For Princess MaryTutor

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 1/10

Module 4: The Police and the Community

Topics

I. Introduction II. Putting the "Community" in Community Policing

III. Actions Speak Louder than Words IV. Police-Community Relations V. Origins of Police-Community Relations

VI. How Do You Know When You Have Community Policing? VII. Making Community Policing Real

VIII. Community Policing and Changing Attitudes IX. Conclusion

I. Introduction

Community policing has been described as a collaborative effort between the police and the community that identifies problems of crime and disorder and involves all segments of the community in the search for solutions to these problems. It has also been referred to as a "philosophy," an organizational way of doing business that is based on forging partnerships between the police and the community served. Ultimately, the goal of community policing is to improve community quality of life by reducing fear of crime and disorder.

In order to discuss the concept of community policing, it is first necessary to understand the relationship between the police and the community: how each perceives the other, acts toward the other, and expects from the other, and how this relationship has evolved over time. We begin the module by examining several aspects of this relationship. We proceed to a more focused definition of community policing and analyze the issues related to its promise, effectiveness, and implementation.

Previously, we've discussed how in some contexts the police have been viewed as a domestic army, and how by extension, the community is portrayed as "the enemy." Throughout the history of policing there has been an "us-versus-them" mentality, and the police have often been viewed as being against the community they are supposed to serve (Gaines & Kappeler, 2003).

How the police are viewed by the community is, in part, a function of who is doing the viewing. Research has shown that whites tend to view police more positively than do minorities. In studies of blacks, the results indicated that they had poor perceptions of the police and tended to believe that the police are more corrupt, more unfair, harsher, tougher, less friendly, and crueler than did whites. Moreover, middle-class blacks were often more critical of the police than those from the lower socioeconomic stratum (Weitzer & Tuch, 1999).

The attitudes of Hispanics toward the police have also been studied, and the findings coincide with black attitudes. Hispanics have been found to:

feel less safe concerning crime in comparison to the general public feel that the police are not capable of reducing the incidence of crime feel they receive less-than-adequate protection from the police generally evaluate the police more negatively, relative to the general population (Gaines & Kappeler, 2003)

Sutham Cheurprakobkit (2000) did find, however, that Hispanics tended to have a more positive perspective on the police than blacks do. Still more research conducted by Bartsch and Cheurprakobkit (1999) revealed that Spanish-speaking Hispanics viewed the police more positively than English- speaking Hispanics. Even though there is a dearth of research concerning other racial and ethnic groups, certain questions arise: What effect does this type of information have on the management of a police agency? What effect do such studies have on how the community is viewed by the police?

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 2/10

Without the support of the community, the police would have a difficult time justifying their continued existence in this country. For example, in the early 1990s, the Long Beach Police Department, of Long Beach, California was almost disbanded because it failed to listen to the needs of the community. Community members were ready to vote the department out of existence and have the county sheriff's department provide police services. Seeing the handwriting on the wall, the leaders of the police agency engaged in damage control and were able to turn back the mounting tide of negative feelings. They are still engaged in working closely with the community and recognized that their legitimacy rests with the good will of their community.

The community, through its elected representatives and government leaders, determines whether a police agency will exist. Through the same channels, the community also approves police budgets. Most importantly, the community provides information that assists the police in solving crimes. And yet, in some communities there remains considerable distrust between the two groups, and a reluctance to form true partnerships. Is it possible for the police and the community to make "community policing" viable?

II. Putting the "Community" in Community Policing

At times, the conflicts between the community and the police have resulted from actions on the part of the police. However, the community must also acknowledge the role it plays (through its elected officials) in politicizing the police, and how this affects the abilities of the police organization to function. Sometimes the best way to bridge this gap is for the police to have a champion or champions in the community who will defend the police when warranted, but will also take them on when they are in error.

Often the community is not aware of the problems involved in satisfying its requests, as illustrated in the conversation below.

A Conversation about Policing Think About This: An Executive Balancing Act

The chief looked disgusted. She found herself, again, before the city council, answering questions about her police officers and what they were or were not doing. "My constituents tell me that they never see a police officer," complained the council member. "Can you tell me why this is? We have directed you to make sure that your officers are on the street and patrolling our neighborhoods."

