Contemporary Challenges and Changes in American Law Enforcement

in crime •  8 years ago 

There are three critical issues in contemporary law enforcement. The first is the war on police. The second is the failure of police to address politicians violating their oaths to serve the public, and the third is the use of evidence based policing to make changes to police operations.


This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.
Aurthor: Julius Schorzman (User:Quasipalm)
Wikimedia Commons

The war on police can be recognized by dishonest and deceptive media coverage of police actions; examples can be seen in the Ferguson and McKinney cases in which key facts were left out of the coverage. However, this is a propaganda war generaled from the highest levels of the Democratic Party, as “Obama has created a pathway for the cop hating rhetoric to flourish” (Clarke, 2015)..Another example can be seen in the prosecution of six policemen in Baltimore related to a death in custody; not only were the investigators surprised by the severity of the charges, but the prosecutor has gone to great lengths to prevent the facts of the case from being made public by using a gag order (“Baltimore prosecutor seeks”, 2015, para. 1).

This leads into the failure of law enforcement agencies and line officers to bring politicians to account for their crimes. In Ferguson and Baltimore, politicians made the choice to ignore their sworn duty to protect the community and instead, “gave space to destroy”, to violent rioters. Another example would be in the Fast and Furious gunrunning case, in which the Obama administration provided weapons to violent narco-terror cartels, in violation of treaty with Mexico and in violation of the duty to protect. Third, evidence based policing is the trend that has continued from Vollmer through today, in which using the scientific method improves both the professionalism and efficiency of the police. Carter contends that “ we learned that experimental research could be effectively performed in a police agency without posing undue threats to public safety” (1995, p. 3)

Not all of these challenges generate controversy. Although there is controversy regarding the war on police within the law enforcement community, discussion in the public is limited due to lack of media focus... from the same media driving the war on police. Even so, "rank-and-file brethren in police departments nationwide, says police feel under siege and demoralized by the bias against them" (Bello, 2014, para. 4) Regarding the second issue, there is very limited discussion ,which is restricted to right wing viewpoints, and there is ambiguity as far as local laws (nonfeasance, misfeasance, malfeasance) and Constitutional responsibilities for dealing with such issues. There is some academic dispute about which evidence policies have worked and which haven't. These disputes carry over into the political sphere. Three strikes sentencing and broken windows policing are two examples in which studies can be at odds with each other regarding results. Foe example, Bowling asserts that New York's drop in crime was more a result of a decline in the use of crack cocaine (1999).

Evidence based policing has created the most change of the three issues. The war on police has not driven a formal change in police departments, but line officers are showing a trend towards not wanting to do their duty if doing so will place their careers and potentially their lives at risk , as the police are afraid of getting arrested for performing their duty” (CNN, 2015) The second has not driven any change. Although the concepts are based upon basic adherence to the law of the land, and duty of public office holders and sworn law enforcement officers , the consideration of this issue is considered to be extremist. Evidence based policing has driven many changes, although the debate and politics muddle he water regarding the efficiency of the changes. Levitt (2004) discusses several possible reasons, not including “Broken windows” policing, that may have been factors in New York's declining crime rate.

The changes driven by these issues can be either temporary or permanent. In the first, these are recent changes and may be temporary depending on how the war on cops is dealt with. There are no changes on the second. In the third, both. Some changes like the shift to community policing have been more permanent, while we can see that the broken windows approached has been discarded due to politics; New York's Mayor DiBlasio ended broken windows policing for political reasons, and we have already seen the rise in crime in New York (Celona, 2015).

These changes reflect a shift in our society as a whole. The country has shifted leftward with control of the media (Groseclose & Milyo, 2005), education (Yancey, 2012), and the bureaucracy into the hands of liberals. This shift has left the country less educated, less patriotic, and more susceptible to propaganda and malfeasance by politicians and bureaucrats.

Originally posted at my blog:
http://gradschoolfool.blogspot.com/2016/03/contemporary-challenges-and-changes-in.html

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

This is such an excellent post that highlights some of the less talked about issues facing law enforcement. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it!

thanks for the words! a little advice, tho. due to the reward system, it's better for you to read and curate content on Steemit that are less than 6 days old; you'll get a better financial reward out of it ;>

“If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law.”
Winston Churchill.

How many regulations do we have?

at least 10 000 pages of regulations...

what does that suggest?

that there is no respect for the law.

certainly not by those that "make" the law.

...which means those abused by "law" give up respect for it as well.

I've been looking up some material on ways to go Galt...that's an upcoming post

Good luck with that.
I've been wondering about how to 'go Galt' since I first read AnyRands books back in the middle sixties.
Sea steading , shanty boats ,water tribe, and sea gypsies give me hope.

Everyone who talks about 'going galt' depcit it as Real World going to a static location.
We have the internet now...and sites such as secondlife and the soon to be broadly adapted virtual reality.
Also consider a nomadic lifestyle. Screw property taxes...live on the road..or the river...or the ocean.

Anything that can be taxed is not owned. It's merely rented.
If you buy land it's definitely going to be taxed, zoned and controlled nine ways from sunday.
That seems to be a big problem to me.
If you live on a boat...especially using the new tech such as solar cells to make yourself as independently sustainable from land as possible...then when the local bloodsuckers get over bearing...just sail away.

