Assignment: Training for Reactive and Proactive Responses

p.68

4 The Role of the Police

©iStockphoto.com/kali9

Media Library

CHAPTER 4 Media Library

P R E M I U M V I D E OP R E M I U M V I D E O

S AG E N E W S C L I PS AG E N E W S C L I P

Occupy Wrap

C A R E E R V I D E OC A R E E R V I D E O

The Most Enjoyable Aspect of Being a Police Officer

O P E N AC C E S S V I D E OO P E N AC C E S S V I D E O

What is the Role of Police?

Kevin Briggs: The Bridge Between S uicide and Life

AU D I OAU D I O

To Reduce Bias, Some Police De- partments Are Rethinking Traffic St ops

Wal-Mart’s Crime Problem Over- whelms Police Across US

W E BW E B

Measuring Performance in a Mod- ern Police Organization

Measuring the Performance of Law Enforcement Agencies

J O U R N A LJ O U R N A L

Explaining Police Officer Discre- tionary Activity

Evolving Strategies: A Historical Ex amination of Changes in Principle, A uthority, and Function to Inform Pol icing in the Twenty-First Century

p.69

Objectives

After reading this chapter you will be able to:

• Discuss the various reasons why we have the police

• Explain why law enforcement is important and controversial even though relatively little time is spent doing it

• Identify why crime control is controversial

• Explain why the police may have an impossible mandate

• Describe the difficulties associated with officers deterring criminal behavior

• Evaluate why the authority to use force is critical to the police role

• Discuss law enforcement, order maintenance, and service as the three primary responsibilities of the police and explain why different police departments tend to emphasize different aspects of the police role

T

Fact or Fiction

To assess your knowledge of the role of the police prior to reading this chapter, identify each of the following statements as fact or fiction. (See page 82 at the end of this chapter for answers.)

1. Police officers spend most of their time enforcing the law.

2. Crime control is relatively easy to measure accurately, and where there is less crime the police are obviously more effective.

3. The police deter criminals.

4. Seldom is law enforcement controversial. It is just a matter of identifying the criminals and arresting them.

5. Media depictions of police work are similar to the realities of police work.

his chapter addresses the question, why do we have the police? The answer is not as simple as it may first

seem.

What is the mandate of the police? In other words, what is their purpose? What is their role in our society? Most fundamentally, why do we have the police? These seemingly simple questions have not-so- simple answers. Indeed, it takes a chapter to adequately answer them. The police

have many important responsibilities; they are absolutely essential in our society. However, their mandate is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. Given their mandate, they are also inherently controversial. To attain an adequate understanding of the police in America, it is necessary to examine their major responsibilities and why their mandate is so difficult and controversial.

Enforcing the Law

Perhaps the first and most straightforward responsibility of the police is to enforce the law and identify and apprehend criminals. This is clearly an important duty. The police have been given the power and authority to arrest citizens when it is believed they have violated the law. If the police did not enforce the law and arrest offenders, then the courts would have no one to adjudicate and corrections would have no one to “correct” (or provide treatment to, administer punishment to, maintain custody of, etc.). The entire criminal justice system would cease to operate. In this light, the police, as enforcers of the law, serve as the gate kee pers of the criminal justice system, determining who comes into the system and who stays out.

p.70

Police Spotlight: Some of the Ridiculous Problems Police Are Asked to Solve

Being a twenty-four-hour agency that is just a phone call away means that the police receive many requests for assistance that simply do not relate to their responsibilities, even as broad as they are. Listed below are some examples of calls received by the police.

• A woman called police to complain when an officer she had interacted with earlier refused to

have sex with her.1

• A grandmother called 911 to see if the police would get her some

beer.2

• A customer at McDonald’s called 911 after not receiving hash browns with his McDonald’s

breakfast sandwich.3

• A citizen got “too damn drunk,” and after she got home she could not get out of her car. She then called 911 for assistance. When police arrived, she was cited for

DUI for the fourth time.4

• A girl called 911 to report a

“massive freaking spider” on her couch. She described it as being as large as a baseball. Police responded and took care of the

problem with a newspaper.5

GIVING MEANING TO THE LAW

It is also important to keep in mind that as enforcers of the law, it is police officers who give the law meaning. The law means little without the possibility that the police will enforce it. Consider the example of speeding enforcement. What does a speed limit of 35 mph really mean? Does it mean if you are going 36 mph you are going to get a ticket? It is not likely, because the police are usually concerned with more serious violations of speed laws. How about if you are traveling 50 mph? In this situation it might depend on whether there is a police officer looking for speeders on that road. Without a police officer or other means to enforce the law, such as a speed camera, there are no worries about getting a ticket. This is what is meant by the police giving the law meaning.