"Why don't we have a bicycle patrol?" asked another.

"Yes, a bike patrol or at least have them walking foot beats," chimed in another. "The community needs to know that the police are out there, protecting them."

"I have another concern," stated the mayor. "Your officers are supposed to attend community meetings. They are to work with community members to solve problems. Why isn't this happening?" Finally, the mayor stated, "Before you have the opportunity to answer all these questions, I would like to add another issue. I've been reviewing the crime stats. Your closure rate is low, very low. What do you intend to do about it?"

Another night, another council meeting, another raking over the coals. All this after working a fourteen-hour day. As the chief was walking back to her office, a community member who attended the council meeting began to walk alongside her. "You know what you need?" offered the community member. "You need a champion. Someone who has the perspective of the community and also that of the police. There are things that need to be said, that you just cannot say—and keep your job. Politics won't allow you to say what you need to. What you need is a citizens' advisory committee that can assist you in prioritizing your agency's needs, and also be a buffer between you and the council."

"They just don't understand," replied the chief.

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 3/10

"And you are not in a position to make them understand, to educate them, without how shall I say it... 'ticking them off,' " offered the community member.

Many community-policing efforts have focused on changing police organizations and police attitudes toward the job and the community. In many instances, however, what has been left out of the community-policing equation is the active participation of the community—specifically the education of the community about policing issues and the community's role in "policing themselves."

This educational process is more than just an overview of policing in America or in a specific community, or how community policing is to be implemented. It should also include letting the community know what the police can and cannot do, organizationally, legally, and fiscally.

As an example, the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice, has funded a number of training initiatives that bring the police and the community together to develop or fine-tune community policing. One of the grantees has developed a process whereby the training forum is also used to bring out information that the police chief might not be able to give without getting into political difficulty. Consider the following conversation that transpired at one of these training sessions.

A Conversation about Policing Think About This: "What Do You Mean We Can't Have Bicycle Patrols?"

"Where are the police? Why don't I ever see them patrolling? asked one of the forum participants. "The only time I do see them is when there is a problem."

"I've been waiting for that question," responded the facilitator. "I truly believe that this will be the first time you'll hear this information, and you'll hear it along with your elected representatives. This type of information has not been released outside the department or governmental structure before now. It is important, though, that the community understand what goes on inside the department."

"The authorized strength of our department is fifty-two," the facilitator continued. "The majority of police departments in this country have fewer than fifty sworn members. We are authorized fifty-two, and currently we are staffed at forty-eight. There are four vacancies, and the department is in the recruitment and selection mode. It usually takes between six to ten months to bring a candidate on board. After hiring, they must attend the academy, which takes another twenty-four weeks. Because we don't have our own police academy, we have to wait until the county police—who provide training for us— start a class. That might take anywhere from one week to three months or more. So, we're talking ten months to a year, at a minimum, before we see the fruits of the department's effort to hire."

"However, how many of you know that the city has a hiring freeze?" she asked. "So, even if there were candidates for the vacancies, the department can't hire them. They can't even complete the hiring process, even though we do happen to have candidates in the pipeline."

"Now, as for the question of not seeing police patrolling. Out of the forty-eight officers who are available, after you take out the command staff, the lieutenants, the sergeants, the detectives, and other support personnel, in patrol—the unit that provides direct service to the community—we are left with a grand total of twenty-five officers available to patrol seven days a week, twenty four hours a day. Take out personal leave, sick leave, court time, training, and the like, and at most there are seven officers on patrol during each of the three tours of duty."

The facilitator continued. "Seven officers, who are taken out of service to answer calls and to run radar—because you have indicated that speeding is a concern to you. Out of those seven, you also have the school-resource and DARE officers. AND you want an officer at each of the monthly community meetings. There are twenty-four citizens groups in this community. Plus, you want the police to develop and run recreational programs for the young people of this community."

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 4/10

"So, excuse me if you think I'm being curt, but every time you stick your head out of your window, you are not going to see a police officer. It is an impossibility. As for bike patrols and foot beats, what are those strategies supposed to accomplish?" the facilitator asked.

"Well, there is at least the perception of safety," offered one of the participants.