Note: I have high hopes for 3D printing and a bit further on for Atomically Precise manufactories..

That will change everything.

My version of it is closer to your nomadic vision.

OTOH, there is no reason that a group of people can't buy land under a front person and base from there.

If you have a good enough income stream, and a good way to move btc anon, you can room here and there a week at a time...then move on.

I had a subreddit devoted to living w/o ID, but the problem is exposing those methods to people who would use it criminally. The other side of THAT problem is rent-seeking politicians criminalizing anything that can make them a buck ,or buy votes from do-gooding idiots.

I got into it with some dumbass that was enraged that I had that info out there, but my point was IF the shakedown artists in office weren't making crimes out of everything under the sun, there would be no need to share the info.

I am still conflicted over the possibilities.

Personally I love having heaps and heaps of laws on the books. In this new age Y2K modern world of social niceties and political correctness a real " he-man " can feel dethroned and emasculated.

Having heaps of stupid pointless laws allows me to blatantly feel empowered and a rebel against the tyranny of " the man " and fighting against the status quo of ' the system ' ! ! !

Personally while I hate how society has devolved its own collective consciousness. Now I know I have to respect no one and nothing, I am empowered and free in this wonderful new age thinking where everything is solely about ME, Myself and I . . .

It is liberating to know I can go to court and tell the guy wearing his black robes to stop cross dressing : )

At least they do not wear those stupid little wigs with the rollers curled up ; )

Then you should be happy. No one knows how many government agencies there are. Various governments 'employ' over twenty percent of those working. Their main focus is to say "no". That's pretty easy for them to do. Some estimates are that there are over ten millions laws, rules and regulations. More and more are being enacted all the time. In the last month the Obama administration is responsible for over a thousand.

My attitude towards life is simple, have the courage to try and change the things you can and learn to live with the craziness that you cannot change . . .

You gotta love the law, society needs laws for good governance. Yet the more laws enacted the less flexible or productive society becomes, it is a catch 22 situation where one is almost the anti-thesis of the other situation.

Further people spend so much time making new laws that old laws are basically not removed. Thus no one has any idea of their local laws (townships), common laws (judge made laws) State laws, Federal laws and international laws.

So the average Joe Citizen thinks, what do i know of the law; oh yeah, cannot threaten to kill the President. So they think, ah sweet I am all informed of the law and go on about their lifestyles : )

I mean what is wrong with me printing dollars at home ? Ultimately I would be helping the government increase the circulation of currency into the economy, but if you read the Statue you get the impression the Administration does not want my help.

You get so many conflicting signals from the government, like they want me down at the local VA helping out with the old vets by volunteering, but when I want to volunteer to grab a bat and head to places of civil unrest or civil disobedience they get all frantic and threaten to arrest me. After all, all i am trying to do is be a good productive contributing member of society ! ! !

Anyways what are those other " premises " of law ? Firstly your innocent until convicted, this is again counter intuitive since a prosecutor cannot bring charges against you unless the prosecution has a good faith basis for believing your guilty. Thus anyone on trial is almost guaranteed to be guilty.

I love the way they coerce the jury pool, we will lock you up in a room of strangers until you agree. We do not care if you argue two hours or 3 weeks, but you will agree. Innocence or guilt will be decided by the clan or group of people with the strongest most domineering personality traits. But you are not ever leaving until you reach an acceptable agreement ! ! !

Of course that other premise of law " ignorance is no excuse " . This means every lawyer must get 100 % on every law exam, after all if every ordinary person must know the 99,000 laws on the books then surely legal specialists should be held to a higher standard.

Can you imagine : police officer " I am arresting you "
Citizen ' on what charge !!! '
Police officer " criminal code 1974, section 739 ; subsection 612 , paragraph 948 "
Citizen ' don't you mean subsection 615 , paragraph 426 ? '
Police Officer " oh yeah , my bad ; your right , come with me " ; )

Other issues which were not addressed in this post are over-criminalization, militarization of the police,and the War on Drugs.

Over-criminalization is the most serious of these, and it ties into the malfeasance of politicians. It is the reslut of do-gooding and rent-seeking politics, which are the bane of effective governance.

I saw where I had misspelled "result" as "reslut", and thought it apt to describe politicians, so I left it as is

Politicians are the lowest form of life on the planet. They cannot be insulted because anything said about them, not matter how vile and disgusting, is actually not as bad as the reality.

Calling a politician a slut is an insult to sluts.

at least we get value for the money we give to sluts

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

REslut, it is truly good when you type what you are thinking ; this political correctness has gone to far : )

I want the next amendment to the Constitution that any person leaving Congressional office must serve no less than 6 months holding rifle range targets for the military , this is where these ex-politicians could really serve their constituents for the most overall common good ! ! !

I'll vote for that!

Service weapon, 2 spare mags, mace spray, baton, radio, tazer, tazer-reload, handcuffs, yadda ; yadda ; yadda . . .

The greatest challenge is working out how you are going to carry more crap than Batman ever had ! ! !

its too much to carry, especially in multiple weaponry.

that choice of weaponry, especially in nonlethal use-of-force, makes bad choices come much too easy

I remember watching the video of the corrections officer shooting a handcuffed prisoner, and seeing that "oh shit" look when he realized he wasnt using the taser