OPEN ACCESS VIDEO What is the Role of Police? CLICK TO SHOW

AUDIO To Reduce Bias, Some Police Dep

artments Are Rethinking Traffic S tops CLICK TO SHOW

CAREER VIDEO The Most Enjoyable Aspect of B eing a Police Officer

IMPLEMENTING THE LAW

Another way of saying the police enforce the law is by saying the police implement the law. Without the police implementing the law, laws are just words on paper. Not all laws are implemented at equal levels; some are enforced all the time, while others are seldom if ever enforced. Every state and city has laws or other ordinances that are so seldom enforced that they are not even viewed as serious rules. For example, in Kennesaw, Georgia, it is required that every head of household own at least one firearm. In California it is against the law to consume a frog that has died in a frog-jumping contest. In Aspen,

Colorado, it is illegal to start or participate

in a snowball fight.6 In East Lansing, Michigan (home of Michigan State University), it is illegal to sing, hum, or play the University of Michigan (the cross-state rival) fight song. These laws (ordinances) exist with little chance that the police will actually enforce them. A more serious example is how many state legislatures have attempted to reduce the frequency of driving under the influence (DUI) by creating laws with severe sanctions. However, research has shown that the enforcement of these laws by police officers is not automatic; it depends on the priority the police chief gives to DUI enforcement, incentives to enforce the law, officer-peer influence, the availability

of time, and other factors.7

It is also important to note that the police do not pay equal attention to all laws and all crime. Local police in particular are more oriented toward the enforcement of predatory crimes, such as murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, and theft, than other sorts of serious crime, such as insider trading, money laundering, investment fraud, insurance fraud, and so on. The latter are more of a priority for federal agencies and insurance companies.

p.71

THE CONTROVERSY OF LAW

©iStockphoto.com/kali9

PHOTO 4.1 Laws are words on paper until police officers decide to enforce them.

ENFORCEMENT

Police enforcement of the law is one reason why the police are controversial. In enforcing the law, the police use discretion. In other words, within limits, police officers can use their own judgment in determining the right course of action. They can decide what laws to enforce, when to enforce them, and against whom they should be enforced. These decisions can affect citizens in dramatic and negative ways. Sometimes the law enforcement decisions of officers can look more like discrimination than objective discretion. This is one way in which law enforcement can be controversial. Police discretion is discussed in more detail in Chapter 8.

Another controversial aspect of law enforcement is that sometimes when the police enforce the law, they have to take

sides. They have to identify who is right and who is wrong; who is good and who is bad. In this sense, they are making moral judgments. As sociologist Egon Bittner put it, “Police work can . . . accomplish something for somebody only by

proceeding against someone else.”8 There is no way around this issue. As a result, someone is always going to be unhappy with the actions taken by the police. This also makes the police controversial.

TIME SPENT ON LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

Although there is no doubt law enforcement is an important reason why we have the police, it must be understood that the police spend relatively little time on law enforcement activities. Several studies, although dated, have examined the workload of officers. Some have analyzed how officers spend their time (Exhibit 4.1); others looked at the types of calls that the police handle. All of the studies come to the same conclusion: Law enforcement makes up a relatively small portion of what the police do. This conclusion is so well established that it may explain why so little recent research has been conducted on the topic.

Similar to the Cincinnati and Wilmington studies, other studies that analyzed calls for service (not necessarily how time was spent) have concluded that approximately

25% of calls relate to crime; the remaining

75% involve noncrime matters.11 Indeed, according to criminologist James Fyfe, “Most of the people with whom the police interact need help with problems not

related to crime.”12 Other studies call attention to the substantial amount of time that patrol officers spend on patrol, which

ranges from 25%13 to approximately 40%. 14

The bottom line is that although law enforcement is an important responsibility of the police, it constitutes a relatively small portion of what they do. As such, the reality of police activities is much different than what is portrayed in the news headlines or on television (Exhibit 4.2). Nevertheless, one could expect to find variation in the amount of time (or proportion of calls) devoted to law enforcement across cities, patrol beats, shifts, and officers’ job assignments.

p.72

Exhibit 4.1

How Do Police Patrol Officers Spend Their Time?

