North Carolina League of the South
“The
law enforcement profession must reevaluate its understanding of
community policing if there’s any hope of saving the philosophy from
becoming a 21st century anachronism. The violent nature of
criminal activity will only make [the gap between strategic and tactical
demands] wider in the coming years. The philosophy….demands that law
enforcement officers and agencies spend time working on both reducing
crime and the fear of crime among the general population. In this model,
notions of idealistic, close community relationships flourish.
But
this begs the question of who constitutes the “community” for which law
enforcement “works” and whether that community should impose
politically acceptable priorities or influence police methods. Such a
scheme runs the risk of politicizing law enforcement. There is also a
more insidious problem. The localities and agencies that have embraced
community policing may be unintentionally fostering the very police
state the philosophy was meant to discourage. Using law enforcement as a
consensual tool in civil disputes builds a dependency on the coercive
presence of armed officers for problem resolution in area better suited
for social services.
[This]
doesn’t sit well with the personality types drawn to modern police
work. Just read any police publication. Few of the popular periodicals
extol the virtues of community policing but instead celebrate the
“warrior” ethos that finds strong purchase among today’s officers. The
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and all the accompanying contracts for
police trainers, have only bolstered this popular paramilitary image.
For the individual officer, however, community policing consists of
nothing more than knowing the community well enough to be at the right
place, at the right time, to deter crime and, should that fail, to
develop probably cause to make an arrest.”
(Lance Eldridge, The Impending Death of Community Policing, Police One, 7.28/10)
I'm no libertarian, I think cops are necessary.
ReplyDeleteI've been reading about the Mexican cartels and what they're doing along the border, they're pretty psycho. They're also active in just about all 50 States, La Familia Michoacana is the main one in NC. These groups have plenty of money and access to real assault rifles(as well as grenade launchers and bombs)and no problem using them. They are extremely vicious. So, I can see a need for a more heavily armed police force to keep them contained, especially since "our" government won't secure that border.
However, a militarized police force is obviously bad for the communities they patrol. The mindset that's involved, what Mr. Thuersam calls the "warrior ethos, an identity of "law enforcer" rather than "peace officer" is counter to creating a sense of community.
So, its a tough call. I imagine if the economy collapses and everything goes to hell, we'll be glad we have a militarized police force, as long as they don't put the boot on us.
I think recruitment is the key, hire peace officers, not wannabe gestapo.
Having just read about the LAPD shooting up some innocents in a truck, I want to add that the mentality mentioned above is too much an us-against-them mentality regarding the citizenry.
DeleteI think recruitment is the key, hire peace officers, not wannabe gestapo.
DeleteThere was a NC cop who stated most of the new ones only joined for power.
There's always been a portion of law enforcement that joined to compensate for their Small Man syndrome; sadly, it seems to have escalated over the last several years.
ReplyDeleteThat's why we now have too many Barneys and wanna-be Rambos, and not nearly enough Andys.
Granted, with the level of arming of the thugs out there, it's a hard job, but still...why would Andy Taylor need a tank?
:)
Delete