"How much are you willing to pay for that perception?" she asked. "Unless we can prove that bike or foot patrols have a documented effect on crime, they just cannot be justified within the budgetary constraints the community has placed on the police department."

The facilitator continued. "If we further deplete the mobile force with bikes and foot, we run the possibility of lengthening the time it takes to answer calls for service. You do want the police to respond in the least amount of time when you dial 911, don't you?"

Sometimes community expectations for the police are unrealistic, especially if they are not willing to accept the associated costs. Politicians often use threat of crime and its control in order to win elections. And as we discussed in module 1, the police can also be their own worst enemy, throwing up barriers between the police and the community.

However, without the community, the police cannot control, prevent, manage, or solve crimes. Because the police usually are not on the scene the moment an incident occurs, they depend on people to report crimes, to provide information on suspects, and to provide information about specific criminals and their activities. This information must come from the community—all segments of the community. For policing to be effective, like it or not, the "us-versus-them" mentality within police culture must be overcome.

III. Actions Speak Louder than Words

A change in mentality is of limited use if not accompanied by a change in actions. The police must become more aware of how their actions affect community perceptions. The visual and print media are replete with instances when the police have violated the public trust. Research has shown that 90 percent of all civil disturbances in this country have had the police at their epicenter (Geller & Scott, 1992, p. 209; Fisher-Stewart, 1994). Ethical violations, corruption, and outright criminal conduct all jeopardize the trust of the community in the police.

Should the police be held to a higher standard than "regular citizens?" Absolutely. As asserted previously, police officers are among the most powerful persons in American society, in that they have the power to take your liberty of your life with no prior review. The community, therefore, has a right to hold the police to a higher standard of conduct, and the police officer has an obligation to maintain very high standards of conduct.

How police officers view their job and their role in society can be improved, and that improvement is a function of education. If patrol is the backbone of policing, the police academy is the lifeblood. Through training and education, values are transmitted throughout the department. Unfortunately, training is sometimes viewed from within the department as a "necessary evil." This view must change. It is through training (education) that positive change in values and attitudes can become a reality in police departments.

The cognitive and affective aspects of police educational programs are no less important than performance-skill aspects, such as firearms training; the first two aspects must be given and be viewed with the same priority as the third. For example, community policing and ethics should not simply be treated as blocks of instruction, they must become threads that run through all aspects of training.

Even the best training programs will be limited in their effect if the culture of the organization is anti- training. For example, an anti-training attitude can be demonstrated by a field training officer advising a new recruit officer, "You can forget all that garbage you learned in the academy, I'll teach you what you need to know." There must be incentives for accepting a new way of thinking and acting. There must also be disincentives for not modeling the new behavior.

Police officers, and particularly police officials, must be held accountable for all of their actions. Disregarding the academy teachings that support a culture of trust and accountability should be viewed

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 5/10

as an ethical violation and treated accordingly. Unethical behavior should be treated severely and excuses not made concerning the fact that the job is difficult or stressful or that the police are under extreme pressures.

People choose to become police officers. If they choose not to follow the rules, to act ethically, and treat people inside and outside the organization with respect, the department should "choose" to show them the door. These are indeed tough words. Because of personnel regulations and unions, it is often difficult to fire police officers. However, because of the importance of the job and the fragility of the public trust, administrators must press hard to rid departments of people who don't embody these ideals.

IV. Police-Community Relations

There is a difference between police-community relations programs and community policing. By the 1960s, the police had become firmly entrenched in the legalistic style of policing. However, the 1960s were also marked by riots and student activism. The war in Vietnam, civil-rights concerns, and other social movements produced large demonstrations and marches. The police were generally inexperienced in crowd control and often found themselves in violent encounters with citizen groups. The police were viewed as "the establishment" and there were often physical battles between police and demonstrators.

As occurrences of social disorganization and civil disorder became more frequent, police departments were desperate to find ways to understand and deal with what they were facing. Recall, though, that this was not the first time that the police found themselves facing rioters and demonstrators—remember the early 1900s and the race riots? Times had changed, however, and the methods used to quell the earlier riots (e.g., fire hoses, illegal use of dogs, excessive force, fear, and intimidation) could not be used again because they were patently illegal and further aroused the ire of those protesting.