Although these studies were conducted in different places at

different times, the findings do not vary dramatically: In Cincinnati, Ohio, 18% of officers’ time was spent on crime-related matters as compared to 26% of officers’ time in Wilmington, Delaware. In both cities, most officer time was spent patrolling.

FIGURE FIGURE 4.14.1 How Police Spend Their Time: Cincinnati, Ohio, Police Department

S o u r c e :S o u r c e : Wilmington, Delaware, Police

Department.10

FIGURE FIGURE 4.24.2 How Police Spend Their Time: Wilmington, Delaware, Police Department

S o u r c e :S o u r c e : Cincinnati, Ohio, Police Department.

9

Controlling Crime

AP Photo/The Omaha World-Herald, Chris

Machian

PHOTO 4.2 The television show COPS is portrayed as “reality-based,” but it has been criticized for not accurately representing the true nature of crime and police work. This photo is of a scene where a COPS crew member was accidentally shot and killed by the police during the filming of a store robbery.

Crime control is closely related to law enforcement as a reason why we have the police. We have the police so that they can control crime; law enforcement is a means by which crime may be controlled. It could be argued that the police enforce the law in order to control crime.

p.73

Exhibit 4.2

“Reality” Television

The television show COPS is one of the longest-running shows on television, now in its twenty-ninth season on Spike TV. The first episode aired in 1989 and the show ran on the Fox network for twenty-five years before moving to Spike. Each episode consists of twenty-two minutes of unwritten script from police officers on the job and the citizens with whom they interact. Reportedly, to create those twenty- two minutes of program content, it takes weeks or months of filming. The show focuses on street crime and the moments of excitement and intrigue during officers’ work days. The show has been criticized for not accurately portraying police work even though it is a “reality-based” program and for focusing exclusively on the crimes of the lower class and thus distorting the reality of criminal offending.

A Question of Ethics

Are Police Undercover Strategies Ethical?

To combat certain crimes, such as drug dealing and prostitution, the police may conduct undercover sting

operations. Sometimes a sting is known as a buy-bust operation. A sting involves an investigator posing as someone who wishes to buy or sell some illicit goods, such as drugs or sex, or to conduct some other illicit transaction. When the terms of the deal are determined, or the deal itself is done, police officers waiting nearby can execute an arrest. Although sometimes subject to claims of entrapment depending on the particulars of the operation, sting operations are legal. Nevertheless, they can be controversial. Fundamentally, this is because sting operations are based on police deceit, on lying, on police pretending to be someone they are not. Deception in this context is legal, but is it ethical? What do you think? Is it ethically okay for the police to use “dirty” means, to lie and deceive, in order to identify criminals and control crime? Under what circumstances is it ethically okay? When is it not ethically acceptable?

THE CONTROVERSY OF CRIME CONTROL

Several issues arise when considering crime control as a reason why we have the police. First, and similar to law

enforcement, crime control can also be controversial. Everyone is in favor of crime control, but crime control really means that the police are seeking to control people’s behavior. Unfortunately, people who engage in criminal behavior are not necessarily easy to identify. As a result, the police seek to control everyone’s behavior. For instance, a commonly used crime control strategy in many police departments today are SQFs, which involve stopping, questioning, and frisking citizens on streets and sidewalks. For example, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 2015, the police conducted more than 46,000 subject stops (SQFs). This is in a city with a population of about 594,000 people, which equates to one out of every thirteen residents being stopped on the streets or sidewalks over the course of the

year.15 The problem is that only after the stop do the police determine that the vast majority of citizens are not involved in criminal behavior (see Research Spotlight feature).

