Help with Assignments

CJ509

Unit 4 DQ

Part 1:

Topic 1: Police Forces (Answer)

Critically discuss with your classmates the various schemes with which the world’s police forces are disbursed. What are three advantages and disadvantages of each model?

Part 2: Student Response #1 (Respond to Joe below)

Joe Cacioppo (Student)

Good morning everyone,

The various schemes the world’s police forces are disbursed consist of a singular structures, multiple coordinated, multiple uncoordinated structures, centralized structures, and de-centralized structures (Reichel, 2018, p. 146.). The advantage for a singular centralized structure, as used in countries such as Ireland, Ghana, Nigeria, Poland and Saudi Arabia is that it allows a single police force to enforce laws across the country. A disadvantage to this structure is that command decisions are centralized and do not take into account the local needs of a region, municipality or territory.  Japan offers a singular form of policing that offers a decentralized model, thus granting local leaders the power enforce federal laws on an independent level.

Multiple coordinated structures of policing can be found in countries such as Austria, France, England and Wales. They have multiple police agencies that report to a centralized authority (Reichel, 2018, p. 146.). An advantage to this is it offers overlapping authorities to agencies, and provides additional funding resources to jurisdictions. A disadvantage to this system is that supervision is centralized and not local. Countries such as Australia, Canada, Germany and India offer multiple coordinating policing along with a decentralized command. This allows for police forces to be formed at the state level and maintain a span and control at a local level.

Multiple uncoordinated structures with a central command can be found in countries such as Belgium, Italy, Spain and Switzerland (Reichel, 2018, p. 152-162.). This allows for multiple police agencies to be formed and enforce laws on a national level, while reporting to a singular command. A problem with this system is that the competition between agencies can spirit animosity between agencies, as well as a broad scope of duties.

The US and Mexico are two countries that have multiple uncoordinated structures with decentralized command (Reichel, 2018, p. 163-168.). This means there can be local, (municipal), state and federal police forces that operate independently. The advantage to this system is that it offers each police agency to set their own command and control for supervision, enforce laws specific to their agency. A disadvantage to this system would be a varying degree of training, performance standards, and conduct standards.

References

Reichel, P. (2018). Comparative criminal justice systems: a topical approach (7th ed.). Pearson.

Part 3: Student Response #2 (Respond to Sunday below)

Sunday Akinwunmi

A centralized or national police system is one in which the national government is in charge of all law enforcement. Responsibility for law enforcement is shared by various levels of government in a decentralized police system, with specific assignments of duties and defined coordination. Crimes such as drug abuse and violence have grown in number and severity. Crimes have become more strategic, planned, violent, organized, and motivated. A centralized police service makes sense to deal with change and social disorganization, as long as the police are well-educated and officers are viewed as professional specialists. The choice between a more centralized or decentralized system is a critical policy issue for countries all over the world (Bayley, 1985, 1992; Kurtz, 1995).

Decentralized police systems may be more effective in preventing property crimes but not violent crimes. For example, while Mexico and Venezuela are moving toward a more centralized system to deal with cross-jurisdictional crimes (Esparza, 2012; Johnson et al., 2012), South Korea is contemplating decentralization in order to be more responsive to local needs (Park & Johnstone, 2013). Diverse interest groups in Thailand have called for police reform, and decentralization of policing to local governments has been proposed as a potential solution to the police problems (Wongpreedee & Mahakanjana, 2017).

References

Bayley, D. H. (1985). Patterns of Policing: A Comparative International Analysis. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Wongpreedee, A., & Mahakanjana, C. (2017). Decentralization and Local Governance in Thailand. Public Administration in Southeast Asia, 53-77. doi:10.4324/9781315089287-3

Esparza, D. (2012). Police centralization and public security in Mexico. Paper presented at the Western Political Science Association 2012 Annual Meeting, Portland, OR.

Johnson, S., Forman, J. M., & Bliss, K. (2012). Police reform in Latin America: Implications for U.S. policy. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.