As the police searched for ways to control these disturbances, police-community relations units and programs were formed. For some police departments, these were little more than espionage programs, used for spying on people and infiltrating groups thought to be at the epicenter of disturbances. For other departments, there were sincere efforts to get beneath the reasons for the unrest and understand those who were involved.

As stated earlier, the majority of riots and civil disturbances found the police at their epicenter. This is not to say that the police were always in the wrong, but that sometimes their mere presence was enough to cause unrest.

V. Origins of Police-Community Relations

When researching the genesis of police-community relations, some authors trace its development to an annual conference held in 1955, entitled the "National Institute of Christians and Jews and the Michigan State University Department of Police Administration and Public Safety" (Schmalleger, 2000). Police- community relations also benefited from the 1967 report by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, "The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society," which found that police agencies were often socially isolated from the communities they served.

Police-community relations programs and initiatives represented a movement toward increasing the level of positive police-community interactions. In attempts to get closer to the communities they served, police departments established storefront centers where citizens could come and file reports and air their complaints. Egon Bittner (1976, in Schmalleger, 2000) wrote that for police-community relations programs to work, they need to reach "the grassroots of discontent" where citizen dissatisfaction with the police exists. The police had to be out in the community.

Many of the 1970s community-relations programs involved officers from a specific unit within the police department providing an array of "goodwill" services to the community such as the following:

"neighborhood watch" drug-awareness workshops DARE (Drug Awareness and REsistance) programs programs that mark valuable property for identification in the event of theft summer camps for children

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 6/10

There were two major problems with such programs:

1. Only a certain segment of the police department was responsible for providing the services and programs that would secure the good will of the community.

2. The focus often was on segments of the community that were not dissatisfied with the police.

So, in Bittner's view, police-community relations programs failed because they did not reach those groups most disaffected and those programs left out the majority of the police department (Schmalleger, 2000).

Consider the following incident regarding the first problem mentioned above.

A Conversation about Policing Think About This: Good Guys and Bad Guys

"I need you to position your personnel at the corner of 51st and South," directed the captain.

"We can't do that," replied the community services lieutenant.

"Did you misunderstand what I said?" asked the captain.

"No ma'am. But the community can't see us arresting people. We're community relations," offered the lieutenant.

"Did you stop being the police?" queried the captain.

"No, but...."

"51st and South, 0900 hours," directed the captain. She left the lieutenant standing in the middle of the station. The lieutenant was thinking about how his personnel now would be perceived by the community. But the captain had a job to do and needed all available personnel.

Officers in community-relations units were often considered the "good guys," whereas those in patrol were the "bad guys." Patrol makes arrests; community relations distributes Christmas baskets, holds children's parties, and attends community meetings. In an effort to reach to the community, a schism was created within the force. A patrol squad did "real work," whereas a community-relations squad was viewed as the "grin-and-wave squad."

Community-relations units were often located in the support section as opposed to the patrol section. Their offices were often physically separate from those of patrol units. Community-relations units did not work around the clock. Unless there were community activities, they did not have to work weekends and holidays. Community relations personnel were "special." In some departments, it was believed that personnel who sought community relations and other support or administrative positions were not able to "handle the streets."

VI. How Do You Know When You Have Community Policing?

As mentioned above, community policing has been described as a collaborative effort between the police and the community in identifying and solving problems of crime and disorder. It has also been referred to as a philosophy, or an organizational way of doing business, based on partnerships between police and community. The goal of community policing is to improve community quality of life by reducing fear of crime and disorder.

The organizing themes of community policing suggest that the police can be more focused, proactive, and sensitive to the communities they serve (Greene, 2000). Community policing also requires significant changes to the social and formal organization of the police department. In terms of social

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 7/10

organization, community policing is believed to break down the barriers separating the police from the community and provide the police with a far-reaching set of community-service ideals. When assessing the police organization, community policing purports to shift police policymaking from a traditional bureaucracy to one that emphasizes greater agency-community interaction.

The term community policing has become a "buzzword." As mentioned in module 1, former Office of Community Policing Services director Thomas Frazier estimated recently that eighty-five percent of police departments claiming involvement in community policing don't truly have it. This might seem a contradiction. Suffice it to say community policing is hard work, difficult to implement, and according to recent Department of Justice studies, the jury is still out on whether or not it accomplishes its goals (ORC-Macro, 2002).