SAGE NEWS CLIP Occupy Wrap

p.74

RESEARCH SPOTLIGHT

The Value andThe Value and Consequences ofConsequences of Pedestrian Stops by thePedestrian Stops by the PolicePolice

Research shows that the use of street stops has increased dramatically in major cities across the United States

in the past decade.16 The popularity of the strategy has raised questions about the actual value of street stops and whether these stops are made in a fair manner. Indeed, research has shown that stops have been disproportionately directed toward

citizens of color.17 Although studies have shown that pedestrian stops have had some success at preventing

crime,18 their success at discovering or interrupting crime has been limited: From 2004 to 2010 in the New York City Police Department, 9.4% of stops resulted in an arrest, 2.9% resulted in the confiscation of drugs, and .25% of stops resulted in

the discovery of an illegal gun.19

Essdras M Suarez/The Boston Globe via Getty Im-

ages

PHOTO 4.3 Crime control can be controversial, often because of the methods used. In particular, sting operations raise many legal and ethical issues.

JOURNAL Explaining Police Officer Di scretionary Activity CLICK TO SHOW

If stops lead to deterioration in positive views of the police, it could make residents less likely to report crime and cooperate with the police. The outcome is a long-term negative

impact on public safety.20

Another aspect of crime control is that sometimes officers have to use aggressive or controversial tactics to deal with criminal behavior. In this sense, the police

“are the fire it takes to fight fire,”21 which references a technique wherein firefighters may intentionally start a fire in order to control and contain another fire. Crime control tactics of the police might be seen by some people not only as controversial but also as inappropriate, “dirty,” unethical, or just plain wrong (see A Question of Ethics feature). The frequent use of SQFs also speaks to this issue.

THE DIFFICULTY OF CRIME CONTROL

Along with being controversial, crime control is also difficult. The police have limited capabilities when it comes to controlling people’s behaviors, especially their criminal behaviors. As such, as we discussed in Chapter 1, it has been argued that the police have an impossible

mandate.22 It has also been argued that “the presence or absence of crime has

nothing to do with the police.”23

AUDIO Wal-Mart’s Crime Problem Over whelms Police Across US CLICK TO SHOW

Police Lack Control over Conditions of Crime

One reason why crime control is difficult, if not impossible, is that the police have no control or influence over the conditions

The Dif!culties of Measuring Crime Control and Police Effectiveness

associated with criminal behavior. They do not control the rate of employment, the amount of poverty, the nature of human interactions, or whether children grow up with proper role models. They do not control the psychological or biological makeup of human beings. They do not control the demographics of the population in which they police. They do not control the weather. They do not control the policies and practices of the other components of the criminal justice system. This knowledge may lead one to the reasonable conclusion that the police can have, at best, limited impact on criminal behavior.

p.75

GOOD POLICING

Crime statistics are used to measure the amount of crime. Police effectiveness at controlling crime is determined by the amount of crime. However, there are questions both about the accuracy of crime statistics in quantifying the amount of crime and about the limitations to using crime statistics as a measure of police effectiveness. For instance, consider this likely possibility: In a retirement community there is very little crime. In a college town, or in the part of a

city where a college is located, there is usually a relatively high rate of crime, especially property crime. So is it accurate to conclude the police in the retirement community are more effective at controlling crime than the police in the college town, simply based on the amount of crime in those two areas? There are many factors that may account for the difference in crime levels in the two places—factors that have nothing to do with the police. Along these same lines, if the crime rate in a particular city is higher this year than last year, it does not necessarily mean that the police department has become less effective.

WEB Measuring Performance in a Modern Police Organization CLICK TO SHOW

WEB Measuring the Performance of L aw Enforcement Agencies CLICK TO SHOW

The Difficulties of Deterring Criminal Behavior

Another reason why crime control is difficult is that it is hard for the police to affect people’s behaviors. There are

generally two approaches to controlling crime: incapacitation or deterrence. Inca- pacitation refers to making it impossible for people to commit crimes. For example, offenders who have been arrested and incarcerated are unable to commit additional crimes, at least outside of prison; they are incapacitated. In addition, if opportunities for criminal behavior are taken away, offenders may be incapacitated. For instance, if a would-be offender does not have a gun or access to a gun, that person is not going to be able to shoot someone, even if motivated to do so (although another weapon could be used). If a person is incapacitated in some way, he or she will not be able to commit a crime, or at least a specific type of crime. As such, the criminal behavior of that person will be controlled.

