Community Based Policing – Law Enforcement For The Essay, Research Paper

COMMUNITY BASED POLICING – LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THE TWENTIETH CENTURYThesis:Community based policing provides hope for the future of Law enforcement. I.Introduction to C.B.P. A.The roots of C.B.P. B.So what is community? II.The two elements of C.B.P. law enforcement philosophy. A.Community partnership. B.Problem solving. III.The reaction of police to change. IV.The future of C.B.P. A.A first step in C.B.P. B.Measuring success. C.Crime prevention. V.Conclusion.INTRODUCTION TO COMMUNITY BASED POLICING (C.B.P.)”In Philadelphia, a pulsating tavern juke box that has caused irate neighbors to log 500 Police calls in six months , was moved away from a common wall with the adjoining building .(Author unknown,U.S News)The calls stopped .(Though it seems simple ,such a move is at the heart of what is known as Community Based Policing). The movement towards C.B.P. has gained momentum in recent years as Police and community leaders search for more effective ways to enhance the sense of public safety and the quality of life in their communities.C.B.P has been slowly accepted in one police department after another ,they are ready now to agree that “C.B.P. provides hope for the future of Law enforcement”. The seed of C.B.P.can be traced back to Sir Robert Peel,the father of the modern Police system,who said “the Police are the public and the public are the Police”(Braiden,108)For different reasons, the Police lost sight of that principle defining their relationship with the public.It has been said that the reform era in government , which started in the 1900’s in order to combat corruption,along with the move towards the professional image of police work, had as a result of the separation of Police and Community(Kelling,Moore.pg-5)The reform style Policing emerged in the 50’s and 60’s with rotating shifts and frequent movement of officers,(to prevent corruption).Random patrolling (a reactive police technique) was also detrimental to the link between Police and public.A policy of centralized control was adopted to ensure compliance with set standards, and to encourage a professional aura of impartiality. All these policies along with the use of automobiles, telephones, and other technological advances helped distance the Police even more. The calls for service increased as urban population and crime awareness increased making the police almost totally reactive.The introduction of computers only encouraged that false idea of “quick” reactive response and statistical view towards measuring success in policing. By the late 70’s the communities had become a diverse pool of nationalities,subcultures,and attitudes.People identified themselves as parts of separate groups and at times the Police was not part of what they called “we”. In this time a burst of new ideas and changes in the sociopolitical and economic structure began to occur. In this changing environment all social institutions were scrutinized.The Police, slow and overburdened, were losing ground rapidly.Police leaders felt the need to reflect on these problems and their overall relationship (their image) with the public.In their attempts to understand what was going wrong, many studies and experiments were sponsored . One of them, the “KANSAS STUDY” proved that, no matter how much personnel is devoted to random patrolling, there is no effect on the actual crime rate.(Bureau of justice asst pg 13-65)The government had recognized the problems of crime fighting and the problems of Police – Community relations, as far back as 1967.The Presidents Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice report:The Challenge of crime in a free society, called”for the creation of a new kind of police officer”. Almost thirty years later the idea of a “new kindof police officer” has provided a whole new model for policing; An evolutionary and not revolutionary philosophy that attempts to refocus the essence of policing to ” a Law Enforcement (philosophy) that tries to do two things :A) bring police officers and citizens together in neighborhoods. B) give the Police responsibilityfor solving problems in the community”.(Wilson pg 21)SO WHAT IS COMMUNITY? Community is ” a small,well defined geographical area with unique geographical and social characteristics”(dictionary Definition).For Law enforcement the term community also incorporates a vast number of priorities ,which, create conflicts when attempting to address community issues. As stated above the new Law enforcement philosophy incorporates two elements :Community partnership and Problem solving.These two elements are the core of the policing strategy for the future of American large communities( inner cities ) and other high crime areas. The way to achieve the results promised by C.B.P.is through constant education and the application of the two elements of C.B.P. COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP means adopting a policing perspective that exceeds the standard Law enforcement emphasis.This broadened outlook recognizes the value of activities that contribute to the orderliness and well being of a neighborhood (community).These activities could be helping accident or crime victims, improving emergency medical services,helping resolve domestic and neighborhood conflicts,controlling automobile and pedestrian traffic(Bureau of Justice assistance pg 15)The two major functions of the Community partnership is to keep the two parties communicating, and to assess the level of fear ( of crime )in the community.To avoid high level of fear in the Community Problem solving techniques are utilized in the daily contact of Police and Public and through communication. PROBLEM SOLVING is the second part of C.B.P., the philosophy behind it is based on the assumption that “crime can be reduced by studying the individual problems and by applying the proper resources”(ECK XVI- XVII)and that”when people make choices based on the opportunities presented by the immediate physical and social characteristics of an area , by manipulating these factors people will be less inclined to act in an offensive manner”(ECK XVI-XVII)