With police-community relations, only one unit of officers was responsible for maintaining the good will of the community. Adherents of community policing offer that to be successful, the entire department must think and be "community oriented." How does a police executive accomplish this? Is it realistic to think that everyone in a police department can actually be community oriented? If they can, how is "community oriented" exhibited or assessed?

Consider these promises of community policing:

strengthening the capacity of communities to resist and prevent crime and social disorder creating a more harmonious relationship between the police and the community sharing power between the police and the community in policymaking and tactical decisions restructuring the delivery of police services by linking them with other municipal services reforming the police organizational model and creating larger and more complex roles for all police officers

As a result, community policing is said to produce more committed, empowered, and analytical police personnel. Advocates claim it will also flatten police hierarchies and open the process of locally administered justice to those who are often the subject of judicial decision-making. Finally, community policing is supposed to make crime prevention, not crime suppression, the ultimate goal of policing (Greene, 2000).

You're the police chief. Think about a mayor or city council converting these ideals into performance measures that will be used to determine your effectiveness as chief. Your job depends on the success of community policing. As police chief, how would you translate the promises of community policing into performance measures for every person (sworn and civilian) in your agency?

VII. Making Community Policing Real

Community policing includes strengthening the capacity of communities to resist and prevent crime and disorder. Sometimes we tend to speak of "community" as if it was one-dimensional. In the Maryland community described below, the residents, police, and local government are currently rethinking the community-policing philosophy.

This community consists of 17,000 residents. Eighteen percent of the community is foreign-born. The foreign-born hail from over thirty countries, with the largest percentage being from countries in Latin America. The children in the city's middle school speak thirty- five foreign languages. In almost 50 percent of these foreign-born households, parents speak only their native language and children assume translation duties.

Some of these immigrants have also experienced negative interactions with the police in their home countries and trust neither the local government nor the police. In this community, you also have residents who are political activists and those who sit back and want the police to do the job "my taxes are paying for." This is also a community where undocumented aliens are able to vote in local elections. You have a police force of forty-three sworn officers. Their length of service ranges from just out of the academy to thirty years.

As police chief, how would you meet the needs of such a varied community? How would you implement community policing in such a community?

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 8/10

The questions being asked are not meant to disparage community policing; they are to show just how difficult it is to make community policing "real"—something that can be measured and that satisfies "the community."

Let's examine the requirements Herman Goldstein (1987) outlined that should be considered by police agencies adopting community policing. Think about the specific questions we have posed about each requirement.

1. The adoption of community policing requires that it become an organizing philosophy that is integrated into the entire police agency and that is not viewed as a new project or program or temporary specialization.

How you would accomplish this in a department with ten sworn officers? How would you do so in a department as large as the New York City Police Department, that has 40,000 sworn personnel?

2. For community policing to take root (so that it does not disappear with a new governmental administration or a new police chief) it must help to create a new working environment in the police agency, so that new values of policing emerge in the management and tactics of the police.

Think about what those "new values" are and how they differ from the "old values." How would you ensure that these new values became a part of the value system of each and every employee?

3. Community policing must overcome resistance from the subculture of the police (the thin blue line), a subculture that is focused on danger, authority, and efficiency (Skolnick, 1966).

Think about these aspects of policing: policing is dangerous; the police have a great deal of authority; and the police must be efficient if they are to even make a dent in crime. What do these aspects of policing mean to you as the chief? What conflicts can you envision between the aspects of the police subculture mentioned above and a proposed community-policing plan?

4. For community policing to be adopted by both the police and the various communities they serve, it must focus on resolving substantive community crime and disorder problems and not simply have the police responding to calls for service and completing paperwork.

Think about how solving crime is different than preventing crime and that the public may be in a better position to prevent certain types of crime than the police. How can the police and the community work together (if the police are really serious about sharing power with the community) to solve problems of crime and disorder?