While incapacitation as a way to control criminal behavior is relatively straightforward, crime control through det errence is not. There are many important issues that need to be considered when thinking about the ability of the police to deter people from committing criminal behaviors. In order to deter behavior, to get someone to choose one behavior over another when both behaviors are an option, there have to be consequences for the undesired behavior. In the context of criminal behavior, the consequences usually come in the form of punishment. The first thing to note is the police usually

do not control the punishment associated with a crime unless an arrest, a fine, or perhaps a use of force is considered the punishment. Moreover, in order for punishment to be an effective deterrent, it has to have at least three qualities. It has to be certain, meaning that the individual must believe that if the behavior is committed, punishment will follow. Punishment also has to be swift; it has to be administered quickly. Finally, punishment has to be individually meaningful. For example, a parking ticket of $50 might be individually meaningful to a person with a moderate income but not to a millionaire. Basically, in large measure the police are not able to control the certainty of punishment, the swiftness of punishment, or if the punishment is individually meaningful to the offender. The police are responsible for identifying and apprehending offenders but have relatively limited success in doing so (e.g., 65% of homicides, 39% of rapes, and 30% of robberies were solved in 2014). In this light it is difficult to see how the police can deter people who are so inclined from committing crimes.

p.76

Exhibit 4.3

Tendencies toward Criminal

Behavior and the Impact of the Police

GROUP 1 consists of people who would obey the law even if there were no police.

GROUP 2 consists of people who obey the law because they fear the consequences of breaking it.

GROUP 3 consists of people who break the law even though they may get arrested by the police; they have no regard for the consequences. This group consists of criminals.

SOME PEOPLE do not need to be deterred; other people will not be deterred.

S o u r c e :S o u r c e : Created using Piktochart.

Further, and even more fundamentally, another part of the difficulty in concluding whether or not—or to what degree—the police are able to deter people from committing crimes is defining exactly what is meant by deterrence and determining how it is measured. Is a man deterred from committing a bank robbery if he decides to commit it tomorrow instead of today? What if the would-be robber sees the police at a particular bank so he decides not to rob that bank but instead robs a different one down the block? Or decides to commit a bank robbery in a different city? What if instead of committing a robbery, he commits a burglary? Think about this issue in terms of the police trying to deter speeders. When you are driving down the street and see a patrol car, chances are you slow down. And then, just maybe, after you see that the officer is not behind you with lights and siren, you speed back up. Where you deterred from speeding? Deterrence is a slippery and difficult concept to define.

It is also important to recognize that not all people are equal in their criminal tendencies (see Exhibit 4.3). At some level of abstraction, there are probably people who would never commit a crime, or at least a serious crime. These people would obey the law even if there were no police, no threat of punishment (Group 1). On the other extreme are people who commit crimes with no regard for the police

(Group 3). They are motivated to commit crimes regardless of the threat of police action. It is probably fair to say that no matter what the police do, these people will still commit crimes. The people in the middle are the people who would likely be affected by police actions and strategies to control crime (Group 2). Before committing a crime, they may consider the risks of getting caught by the police and punished by the criminal justice system. The point is that the police do not deter criminals; if they did, there would not be criminals! In addition, some people need not be deterred because they would not commit crimes in the first place.

p.77

RESEARCH SPOTLIGHT

Morality, Deterrence, andMorality, Deterrence, and Sexual OffendingSexual Offending

The idea that the threat of apprehension and punishment is not a meaningful deterrent when a person would not commit a crime in the first place finds some support in research on the issue. Ninety-four male college students were presented with five scenarios describing the sexual assault of a female. The students were asked to judge the moral conduct of the male

A Question to Consider 4.1

offender in the scenarios, the perceived risk of sanctions relating to the sexual assault, and the likelihood that he (the research subject) would do what the offender did given the same circumstances. The researchers found that when the respondents’ moral condemnation of the actions was strong, the respondents reported they would commit the sexual assault only 6% of the time in the given scenarios. On the other hand, when moral condemnation was weak, respondents reported some probability of committing the sexual assault 45% of the time in the given

scenarios.24

This study portrays morality as kind of a first-line defense against the commission of criminal behaviors. If a person’s moral beliefs are strong, perceived sanctions are not a necessary concern in shaping behavior. However, if moral beliefs are not strong, perceived sanctions may or may not deter criminal conduct. The bottom line is that a sense of morality is more effective in preventing criminal behavior than the police or the threat of sanctions in general.