So “Problem Solving” involves bringing problems of the community to the right persons attention; Hopefully, resolving that problem,so it will not get worse or create other problems. An example of a tool used in “Problem Solving” is what is called the “broken window” theory which suggests that an abandoned, or not well maintained house (community) will attract disorder or mischief and the criminal element.Trough “Problem Solving” the window is fixed ,deterioration is prevented and the community is safe once more.Like any other part of C.B.P. “Problem Solving” requires a lot of communication ,compromise and information exchangein order to yield. THE REACTION OF POLICE TO CHANGEDespite the optimism of C.B.P. proponents it has not been accepted as the mature successor to the Reform Model of the Sixties. The Police have a difficult time dealing with the contradictions that exist within them ;this also restricts them from achieving their newfound goals.Being a paramilitary organization it is difficult to encourage flexibility and creativity (that strict supervision stifles), and still insure that the incorrupt image is maintained. The reactive instinct of the Police will also have to be curtailed, the so called “tyranny of 911″ has to controlled and although some reactive or emergency services will be necessary they have to escape the tyranny of the 911 service in favor of reliance to the community and the new model along with mutual trust”.(Sparrow chapter 4)It will take some time for the movement from “just the facts ma’am” to a more caring police officer who is a social worker, councilor and law enforcer. THE FUTURE OF C.B.P(ACTION PLAN) A first step in C.B.P.is a plan of action or a statement of beliefs and goals that will provide direction and make values become actions and behaviors .C.B.P.is only a philosophy or a statement of value, nuts and bolts are worked out later by setting goals and objectives unique for each community,aiming to achieve your value statement. The change in values that is in the heart of C.B.P. must be pursued in order to achieve success, because once the first excitement goes, and the first difficulties arise the statements of value that have been adopted will be the guiding light that will provide the solutions. In order for C.B.P.to be evaluated and its success determined two things need to be done,first day to day work evaluations need to change and adapt to C.B.P goals, second C.B.P. SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AND A COMMITMENT TO INCREASE MAN POWER IF NECESSARY should be made. There is a distinct difference between C.B.P.and other models of policing and that is the way we can measure success, “measures such as crime rates ,arrest rates and response times are obsolete,”(Moore 10)”these numbers have little to do with community needs and they only represent serious committed crimes and not the increase of public disorder (or fear) or other so called non priorities”(Kelling pg 21-21)To know if C.B.P. is working we need to know; are we solving problems instead of reacting to them? Arepolice officers encouraged to leave their patrol cars and cooperate with the public? Do we have streets free of drug dealers, rowdy teenagers, soliciting prostitutes, predatory criminals, graffiti or drive by shootings.In conclusion C.B.P. is striving to build stronger, more self sufficient communities, in which,crime and disorder do not thrive. Effective C.B.P. has a positive impact on reducing neighborhood crime ,helps reduce fear of crime, and enhances the quality of life in the community;It accomplishes this by combining the efforts and the resources of the police ,local government,and community members.Crime prevention takes on renewed importance in C.B.P.and the community becomes a partner to law enforcement in order to address disorder and neglect or other problems that can breed serious crime. As links between the police and the community are strengthened over time, the partnership is better able to pinpoint and mitigate the underlying causes of crime. Following all these principles we can at least attain a new sense of community and at best we can make true the vision of Sir Robert Peel “It should be understood at the outset that the object to be attained is the prevention of crime. To this , great and everyeffort of the police is to be directed.The security of person and property and the preservation of a police establishment will thus be better effected than by the detection and punishment of the offender after he has succeed in committing the crime”…..(Braiden 120)

Braiden, Chris. “Enriching traditional police roles” Police management:Issues and perspectives. Washington,DC.Police executive research forum 1992,Pg 108,120Eck, John E. and William Spelman,” Problem solving:Problem oriented policing” in Newport News.Washington, DC olice executive research forum, 1987 Pg xvi-xviiKelling, George L.and Mark H,Moore “The evolving strategy of policing” Perspectives on policing .Washington,DC : National Institute of Justice and John F. Kennedy School of Government.Harvard University,1988 Pg 4-5Kelling, L. George ” Measuring what matters :a new way of thinkingabout crime and public order”.The city Journal,Spring 1992, Pg 21-22Moore H. Mark and Geofrey Albert ” Measuring police performance ” in John Dijulio Sr, et al Justice System Performance measures rinceton University Bureau of justice discussion series (forthcoming)Moore H. Mark and Malcolm K. Sparrow,David MacKennedy Beyond 911:A new era for policing. Chapter 4 Wilson Q. James ” Can the bureaucracy be deregulated? “in John Dijulio Sr ,ed, Deregulating the public service : Can the government be improved?(Washington,DC. Brookings Institution Press Jan 1994 Chapter 3,draft pg 21,54)Magazine : Us News and World report Aug 2 1993. Title:Beyond ” Just the facts ma’am “Author unknownPresidents commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice ,Title : The challenge of crime in a free society (Washington, DC: U.S Government printing office, 1967 Pg 97-103) Bureau of justice assistance Publication: Understanding community policing ” Aug 1994 Chapter 3 Pg 13,15