VIII. Community Policing and Changing Attitudes

Community policing has been touted as improving relations with members of minority communities. As discussed earlier in this module, minority groups such as blacks and Hispanics tend to view the police more negatively than do whites. Perpetuated stereotypes and lack of knowledge have served only to exacerbate the situation in both directions between police and minorities in a given community. This can be especially true in areas that have high crime rates and where minorities reside or hang out and where the police may be viewed as an occupying army.

Community policing has the potential to improve relations with minority groups by focusing on a basic human concept called respect. For example, failure of police personnel to use proper forms of address (using first names) has been and remains a major complaint of minority group members.

The practice of racial profiling has also pitted members of minority groups against the police, as have complaints of excessive force, harassment, and abuse. Even though the instances of these negative interactions are miniscule compared to the total number of interactions the police have with community, they can become legend and further damage the image of the police.

As chief, you will bear public responsibility for the negative effects of misguided stereotypes, lack of respect between police and community, and racial profiling practices. How would you begin to address such issues in your department?

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 9/10

IX. Conclusion

Community policing has promised great things, but is not a panacea. Nor is it silver bullet. As a philosophy, it is difficult to implement. As a strategy, it has potential. Those who lead and seek to lead police agencies must decide if they can be true to the tenets of community policing and the changes community policing requires or whether they will just spew the rhetoric and create false expectations within the department and the community. It is critical that the community has accurate information about the realities of community policing, and the police should take the lead in providing it.

Community policing has great potential to improve the quality of life in America's communities. It must be tailored, however, to the specific needs of those communities. The costs of community policing must also be relayed to the community. It is only then that community members can make informed decisions about whether or not community policing is suitable for their community.

As police departments continue to consider community policing, training will be key to its acceptance inside and outside the department. The role of training within police departments must be given higher priority. It is only through training that the values and attitudes necessary to serve a diverse community can be transmitted throughout the agency. Training and community policing are inextricably tied to an improved relationship between police and community.

References

Baldwin, J. (1962). Nobody knows my name: More notes of a native son. New York: Vintage.

Bartsch, R. A., & Cheurprakobkit, S. (1999). Police work and the police profession: Assessing attitudes of city officials, Spanish-speaking Hispanics, and their English-speaking counterparts. Journal of Criminal Justice 27(2): 87-100.

The challenge of crime in a free society: A report by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. (1967). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Cheurprakobkit, S. (2000). Police-citizen contact and police performance: Attitudinal differences between Hispanics and non-Hispanics. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28 (4): 325-336.

Cohn, A. W., & Viano, E. C., Eds. (1976). Community Relations. In Police community relations: Images, roles, realities. Philadelphia: Lippincott.

Cox, S. M. (1996). Police: Practices, perspectives, problems. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Fisher-Stewart, G. (1994). Multicultural training for police. MIS Report, International City/County Management Association (ICMA). Washington, DC: ICMA.

Gaines, L. K., & Kappeler, V. E. (2003). Policing in America (4th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.

Geller, W. A., & Scott, M. S. (1992). Deadly force: What we know - A practitioner's desk reference on police-involved shootings. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.

Goldstein, H. (1987). Toward community-oriented policing: Potential, basic requirements, and threshold questions. Crime and Delinquency, 33 (1): 6-30.

Greene, J. R. (2000). Community policing in America: changing the nature, structure, and function of the police. Criminal Justice 2000, volume 3, 299-370. Available online: http://www.ncjrs.org/criminal_justice2000/vol_3/03g.pdf.

Hacker, A. (1996). Two nations: Black and white, separate, hostile, and unequal. New York: Ballantine.

ORC-Macro. (2002). National Evaluation of Community Policing. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS.

Schmalleger, F. (2000). Criminal Justice Today: An Introductory Text for the Twenty-First Century. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

9/16/2017 Module 4 Commentary

https://umuc.equella.ecollege.com/file/3de522e1-7ab3-43ac-bc4e-14a61b3de9a9/1/CCJS340-1209.zip/Modules/M4-Module_4/S3-Commentary.html 10/10

Skolnick, J. (1966). Justice without trial. New York: Wiley and Sons.

Weitzer, W., & Tuch, S. A. (1999). Race, class and perceptions of discrimination by the police. Crime and Delinquency, 45 (4): 494-507.

Report broken links or any other problems on this page.

Copyright © by University of Maryland University College.