Does the Authority to Use Force Really Make the Police Unique?

Although it has been argued that authority to use force differentiates the police occupation from all others, upon further reflection it appears that people in many other occupations also have the authority to use force—for example, bouncers at a bar, football players, soldiers, and martial arts fighters. But how does police authority to use force differ from these occupations? Explain your answer. Hint: Think about the situations in which the police can use force, compared to people in these other occupations.

Dealing with Situations Where Force May Need to Be Used

The tools used in occupations give clues about why those occupations exist. Farmers use tractors because they cultivate crops and grow food for people to eat. Garbage collecters use trucks because people create garbage that needs to be removed. Teachers use books because people need to be educated. Physicians use stethoscopes and a variety of other instruments to diagnose illnesses so they can heal people.

OPEN ACCESS VIDEO

The Continuum of Force, OC Spray, and Tasers

Kevin Briggs: The Bridge Be- tween Suicide and Life CLICK TO SHOW

Using this line of reasoning, the tools used by police include handcuffs, batons, firearms, pepper spray, and Tasers, among others. Arguably, the most important tool of the police is their ability to use force, or at least the threat of force (see Technology on the Job feature). The police have the authority to use force so that people listen to them and obey their orders. If the police are responsible for regulating the conduct of citizens, having such a tool can certainly help. Citizens might obey the orders of the police because if they do not, the police may use force upon them. Indeed, scholars have identified police authority to use force as the central feature of the police function—a feature that differentiates the

police occupation from all others.25

However, it is not just the authority to use force that makes the police unique; it is that the police can potentially use force in virtually any situation or location.

p.78

TECHNOLOGY ON THE JOB

Although use of force is discussed in detail in Chapter 11, it is useful to

introduce the concept of the continuum of force and less lethal force here.

There are many different versions of the continuum of force, but the basic idea behind all of them is that the police must only use as much force as necessary to overcome the resistance offered by a noncompliant subject. The initial steps on the continuum consist of officer presence and verbal commands. If these forms of force do not induce compliance, then it is appropriate to use physical force. The most common form of physical force is bodily force wherein officers use their bodies to gain control and compliance over subjects. If bodily force does not work, then a weapon such as a Taser or oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray is appropriately used. Finally, if none of these options produces subject compliance or is appropriate given the situation (for example, the subject is armed and poses an immediate threat to officers or citizens), then deadly force (via a firearm) would be appropriately used.

OC spray and Tasers are generally considered to be forms of force that are less likely to be lethal, at least when compared to firearms. OC is an inflammatory agent naturally found in cayenne peppers. Ideally, when a

person is sprayed in the face with OC, the effects are immediate: The respiratory tract becomes inflamed; the subject experiences an intense burning sensation and swelling around the eyes, which close involuntarily; and the subject is no longer able to resist. Police departments have been using OC spray since the 1980s.

Taser (short for Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle) is the brand name of an electronic stun device and is the most popular such device on the market. Tasers were first introduced in police departments in the 1990s. A Taser resembles a gun. When the trigger is pulled, two wired probes are discharged from the gun and fired into the body of a subject. An electrical current then runs from the weapon through the wires and into the subject’s body. When both probes attach to the subject, the Taser delivers the electrical current, which overrides the central nervous system. This causes involuntary muscle contractions and the incapacitation of the resisting subject. The weapon can also be used in drive-stun mode. In this mode the weapon itself is placed in contact with the subject’s body to deliver the electrical current. Used in this way, the weapon causes localized pain that can be used to allow officers

©iStockphoto.com/Juanmonino

PHOTO 4.4 Many of the tools of the police, such as Tasers and firearms, relate to the use of force against subjects. Scholars argue that the authority to use force makes the police a unique and inherently controversial occupation.

to overcome the resistance of the subject. In many police departments, the use of a Taser in drive-stun mode is discouraged or even prohibited except in extreme circumstances.

