factors such as the acceptance of the community of the manner by which their local police agency exercises their mandate, the role being performed by other local agencies and private businesses in promoting community policing, the presence of volunteer groups and other member-based organizations aiming to promote a better understanding of community policing and its specificities and the manner by which media, through its various forms, would endeavor to rationalize the concept of community policing (Eck and Spelman, 1987). While it is a relatively old concept in law enforcement, community policing has taken on new meanings as it continually strives to be flexible to the apparent need of the times. As people become more socially aware and culturally responsible, the role they play in law enforcement has likewise become more perceptible. As the society becomes more vigilant, so does the duties of local police officers become less difficult due to the presence of civic conscientiousness and action. However, such development must continually be improved so that a more effective law enforcement unit may be attained through the constant revitalization of the force and the execution of policies aimed at the furtherance of community policing well into the ages (Mazerolle, Ready, Terrill and Waring, 2004). True enough, crime cannot be prevented by mere preponderance of law enforcement officials in the streets nor would the establishment of healthy and productive relationship between the public and the police stop any criminal from acting out certain illegal deeds. But the fact that a socially responsible citizenry and a socially-mindful local police is present will most definitely aid in abetting criminal minds from executing their evil deeds. References Crowe, T. (1991). Crime prevention through environmental design: Applications of architectural design and space management concepts. Boston: ButterworthHeinemann. Dantzker, M., Fisher-Stewart, G., Saavedra, P., Markaryan, T., & Bennett, S. (2003). Community Policing, Then and Now. NIJ Journal 249: 34. Retrieved September 15, 2011 from NCJRS database. Das, D. & Lab, S. (2002). International perspectives on community policing and crime prevention. London: Prentice Hall. Eck, J. & Spelman, W. (1987). Problem solving: Problem-oriented policing in newport news. Police Executive Research Forum. Fleissner, D. & Heinzelmann, F. (1996). Crime Prevention through environmental design and community policing. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice, Research in Action. Friedmann, R. & Cannon, W. (2007). Homeland Security and Community Policing: Competing or Complementing Public Safety Policies. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management: Vol. 4: Issue 4, Article 2. Gardiner, R. (1982). Design for safe neighborhoods. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Greene, J.R. (2000). Community Policing in America: Changing the Nature, Structure, and Function of the Police. Criminal Justice 2000, vol. 3: Policies, Processes, and Decisions of the Criminal Justice System. Retrieved September 15, 2011 from US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice database. Kelling, G. (1981). The Newark foot patrol experiment. Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation. Kelling, G. & Moore, M. (1988). The evolving strategy of policing, perspectives on policing. U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Mazerolle, L., Ready, J., Terrill, W. & Waring, E. (2004). Problem-Oriented Policing Succeeds in Public Housing. NIJ Journal 251 (July 2004): 28. Justice Quarterly 17(1) (March 2000): 129–158. Wallis, A. & Ford, D. (1980). Crime prevention through environmental design: An operational handbook. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Wilson, J.Q. & Kelling, G. (1982). Broken windows. The Atlantic Monthly, March. Read More