Police use of force is controversial to say the least, especially when force is used in situations where it may not be justified or necessary and/or when the force being used is deadly. Police use of force, justified or not, never photographs well. Part of the issue here is that citizens and police officers (as well as prosecutors, judges, and juries) may disagree about whether the force used was actually necessary. Many of

©iStockphoto.com/Kliim

the urban riots in the 1960s began as a

result of incidents in which white officers shot African American citizens. In 1991 areas of Los Angeles burned and businesses were looted after the white officers who beat Rodney King, an African American man, were found not guilty of assault by a jury (several officers were later found guilty on federal charges). In 2014, 2015, and 2016, cities across the country saw demonstrations, marches, and, in some places, riots to protest the killing of black men by white officers in New York City; Baltimore, Maryland; Ferguson, Missouri; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; and other cities. The sniper killing of five police officers in Dallas, Texas, in 2016 was apparently motivated by two high-profile police killings of black men that same year.

p.79

PHOTO 4.5 Some of the many responsibilities of the police have very little to do with law enforcement or crime control. Some, such as directing traffic, are provided as a public service.

Handling Time-Pressing Situations

Some scholars have argued that we have the police in order to deal with a wide variety of situations where something is not right—situations where “something ought not to be happening, about which

something ought to be done now!”26 A gas station has been robbed, a neighbor is threatening another neighbor, traffic lights are not working, people are arguing, a dog is on the loose. Police officers may be asked to intervene in each of these situations. Some involve crime and law enforcement, but most do not. Some involve regulating citizens’ behavior, others do not. Some involve the potential use of force, but not all of them do. As seen in the Police Spotlight feature at the introduction to this chapter, since the police are only a phone call away and are available twenty-four hours a day, these sorts of situations become their responsibility. These situations cannot wait for some future resolution; they need to be handled immediately. Cars may collide and the dog might bite someone. As this clearly illustrates, the police are

needed for more than law enforcement, crime control, or the use of force. As criminologist James Fyfe wrote, “The police perform a variety of services that must be available seven days a week, 24 hours-a-day, that may require the use or threat of force, and that are not readily available from any other public agency or

private institution.”27

BALANCING LAW ENFORCEMENT, ORDER MAINTENANCE, AND PUBLIC SERVICE

Perhaps the simplest way of explaining why we have the police—but one that still describes the breadth of the role—is to highlight the important tasks of law enforcement, order maintenance, and service. As discussed, law enforcement refers to tasks such as conducting investigations and making arrests. Order maintenance consists of activities that keep the public peace, which involves regulating citizens’ conduct without resorting to citations or arrests. Service activities include all other activities of the police besides order maintenance and law enforcement, such as assisting motorists whose cars have broken down, getting keys out of locked cars, and conducting safety programs in schools.

JOURNAL Evolving Strategies: A Historical Ex amination of Changes in Principle,

©iStockphoto.com/csfotoimages

PHOTO 4.6 The police sometimes find themselves in a difficult position: They are supposed to preserve the public peace, but at the same time they are supposed to protect the right of people to protest.

Authority, and Function to Inform P olicing in the Twenty-First Century CLICK TO SHOW

p.80

Several observations can be made regarding this classification of activities and responsibilities. First, over time police departments have emphasized some responsibilities over others. For example, during the political era, service to politicians and order maintenance were the focus of the majority of police departments. In the reform era, law enforcement was the central objective. In the community problem-solving era,

service to citizens and order maintenance

are probably most strongly emphasized.

Second, the lines that differentiate service, law enforcement, and order maintenance are at times rather blurry. For example, when the police ask a citizen to turn down his or her music because the neighbors are complaining, it would best be considered order maintenance. When the police return and issue a citation for loud music, it would be law enforcement. Police patrol could be considered a service to the community, order maintenance, or perhaps even law enforcement.

Third, law enforcement and order maintenance may conflict. For example, citizens have the right to protest, and the police are supposed to protect that right, but the police are also supposed to preserve the public order. Sometimes the police make arrests of citizens who protest. This conflict underscores the difficult position the police sometimes find themselves in.

Finally, different police departments emphasize different aspects of the policing role. A police department is not a “one size fits all” entity. One community may have disparate expectations of their police compared to another community. For example, in his classic book, Varieties of

Police Behavior,28 James Q. Wilson identified three styles of policing reflected

by police departments: the legalistic, watchman, and service-oriented styles. In departments that adhere to a legalistic st yle of policing, enforcement of the law is the top priority. Not surprisingly, officers in legalistic departments make a lot of arrests and issue a lot of citations. In departments that follow a watchman style of policing, order maintenance and controlling disorder are the top priority. Police departments that reflect the service-orie nted style of policing believe citizen satisfaction is the top priority. The main goal is to serve the citizens of the community; arrests are made when necessary, but police action is mostly geared toward services to satisfy citizens.

To illustrate the different styles of policing, consider a situation in which a police officer discovers juveniles who are in violation of a curfew ordinance. In the legalistic departments, the juveniles would most likely be issued citations. In the watchman-style departments, they would probably be brought to the police department and their parents called to pick them up. In the service-oriented departments, the juveniles would most likely be taken home to their parents, perhaps without legal consequences.

Just like police departments may have certain priorities and orientations, so may

police officers.29 It is not a stretch of the imagination to think that police officers

bring their own ideas, preferences, styles, and belief systems to the job. These attitudes relate to officers’ personalities and their occupational outlooks, or the way they view their role. The fact is that the role of the police varies based not only on the police department but also the officers who work within a department.

p.81

MAIN POINTS

• We have the police for various reasons:

○ To enforce the law ○ To control crime ○ To deal with situations where

force may be needed

○ To handle situations where something ought not to be happening and about which something needs to be done immediately

○ To enforce the law, maintain order, and provide services

• When police enforce the law, they give it meaning. The police do not pay equal attention to all laws or to all offenders.

• Although law enforcement is an

important function of the police as it is critical to the functioning of the entire criminal justice system, the police spend relatively little time on law enforcement activities.

• One common strategy of crime control today involves pedestrian and vehicle stops. This strategy has raised concerns about the value of such stops and whether officers may use them excessively or inappropriately.

• Some scholars have argued that the police are the fire that it takes to fight fire. This means that sometimes the police use controversial tactics to try to control crime.

• Some scholars have argued that the police have an impossible mandate. This means that because the police cannot control the factors associated with crime, they cannot control crime.

• Crime control is difficult to measure. Crime statistics are flawed, and variation in crime levels is not easily attributed to police actions.

• Ideally, crime can be controlled through the incapacitation and/or deterrence of criminals. Deterrence is difficult for statisticians to measure and for the

police to provide. Some people do not need to be deterred; other people cannot be deterred.

• One of the most important tools of the police is their ability and authority to use force; that is a defining feature of the police occupation. However, police use of force can be controversial.

• Not only are some functions of the police difficult or impossible to achieve, some conflict with one another.

• A police department is not a “one size fits all” entity. Different communities have different expectations of their police. As a result, departments may emphasize different aspects of the policing role (law enforcement, order maintenance, or service). The outlooks of police officers may also determine the role orientation of their departments.

IMPORTANT

TERMS

Deterrence 75

Gate keepers 69

Incapacitation 75

Law enforcement 79

Legalistic style of policing 80

Order maintenance 79

Service-oriented style of policing 8 0

Watchman style of policing 80

QUESTIONS FOR

DISCUSSION

AND REVIEW

1. Why do we have the police? Hypothetically speaking, what would happen if we did not have the police?

2. Is law enforcement the most important aspect of the police role? Why or why not?

3. Identify the reasons why crime control is potentially a controversial activity or responsibility of the police.

4. What does it mean to say the police are the fire it takes to fight fire? Do you think this is a legitimate argument?

p.82

5. What are the potential benefits and problems associated with police stops as a crime control strategy?

6. Why is the goal of crime control difficult to measure accurately?

7. What is deterrence? Why is it difficult for the police to deter criminals?

8. How do a person’s moral beliefs relate to the issue of deterrence?

9. Many scholars argue that police authority to use force is the defining feature of the police role. Do you agree? Why or why not?

10. Why is a police department not a “one size fits all” entity? According to James Q. Wilson, how do police departments vary in their role orientation?

FACT OR

FICTION

ANSWERS

1. Fiction

2. Fiction

3. Fiction

4. Fiction

5. Fiction

DIGITAL

RESOURCES

h t t p : //e d g e . s a g e p u b . c o m / b ra n d lh t t p : //e d g e . s a g e p u b . c o m / b ra n d l

SAGE edge offers a robust online environment featuring an impressive array of free tools and resources for review, study, and further exploration, keeping both instructors and students on the cutting edge of teaching and learning.